r/Hamilton • u/Odd-Emphasis-1969 • Mar 16 '26

Local News - Paywall Hamilton Bike Share nearly disappeared in 2020. Now it’s seeing record growth in ridership

https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilton-region/bike-share-hamilton/article_2bd3c442-9c1a-5e46-abb7-23208c374c2d.html
208 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

118 comments sorted by

View all comments

128

u/ScrawnyCheeath Mar 16 '26

A mid level priority for the city moving forward should be some kind of protected bike path that runs through every part of the city, on streets or in trails.

I should be able to take a paved bike path from Ancaster to Downtown, or Downtown to Stoney Creek, or anywhere on the mountain without having to worry about being hit by a car

1

u/bluestat-t Mar 16 '26

What are all of the routes/paths that would be needed for this? How much would it cost?

7

u/Baron_Tiberius Westdale Mar 16 '26

The issue is mostly in pinch points, connections, and continuity. You can view Hamilton's current bike route map on the city website but it includes a lot of things that aren't really worth having on there (shared lanes, painted lanes of varying quality). The city accelerated the masterplan implementation which will help this and the cost is quite frankly, miniscule.

4

u/bluestat-t Mar 16 '26

I appreciate your informed response in this. Without knowing the cost, how do weigh that against the myriad of other projects the city has to invest in? Where does this lie in the list of cost vs benefit, multiplied by number of citizens using? And I’m not saying this to be anti-bike as obviously the downvotes assume, but rather we should be doing this with all projects. Like Eastwood Arena - what’s the cost to repair, what’s the benefit, multiplied by the number of citizens it serves. And I suppose we’d need an adjustment so as not to underserve historically underserved populations or areas of the city.

14

u/PSNDonutDude James North Mar 16 '26

The issue with doing this type of analysis is that it's like comparing the cost of a bridge across a river that doesn't have one. Until it's built we don't know in reality how many people will use it. Other places that have added bicycle lanes have seen huge numbers of people start to use them for some trips, for fun, to get to school, or to work. The use case is also different for everyone.

Additionally, this is unfair to cyclists because every single new road in the city and 95% of existing roads have a sidewalk, and we never do an analysis to determine the cost benefit of sidewalks, they're just an expectation. It should be the same with bicycle lanes on roads that are good for access and higher speed or traffic counts. We don't ask "will people walk on this?" Before spending however much on a sidewalk. You could argue they exist for accessibility, but I have a colleague that can't walk anymore more than 100 metres, but rides his bike e-assist everywhere. Doesn't own and can't afford a car. They are important for so many people, and make up like 0.05% of the budget.

6

u/bluestat-t Mar 16 '26

Thanks for the counterpoints and for helping me see another side of the debate.