CAG Position Statement - Crosswalks Over Bike Lanes

Position Statement on Crosswalks Over Bike Lanes

Date: September 2025

About the Consumer Access Group

The Consumer Access Group (CAG) is a coalition of blindness-related not for profit organizations. Each partner contributes their expertise to developing position statements on blindness-related concerns. These statements enable organizations and individuals to advocate with a common voice on blindness-related issues, increasing the capacity of each to more effectively promote social inclusion for Canadians who are blind, deafblind and partially sighted.

Issue

With the installation of dedicated and protected bike lanes in order to achieve Active Transportation goals, it is becoming more and more necessary for pedestrians to cross over these bike lanes to get to where they want to go. Although painted crosswalks are usually present, and cyclists are required by law to yield to pedestrians using the crosswalk, they cannot be relied upon to do so. Pedestrians must use caution when crossing, but those who are blind, Deafblind and partially sighted (hereafter referred to as blind) are unable to reliably see or hear a cyclist’s approach. Such situations create a new barrier for pedestrians who are blind as they cannot safely and independently access their destination on the other side of the bike lane.

Background

Until the promotion of Active Transportation, cyclists usually shared the roadways along with motorists. Construction of dedicated Cycling infrastructure to achieve Active Transportation goals, although providing cyclists with greater safety, has resulted in reducing the safety for vulnerable pedestrians who now find themselves having to negotiate this infrastructure. Although many cyclists are aware of pedestrians and their obligation to yield to them, particularly when they are using crosswalks, far too many other cyclists view unimpeded use of the bike lane as their right, and are oblivious to pedestrians; either riding past them waiting at the crosswalk or swerving around them once they are in the crosswalk.

Sighted pedestrians are able to use caution, looking for cyclists before they step out. Pedestrians who are blind however, cannot take this precaution. In addition, they are unable to use their sense of hearing, as they do for motor vehicles, to detect a cyclist’s approach. The odds make crossing the bike lane independently too risky for many pedestrians who are blind, and results in the creation of a barrier to their ability to access their community independently.

CAG has addressed one such barrier created by dedicated cycling infrastructure, in the position statement on mid-block bus stops and protected bike lanes but it has become apparent that this is not the only circumstance where pedestrians are required to cross over the bike lane to get to their destination or continue their journey.

The cycling infrastructure at protected corners can also pose a safety risk to pedestrians who are blind. Protected corners have design features to separate vulnerable road users (i.e. cyclists and pedestrians) from motor vehicle traffic. In such cases however, there may not be anything separating the pedestrians from the cyclists. An example of this is when there is a crosswalk traversing both cycle and motor traffic turning right using a slip lane. A slip lane is a dedicated lane that allows drivers and in this case cyclists, to make a right turn without merging into the main intersection or stopping for a traffic signal. With such a design, pedestrians are required to cross over the slip lane to access the island where the pedestrian signal pole is located. This signal only controls the traffic crossing over the main intersection, and not the traffic and cyclists using the slip lane to turn right.

Slip lanes for motor traffic are not new, and motorists can usually be relied upon to stop at the crosswalk. If they do not, persons who are blind can usually hear them. Cyclists on the other hand, have been observed at such locations riding through the crosswalk without stopping. The addition of a bike lane to the slip lane has created a barrier for the pedestrian who is blind crossing at such corners.

Another example is when pedestrians are required to cross over the bike lane at T intersections where the bike lane is running across the top of the “T”. Pedestrians are required to cross over the uninterrupted bike lane to an island where the pedestrian signal for the vehicle traffic is located. Again, this design creates a situation where a pedestrian who is blind cannot cross to the pedestrian signal pole safely and independently. 

Although orientation treatments such as attention and guidance tactile walking surface indicators and accessible signage, may make it easier for pedestrians who are blind to find and understand the crosswalk over bike lanes, no treatments have been found to date to provide them with the information they need to cross safely and independently in such a situation.

It is recognized that encouraging active means of transportation such as cycling, with the goal of reducing the use of motor vehicles, is an important strategy to address climate change, but this should not be at the cost of the safety of persons who are blind. It is critical that municipalities are not creating new barriers for persons who are blind, who have a right to travel around their communities safely and independently as determined by a 2020 Human Rights decision.

The organizations listed below therefore make the following recommendations.

Recommendations

1. Unless a treatment is found, and demonstrated, to give persons who are blind the agency they need to cross over a proposed bike lane safely and independently, such cycling infrastructure should not be built.

2. Consult with members of the blind, Deafblind and low vision community to develop bike lane infrastructure that is safe for all pedestrians.

3. Where possible, build bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure such that pedestrians do not have to cross bike lanes.

4. When it is necessary for pedestrians to cross a bike lane, the crossing should be controlled by an audible pedestrian signal. If necessary, explore unique and innovative alternate solutions which do not cause confusion for drivers nor pedestrians, especially those with sight loss.

5. Explore ways of providing stronger enforcement against cyclists who do not follow the rules of the road and endanger pedestrians.

6. Provide greater education to cyclists, especially as it pertains to pedestrians who may not be able to signal their intent to cross in conventional ways, such as making eye contact.

Endorsed by the following organizations:

Printable PDF Version