Calgary Roads

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by fusili

Really? I've popped at least 5 tubes on mine now. I think each time its been the rear tube too. Damn. It is a pretty sturdy bike though.

They are pretty good for a hybrid, but I want a nice carbon fibre road bike next year for the Ride to Conquer Cancer. I did it this year and two years ago on the Kona. This year I did really well, but I would get passed on the flats by my friends on road bikes. But then I would crush them on the hills. LOL.


Maybe not the right thread for this, but anyone have recommendations on a good entry-level road bike? I am looking at sub $1500, and I need a big frame (62cm).

MEC is really good. Should have reasonable end of season deals soon too.

[Yahoo]

Sharing a lane of traffic between vehicles and bikes just isn't possible. Lanes aren't designed to have room for both. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. We have to live with the realities of life, not how we hope things should be. Bikes simply shouldn't be allowed to take a lane of traffic - for their own safety. It just isn't safe outside of uncongested residential areas. I'll go to great lengths to stay off of main roads when biking. It's just common sense.

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it! I even saw one bike rider taking up a lane of traffic instead of driving in the bike lane. This kind of arrogance doesn't help the situation.

People get frustrated because bikes are slower, harder to see, are unpredictable, and yes - they frequently break laws and are rude to drivers. Many act as if it's up to everyone else to watch out for them - when they don't seem to care about driving safely themselves.

I know there will be lots of people mad about this post, but bike lanes shouldn't be in traffic. Our city is growing, so there isn't room to get rid of vehicle lanes. Bike paths need to be built away from roads - and yes, if there is a bike path in the area then bikes need to be outright banned from roads.

The situation is becoming worse since engineers, planners, and designers claim that safety is a #1 priority, but most new roads in Calgary have little to no shoulders. Provincial roads like Stoney and Deerfoot have them, but main roads in Calgary rarely do - likely to save money at the expense of safety. Leaving bikes no choice but to drive in traffic. If roads had proper shoulders then this issue would be easy. Just tell bikes to drive in the safer shoulders - which I'm sure most riders would prefer anyway.

If people insist on driving on busy main roads with their bikes they should be trained, licensed, registered and insured - just like every other vehicle on the road.

Remember, drivers get mad because they don't want to get in an accident. It doesn't matter if it's a person on a bike or in a car. If you are causing an unsafe situation then people get mad at you.

If people are always honking at you then you need to look at one person - yourself - since it's pretty likely you who are acting like the jerk. Seriously, people don't honk at people when they're being safe. People honk because you're creating an unsafe situation and expect others to protect you even though you're causing the danger. (this goes for bike riders AND drivers who get honked at a lot). Nobody has ever honked at me - in a car or on my bike. Because I drive safely.

One bike rider in our elevator comments about how he likes to drive on the dashed lines between the cars "and people sure get mad at me". He didn't have a clue that people were mad because they didn't want to kill someone on their way to work. Man what a fool.

Pitting vehicles (and pedestrians) against bikes is wrong, but mayor N seems to be fueling the conflict by encouraging unsafe interaction. Wishing it was safe doesn't make it safe. Telling people to all get along won't make it safe. Think of it this way. If you walked in a lane of traffic and got hit people would think you're an idiot. A bike in traffic is no different than a pedestrian, skateboarder, or roller skater in traffic.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

Sharing a lane of traffic between vehicles and bikes just isn't possible. Lanes aren't designed to have room for both. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. We have to live with the realities of life, not how we hope things should be. Bikes simply shouldn't be allowed to take a lane of traffic - for their own safety. It just isn't safe outside of uncongested residential areas. I'll go to great lengths to stay off of main roads when biking. It's just common sense.

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it! I even saw one bike rider taking up a lane of traffic instead of driving in the bike lane. This kind of arrogance doesn't help the situation.

People get frustrated because bikes are slower, harder to see, are unpredictable, and yes - they frequently break laws and are rude to drivers. Many act as if it's up to everyone else to watch out for them - when they don't seem to care about driving safely themselves.

I know there will be lots of people mad about this post, but bike lanes shouldn't be in traffic. Our city is growing, so there isn't room to get rid of vehicle lanes. Bike paths need to be built away from roads - and yes, if there is a bike path in the area then bikes need to be outright banned from roads.

If people insist on driving on busy main roads with their bikes they should be trained, licensed, registered and insured - just like every other vehicle on the road.

Remember, drivers get mad because they don't want to get in an accident. It doesn't matter if it's a person on a bike or in a car. If you are causing an unsafe situation then people get mad at you.

If people are always honking at you then you need to look at one person - yourself - since it's pretty likely you who are acting like the jerk. Seriously, people don't honk at people when they're being safe. People honk because you're creating an unsafe situation and expect others to protect you even though you're causing the danger. (this goes for bike riders AND drivers who get honked at a lot)

Pitting vehicles (and pedestrians) against bikes is wrong, but mayor N seems to be fueling the conflict by encouraging unsafe interaction. Wishing it was safe doesn't make it safe. Telling people to all get along won't make it safe. Think of it this way. If you walked in a lane of traffic and got hit people would think you're an idiot. A bike in traffic is no different than a pedestrian, skateboarder, or roller skater in traffic.

This is so many kinds of wrong I don't know where to start.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

Sharing a lane of traffic between vehicles and bikes just isn't possible. Lanes aren't designed to have room for both. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. We have to live with the realities of life, not how we hope things should be. Bikes simply shouldn't be allowed to take a lane of traffic - for their own safety. It just isn't safe outside of uncongested residential areas. I'll go to great lengths to stay off of main roads when biking. It's just common sense.

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it! I even saw one bike rider taking up a lane of traffic instead of driving in the bike lane. This kind of arrogance doesn't help the situation.

People get frustrated because bikes are slower, harder to see, are unpredictable, and yes - they frequently break laws and are rude to drivers. Many act as if it's up to everyone else to watch out for them - when they don't seem to care about driving safely themselves.

I know there will be lots of people mad about this post, but bike lanes shouldn't be in traffic. Our city is growing, so there isn't room to get rid of vehicle lanes. Bike paths need to be built away from roads - and yes, if there is a bike path in the area then bikes need to be outright banned from roads.

If people insist on driving on busy main roads with their bikes they should be trained, licensed, registered and insured - just like every other vehicle on the road.

Remember, drivers get mad because they don't want to get in an accident. It doesn't matter if it's a person on a bike or in a car. If you are causing an unsafe situation then people get mad at you.

If people are always honking at you then you need to look at one person - yourself - since it's pretty likely you who are acting like the jerk. Seriously, people don't honk at people when they're being safe. People honk because you're creating an unsafe situation and expect others to protect you even though you're causing the danger. (this goes for bike riders AND drivers who get honked at a lot)

Pitting vehicles (and pedestrians) against bikes is wrong, but mayor N seems to be fueling the conflict by encouraging unsafe interaction. Wishing it was safe doesn't make it safe. Telling people to all get along won't make it safe. Think of it this way. If you walked in a lane of traffic and got hit people would think you're an idiot. A bike in traffic is no different than a pedestrian, skateboarder, or roller skater in traffic.

Yikes.

It's not like Deerfoot or Macleod Trail is getting bike lanes, you have to relax. Getting them out of your way is exact what lanes are designed to do.

Cycling is up 40% in 5 years in the downtown core. Deal with it. The city needs that infrastructure because the bikes are coming. If you don't like bikes, pedestrians, traffic, congestion, don't drive in the inner city.

You'll hate it there.

Did you see the YYC airport runway is empty most of the time? The most I ever see on it is one plane! Think of all that pavement that could have gone to widening Deerfoot to 30 lanes! I drive by one of these every day and it's a huge flop.

[MalcolmTucker]

I have insurance covering the damage I could do while biking (and anywhere else really). Though I can't imagine causing a million dollars of damage to 3rd parties as a cyclist.

[sim]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

Sharing a lane of traffic between vehicles and bikes just isn't possible. Lanes aren't designed to have room for both. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. We have to live with the realities of life, not how we hope things should be. Bikes simply shouldn't be allowed to take a lane of traffic - for their own safety. It just isn't safe outside of uncongested residential areas. I'll go to great lengths to stay off of main roads when biking. It's just common sense.

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it! I even saw one bike rider taking up a lane of traffic instead of driving in the bike lane. This kind of arrogance doesn't help the situation.

People get frustrated because bikes are slower, harder to see, are unpredictable, and yes - they frequently break laws and are rude to drivers. Many act as if it's up to everyone else to watch out for them - when they don't seem to care about driving safely themselves.

I know there will be lots of people mad about this post, but bike lanes shouldn't be in traffic. Our city is growing, so there isn't room to get rid of vehicle lanes. Bike paths need to be built away from roads - and yes, if there is a bike path in the area then bikes need to be outright banned from roads.

The situation is becoming worse since engineers, planners, and designers claim that safety is a #1 priority, but most new roads in Calgary have little to no shoulders. Provincial roads like Stoney and Deerfoot have them, but main roads in Calgary rarely do - likely to save money at the expense of safety. Leaving bikes no choice but to drive in traffic. If roads had proper shoulders then this issue would be easy. Just tell bikes to drive in the safer shoulders - which I'm sure most riders would prefer anyway.

If people insist on driving on busy main roads with their bikes they should be trained, licensed, registered and insured - just like every other vehicle on the road.

Remember, drivers get mad because they don't want to get in an accident. It doesn't matter if it's a person on a bike or in a car. If you are causing an unsafe situation then people get mad at you.

If people are always honking at you then you need to look at one person - yourself - since it's pretty likely you who are acting like the jerk. Seriously, people don't honk at people when they're being safe. People honk because you're creating an unsafe situation and expect others to protect you even though you're causing the danger. (this goes for bike riders AND drivers who get honked at a lot). Nobody has ever honked at me - in a car or on my bike. Because I drive safely.

One bike rider in our elevator comments about how he likes to drive on the dashed lines between the cars "and people sure get mad at me". He didn't have a clue that people were mad because they didn't want to kill someone on their way to work. Man what a fool.

Pitting vehicles (and pedestrians) against bikes is wrong, but mayor N seems to be fueling the conflict by encouraging unsafe interaction. Wishing it was safe doesn't make it safe. Telling people to all get along won't make it safe. Think of it this way. If you walked in a lane of traffic and got hit people would think you're an idiot. A bike in traffic is no different than a pedestrian, skateboarder, or roller skater in traffic.

It's ok not to post too.

[Chealion]

Anecdotally, a baby windshield on the front of a bike does all kinds of things to command respect. (Yes on 17th as well)

[pulkit10]

@Yahoo: Two major gripes:

- Only recently has the city started to put the necessary infrastructure in place for bike riding. Needless to say, it'll take a little while before it takes hold in the culture of the city. Thing is, it is pretty obvious that there is a genuine demand as people definitely like using their bikes for short commutes in the inner city so it'd be pretty foolish for city planners to not incorporate this in their plans. Sure, some lanes are empty now but a gradual increase in usage is likely.

- Your argument about "bike lanes being useless since they are always empty" is not a very convincing one. Most residential streets barely see a car go by for most of the day - does that mean they are useless too? Bikers will come - there is an obvious demand for it.

That said, I do agree that some basic manners in riders will do wonders for everyone. There is nothing more nerve wrecking than a biker that thinks it is okay to constantly switch between the road and the pathway at his/her leisure. Seriously. Drove on Copperfield Blvd today and this imbecile had his earphones plugged in and kept going on and off between the road and the pathway. If that wasn't bad enough, he decided to stop on the road right before the crosswalk and wait for traffic to stop before crossing the street like a pedestrian - all the while blocking me and the other 3 vehicles behind me from turning right. Honestly, get your act together - you don't get to switch between three roles on a busy street.

[Chealion]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

Sharing a lane of traffic between vehicles and bikes just isn't possible. Lanes aren't designed to have room for both. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. We have to live with the realities of life, not how we hope things should be. Bikes simply shouldn't be allowed to take a lane of traffic - for their own safety. It just isn't safe outside of uncongested residential areas. I'll go to great lengths to stay off of main roads when biking.

Bikes should and are allowed to take a lane of traffic for their safety. Riding too far to to the right is actually more dangerous and causes more congestion than taking the lane. For an example of what I mean, see the video on http://cyclingsavvy.org/hows-my-driving/

It's just common sense.

If I had a penny for every time this phrase is used...

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it! I even saw one bike rider taking up a lane of traffic instead of driving in the bike lane. This kind of arrogance doesn't help the situation.

Your anecdotal evidence and my anecdotal evidence are the exact opposite of each other. I'm constantly amazed at how many cyclists I see using 7th St.

There is no reason someone should be forced to use the bike lane/cycle track. eg. a right turn from the track onto 6th Ave isn't possible - you need to leave the cycle track and move two lanes over to make a safe right turn. Or if the location you want to go to is on the W side of 7th St. The cycle track is on the E side.

People get frustrated because bikes are slower, harder to see, are unpredictable, and yes - they frequently break laws and are rude to drivers. Many act as if it's up to everyone else to watch out for them - when they don't seem to care about driving safely themselves.

Replace bike with vehicles and it's still the same.

I know there will be lots of people mad about this post, but bike lanes shouldn't be in traffic. Our city is growing, so there isn't room to get rid of vehicle lanes. Bike paths need to be built away from roads - and yes, if there is a bike path in the area then bikes need to be outright banned from roads.

You're assuming that all bike lanes must replace vehicle lanes (there can only be 1!) - that's not true. Narrowing other lanes (which also reduces speed) to fit in a bike lane works as well.

I disagree entirely that cyclists should be forced to use a path when available. Multi-Use pathways have a speed limit of 20 km/h (or 10 in some places) and have many different users - pedestrians, dog walkers, rollerbladers, etc. Nor do they scale well once a certain amount of traffic is on them.

If people insist on driving on busy main roads with their bikes they should be trained, licensed, registered and insured - just like every other vehicle on the road.

Only busy main roads? Licensing/insuring bicycles is a rabbit hole of pain full of red herrings and wasted time and money. (What about those under 18, the fact a bike isn't a thousand pound projectile, registration doesn't actually pay for what people think it does, etc.)

It doesn't matter if it's a person on a bike or in a car. If you are causing an unsafe situation then people get mad at you.

Exactly

If people are always honking at you then you need to look at one person - yourself - since it's pretty likely you who are acting like the jerk. Seriously, people don't honk at people when they're being safe.

Anecdotally, the only time I've been honked at cycling is when a driver is being impatient and trying or creating an unsafe situation. Wanting to get around me to make a right instead of the 10 more seconds left in the light sequence, or weaving around me to gun it down a playground zone.

Pitting vehicles (and pedestrians) against bikes is wrong, but mayor N seems to be fueling the conflict by encouraging unsafe interaction. Wishing it was safe doesn't make it safe. Telling people to all get along won't make it safe. Think of it this way. If you walked in a lane of traffic and got hit people would think you're an idiot. A bike in traffic is no different than a pedestrian, skateboarder, or roller skater in traffic.

Except for the pesky fact that a bike is a vehicle and is legally entitled to be ridden on the road and not the sidewalk? (Unless that sidewalk is labelled a pathway and good luck telling the difference)

[Yahoo]

Originally Posted by sim

It's ok not to post too.

I know. :-) But when someone asks a question it's only polite to respond. Especially when only one side of the story is being told.

You see - lots of people have different viewpoints. I like to hear all viewpoints, as do others. Even if I don't agree with them, it helps you understand the world.

I'm a detail oriented person who has a job looking for defects and solutions. Yes, I'm long winded here, but it's a discussion forum, not twitter.

There are serious conflicts between bikes and vehicles. And like it or not there are reasons. If you try to understand differing views then you can more clearly plan and understand the reasons for conflicts - and eliminate them.

Blindly blaming ignorant drivers or ignorant bikers and asking them to play nicely just doesn't work - and will never work, no matter how much we wish it.

[Yahoo]

Originally Posted by pulkit10

@Yahoo: Two major gripes:

- Only recently has the city started to put the necessary infrastructure in place for bike riding. Needless to say, it'll take a little while before it takes hold in the culture of the city. Thing is, it is pretty obvious that there is a genuine demand as people definitely like using their bikes for short commutes in the inner city so it'd be pretty foolish for city planners to not incorporate this in their plans. Sure, some lanes are empty now but a gradual increase in usage is likely.

- Your argument about "bike lanes being useless since they are always empty" is not a very convincing one. Most residential streets barely see a car go by for most of the day - does that mean they are useless too? Bikers will come - there is an obvious demand for it.

That said, I do agree that some basic manners in riders will do wonders for everyone. There is nothing more nerve wrecking than a biker that thinks it is okay to constantly switch between the road and the pathway at his/her leisure. Seriously. Drove on Copperfield Blvd today and this imbecile had his earphones plugged in and kept going on and off between the road and the pathway. If that wasn't bad enough, he decided to stop on the road right before the crosswalk and wait for traffic to stop before crossing the street like a pedestrian - all the while blocking me and the other 3 vehicles behind me from turning right. Honestly, get your act together - you don't get to switch between three roles on a busy street.

I do agree with bike lanes, I just think they rarely should be put over roadways. I do support innovation, and it is worth a try in some little used roads. But my observations of the current bike lane is valid - it just isn't being used. If anyone observes otherwise please post details about the bike count, since I suspect you're just "thinking" it's being used without actually making any observations.

I'd use the bike lane myself if it aligned with my commute, but it doesn't. Edit: I should mention that my observations occur as a pedestrian at the height of the morning and afternoon rush hours. And today at noon I crossed the bike path using the +15 and waited 5 minutes. Hundreds of pedestrians and cars. A couple cross traffic bikes. And zero bikes in the bike lane. Sure, most don't use bikes to go for lunch, but it's the same during the rush hours. Instead of spending a fortune of taxpayer money ripping up the road and pouring concrete barriers I think removable flower pots and a little line painting would have been more $ effective. Perhaps it'll eventually get used, but if it doesn't then we don't have to waste more money changing it back to a road.

Honestly, I think allowing bikes to legally use sidewalks is often the better solution. Perhaps some people don't realize that only people 14 years old and under can legally use a sidewalk as a bike path (at least that's what I was taught in my bike safety course years ago). I think that's really much of the problem. People often assume they know the law when they don't. Sure you aren't allowed to hit a bike, but bikes aren't allowed to take up lanes of traffic, drive side by side, go the wrong way on 1 way streets or run red lights! (please correct me if the laws have changed. With facts though, not just opinions of laws). Perhaps a lawyer in the crowd can clarify things for us about what is and isn't allowed.

If a low speed limit was set on sidewalks when pedestrians were present, and bikers had the courtesy to warn people when they pass then sidewalks are the best option. Sure - there would be conflicts too, but many bikers use sidewalks illegally now anyway.

[Yahoo]

I appreciate your responses. I disagree with many of them (some I take as an exaggeration or mean mean spirited joke trying to twist my words, but I understand the intention), and actually agree with a lot of comments (with a further 2 cents I could add, but won't). I think most agree that we need a solution - as the current situation with bikes and vehicles is just causing grief and danger for everyone and will only get worse as the city grows.

[Yahoo]

In other news... CBC is reporting the SE ring road opening.

"After three years of construction, the provincial government says the southeast ring road will open to traffic on Oct. 1.

Ald. Shane Keating says local residents will be happy construction is finally over, but he doesn't expect the opening of Stoney Trail will change the drive for most commuters on traffic-laden Deerfoot Trail. "


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...letion-tr.html

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I largely agree. The solution is dedicated road space for cyclists. Calgary is falling way behind on cycling infrastructure compared to most of North America. 7th street cycletrack is a start, but it is expensive and only is needed in specific cooridors downtown. So much would be accomplished with painted lines throughout the Beltline. Hell, 11th and 12th are wide enough for one each without even losing any auto-lanes. Same goes with 10th ave (both directions).

17th Ave westbound really could fit one too, its too narrow for 2 travel + parking, its really a 2.5 lane road pretending to fit 3 lanes of cars.


There really needs to be a whole-hearted effort for the inner city to recieve bike lanes. The numbers are already there to justify lanes throughout, they would only grow once people actually feel safe on a bike.

It seems to me that we’re putting it in quite quickly. How can we be falling behind?

There are always going to be some drivers who are a-holes, and if you’re driving down a busy cruising street like 17th you’re going to run into a higher percentage of them, but my main problem with drivers in Calgary is that they’re actually too polite to cyclists. I don’t know how many times I’ve been stopped at a stop sign where the crossing street had the right of way, and a car on that street came to a full stop to let me cross. This is actually quite dangerous and annoying, but they’re clearly doing it because they think they’re being nice.

[Allan83]

The 7th ave cycle way is a big success imo. Are there any stats on it yet? I’m usually on it outside of peak hours and I’m never alone. It even improves the look and feel of the street. The cycleway seems to make it more pedestrian friendly as well.

[mwalker_mw]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Simple, painted bike-lanes can solve all the problems you listed. A reminder that not all cyclists are the 50km/h carbon fibre types. Some will saunter (i.e. the cool types), some are old, some are young and some are not in a hurry. A typically bike is 15 - 25 km/h and cars have to get used to that until dedicated infrastructure is built like bike lanes. Separated is even better, albeit probably more cost-effective in only tight high-collision areas with lots of traffic and speed (i.e. 7th street).

My fat ass is neither 50km/h or carbon fibre :-)

It's mostly about making an effort. When a cyclist is in a traffic lane (or on roads at all for that matter) I think it is reasonable to expect them to be alert and traveling as fast as they can reasonably go. Much as I am a strong believer in cyclist rights, I'm also a strong believer in cyclist responsibilities. Some people just shouldn't be on the road (whether in a vehicle or on a bike).

As you mention, I probably should have added that much of my commentary is only relevant until there is proper cycling infrastructure in place. That is, of course, the best solution.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Allan83

It seems to me that we’re putting it in quite quickly. How can we be falling behind?

There are always going to be some drivers who are a-holes, and if you’re driving down a busy cruising street like 17th you’re going to run into a higher percentage of them, but my main problem with drivers in Calgary is that they’re actually too polite to cyclists. I don’t know how many times I’ve been stopped at a stop sign where the crossing street had the right of way, and a car on that street came to a full stop to let me cross. This is actually quite dangerous and annoying, but they’re clearly doing it because they think they’re being nice.

Anecdotal examples:

LA agreed to add 2,700km of them over 2 years ago at a pace of 320km / year. Sure they started from a weaker base of cycling paths than Calgary but that level of investment is happening across the US. And they are more car-dependent than us by a wide margin.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/02/la-bike.html

Here is a smaller city, Eugene Oregon.

35 miles ~56 km. for a city of metro population of 350,000.

http://www.eugene-or.gov/bicycles

Here is a Metro article from this year.

26km of on street bike lanes in Calgary. of a city of 1.2 million people


http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/710...nfrastructure/


Yes I think there is plenty of evidence we are falling behind. The progress we have made is admirable, but it has to continue and expand even faster.

[speedog]

Originally Posted by Allan83

It seems to me that we’re putting it in quite quickly. How can we be falling behind?

There are always going to be some drivers who are a-holes, and if you’re driving down a busy cruising street like 17th you’re going to run into a higher percentage of them, but my main problem with drivers in Calgary is that they’re actually too polite to cyclists. I don’t know how many times I’ve been stopped at a stop sign where the crossing street had the right of way, and a car on that street came to a full stop to let me cross. This is actually quite dangerous and annoying, but they’re clearly doing it because they think they’re being nice.

People need to figure this out - a cyclist who remains on their cycle while trying to cross a road is not a pedestrian. I will not stop to let a mounted cyclist go through an intersection when I have the right of way as a motorist and I expect no less of other motorist when I am a cyclist in the same situation. Dis-mount your cycle and become a pedestrian and the situation changes or at least it does for me as a driver but I do hate it when a pedestrian all of a sudden decides to become a cyclist part-ways through the intersection after I've stopped for them when they were initally representing themselves as a pedestrian.

As far as riding on sidewalks, in some places it makes more sense - 32 Ave in the NE west of 36th Street. Really a dangerous road for any cyclist to be on the road and the sidewalk on one side is even designated as a pathway - even where it's not, the sidewalk is a safer alternative and I'm sure most CPS would turn a blind eye to a cyclist on the sidewalk as opposed to one riding on busy 32nd Ave NE. Certainly know that I was never bothered by CPS when I cycle commuted on the sidewalk (north side) along 32nd Ave NE for 4 years.

Another example - riding on John Laurier Boulevard on the south side of Nose Hill when there is a perfectly good pathway just to the south of John Laurier. Why on earth would a cyclist opt to ride on John Laurier when there's an alternative is beyond me.

[sim]

Originally Posted by Yahoo

I know. :-) But when someone asks a question it's only polite to respond. Especially when only one side of the story is being told.

You see - lots of people have different viewpoints. I like to hear all viewpoints, as do others. Even if I don't agree with them, it helps you understand the world.

I'm a detail oriented person who has a job looking for defects and solutions. Yes, I'm long winded here, but it's a discussion forum, not twitter.

There are serious conflicts between bikes and vehicles. And like it or not there are reasons. If you try to understand differing views then you can more clearly plan and understand the reasons for conflicts - and eliminate them.

Blindly blaming ignorant drivers or ignorant bikers and asking them to play nicely just doesn't work - and will never work, no matter how much we wish it.

A viewpoint is only as good as the point of viewing it is, which is of course difficult because that can only be known once read; and hence, the earlier comment: Not every viewpoint is in fact helpful, as there isn't always enough time to entertain each person's whimsical notions. Quite frankly, even in what may be a rather inconsequential forum, it more or less derails any meaningful discussion. At least target your arguement a bit in your post.

I mean no disrespect, and while your job may be looking for solutions to problems, you can be assured that many people have come before you in this case and have a much, much better idea of how to do so. These are the realities of life.

The amount of time it would take for someone to even begin to try and address what you've posted and to do so in a manner that may even start, as it would seem, to convince you otherwise lends itself to Fusili's post where one wouldn't "even know where to start." To me it begs the question of if you are even being genuine in your desire to find solutions or if your solution is simply that cycling should be accomodated as an afterthought; i.e. not at all.

If this isn't the case, then I can recommend a book that can at least keep the discussion in a prudent frame.


But to address just one of your points:

Originally Posted by Yahoo

As for taking over traffic lanes and giving them to bikes - that's just wrong too. I walk by one of these downtown every day and it's a huge flop. I've counted 3 bikes, 2 skateboarders and 2 joggers since it opened. (Lol, I can't wait for bikers to start protesting people jogging and skateboarding in their lanes! It works both ways hahaha). I cross the lane as a pedestrian every day - 4 times a day, and it's crazy how no bikes use it!

Originally Posted by Yahoo

I'd use the bike lane myself if it aligned with my commute, but it doesn't.

So just for how many people's commute's do you think the 7th st cycle track aligns? Tell me, does 7th st itself align with your commute? How many drivers do you think you would see on a road isolated out in a field? If my point isn't overly clear here, and perhaps excuse my pretentiousness, then please see my second paragraph above or alternatively, think about the value of an actual network.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by speedog

People need to figure this out - a cyclist who remains on their cycle while trying to cross a road is not a pedestrian. I will not stop to let a mounted cyclist go through an intersection when I have the right of way as a motorist and I expect no less of other motorist when I am a cyclist in the same situation. Dis-mount your cycle and become a pedestrian and the situation changes or at least it does for me as a driver but I do hate it when a pedestrian all of a sudden decides to become a cyclist part-ways through the intersection after I've stopped for them when they were initally representing themselves as a pedestrian.

As far as riding on sidewalks, in some places it makes more sense - 32 Ave in the NE west of 36th Street. Really a dangerous road for any cyclist to be on the road and the sidewalk on one side is even designated as a pathway - even where it's not, the sidewalk is a safer alternative and I'm sure most CPS would turn a blind eye to a cyclist on the sidewalk as opposed to one riding on busy 32nd Ave NE. Certainly know that I was never bothered by CPS when I cycle commuted on the sidewalk (north side) along 32nd Ave NE for 4 years.

Another example - riding on John Laurier Boulevard on the south side of Nose Hill when there is a perfectly good pathway just to the south of John Laurier. Why on earth would a cyclist opt to ride on John Laurier when there's an alternative is beyond me.

I think you’re probably right. I think that’s it. For whatever reason there seems to be a large number of drivers in Calgary who think cyclists on their bikes, on the road, have the same rights as pedestrians. This is not the case, and Mr. Driver you’re not doing me as a cyclist any favour by stopping for me this way. You’re only greatly increasing the chances that I’ll have a front row seat to a horrific rear end collision.

On the issue of riding on sidewalks, I have no problem with people riding on sidewalks as long as there are no pedestrians. As others have said, it’s often much safer for both the cyclist and the divers. If the cyclist encounters a pedestrian, however, then he needs to slow down and get off his bike well ahead of said pedestrian, and become a pedestrian himself. Don’t try to ride around the pedestrian. Don’t stop just in front of the pedestrian and make them worry about whether you were going to stop. Stop well in front of them so you don’t disturb them in any way. But if the sidewalk is clear and the road is busy and dangerous, then the sidewalk is a better option for both the cyclist and the drivers, imo. Just use common sense and common courtesy.