I just truly don't understand it. I mean, I'm someone that has zero interest in riding a bike, and cannot relate to cyclists one bit. I'm a car driver through and through. Which is exactly why I am 100% on board with cyclists not being in the same lane as me. Seems like that just works better for everybody
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to btimbit For This Useful Post:
I just truly don't understand it. I mean, I'm someone that has zero interest in riding a bike, and cannot relate to cyclists one bit. I'm a car driver through and through. Which is exactly why I am 100% on board with cyclists not being in the same lane as me. Seems like that just works better for everybody
100%. As a cyclist I don’t want to be in the same lane as a car. As a driver I hate having cyclists in the same lane as I am. Bike lanes, especially an extensive, well maintained network of them, benefit everyone.
It’s hard to believe people are still crying about the few we have.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
And spearheaded by a councillor who, I'm pretty sure, has exactly zero bike lanes in his Ward.
#### off Dan, shouldn't you be busy getting sanctioned by the city's integrity commissioner for the umpteenth time? What, no rounds of golf with your crooked buddies this week? No indigenous people nearby to go bash again? Really, bike lanes are your focus?
But bike lanes makes it so much easier to gather up and run over those ######bag and elitist cyclists all at once. They make the process so much more efficient!
Funny how the people who speak loudest about freedom are the same ones that think people shouldn't be able to choose between more than one viable mode of transportation and should be forced to buy a car/truck.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ashartus For This Useful Post:
100%. As a cyclist I don’t want to be in the same lane as a car. As a driver I hate having cyclists in the same lane as I am. Bike lanes, especially an extensive, well maintained network of them, benefit everyone.
It’s hard to believe people are still crying about the few we have.
I want way more goddamned bike lanes, but I also do want the city to be a bit more mindful about *where* they put them. 12 Ave SW is a busy, high volume route and a crappy place for the one it has. It would have been way better suited to 10 Ave SW.
Aside: We were walking back from dinner along the south side of 12 Ave SW and I hear a faint "ding ding" behind us and turn around to see some guy on a bike in full gear riding along the sidewalk. Having a margarita or two in me, I said "GEE, I SURE WISH WE HAD BIKE LANES IN DOWNTOWN. I BET THAT WOULD MAKE WAAAAAY MORE SENSE THAN SOME GROWN-ASS DUDE RIDING ON THE SIDEWALK," and some guy walking the other way was like "Where even are the bike la--" then looked across the street at the north side of 12 Ave SW to see the nice protected (and empty) bike lanes and proceeded to double-over in laughter. Bike guy just gave me a dirty look and kept going.
I don't care; tequila told me to say it and tequila was right.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
Last edited by TorqueDog; 07-24-2025 at 03:02 PM.
Reason: Accidentally a word.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
I want way more goddamned bike lanes, but I also do want the city to be a bit more mindful about *where* they put them. 12 Ave SW is a busy, high volume route and a crappy place for the one it has. It would have been way better suited to 10 Ave SW.
Aside: We were walking back from dinner along the south side of 12 Ave SW and I hear a faint "ding ding" behind us and turn around to see some guy in a bike in full gear riding along the sidewalk. Having a margarita or two in me, I said "GEE, I SURE WISH WE HAD BIKE LANES IN DOWNTOWN. I BET THAT WOULD MAKE WAAAAAY MORE SENSE THAN SOME GROWN-ASS DUDE RIDING ON THE SIDEWALK," and some guy walking the other way was like "Where even are the bike la--" then looked across the street at the north side of 12 Ave SW to see the nice protected (and empty) bike lanes and proceeded to double-over in laughter. Bike guy just gave me a dirty look and kept going.
I don't care; tequila told me to say it and tequila was right.
I think the issue they had with that initial plan is they couldn't make it work with the fire station. I'm not sure if that was a lack of imagination, fire station veto power, or something else. But that was the claim at the time.
I do agree though, they should be on roads suited for them. Or perhaps...no roads? Perhaps we just need the bike version "The Penetrator". Elevated bike-ways with access to everywhere.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
I think the issue they had with that initial plan is they couldn't make it work with the fire station. I'm not sure if that was a lack of imagination, fire station veto power, or something else. But that was the claim at the time.
I do agree though, they should be on roads suited for them. Or perhaps...no roads? Perhaps we just need the bike version "The Penetrator". Elevated bike-ways with access to everywhere.
IIRC the biggest issue with 10th is that there wasn’t a way to do it without losing parking spaces, which was a no go when it came to getting the Cycle Track Network passed (along with sacrificing 1st St SE so the opponents could say they got something back). 12th would have travel lanes affected but would be able to maintain parking, so it was picked.
Similar reason the 5th Street Cycle Track doesn’t go down and connect with the Elbow River pathway like it logically should; the only way to not lose parking would be to have it continue as a one-way south of 17th.
The Following User Says Thank You to Roughneck For This Useful Post:
100%. As a cyclist I don’t want to be in the same lane as a car. As a driver I hate having cyclists in the same lane as I am. Bike lanes, especially an extensive, well maintained network of them, benefit everyone.
It’s hard to believe people are still crying about the few we have.
I really hate how poor of a job our city does at many things... bike lanes seem especially badly executed.
With the cyclist fatality on 26th ave SW just a few days back it really aggravates me that they couldn't have just moved the bike lanes a block north and pushed it through the community (with proper infrastructure like lights and barricades). Right now the only thing separating the cars and the bikes on 26th ave is a line of paint and I often see cars crossing that line to whip around turning cars or whatever.
For downtown my idea will be especially radical. I think the city should evict the trains from the city. Every time I see those trains full of tanker cars going through downtown I wonder how much damage it would be if it exploded (like Lac-Mégantic).
Instead, move the train yard outside of the city (maybe make it a battle between Airdrie and Okotoks to determine if the new train tracks go north or south of Calgary) and reclaim the land currently allocated to trains within the city. The train tracks that run through downtown would convert into a bike highway and the train yard in Ogden could become a massive density housing project that would immediately add tens of thousands of inner city housing.
Then build all of the other bike lanes to essentially get to the legacy train tracks to then get downtown safely with almost no cars (except for that stupid crossing on 11th street SW).
For downtown my idea will be especially radical. I think the city should evict the trains from the city. Every time I see those trains full of tanker cars going through downtown I wonder how much damage it would be if it exploded (like Lac-Mégantic).
Instead, move the train yard outside of the city (maybe make it a battle between Airdrie and Okotoks to determine if the new train tracks go north or south of Calgary) and reclaim the land currently allocated to trains within the city. The train tracks that run through downtown would convert into a bike highway and the train yard in Ogden could become a massive density housing project that would immediately add tens of thousands of inner city housing.
Then build all of the other bike lanes to essentially get to the legacy train tracks to then get downtown safely with almost no cars (except for that stupid crossing on 11th street SW).
Who pays CP the infinity dollars they would want for agreeing to that?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
I want way more goddamned bike lanes, but I also do want the city to be a bit more mindful about *where* they put them. 12 Ave SW is a busy, high volume route and a crappy place for the one it has. It would have been way better suited to 10 Ave SW.
.
I think most traffic engineers would suggest this is the correct way of looking at the problem
Dedicated bike lanes likely reduce traffic flow rates on high volume roads by taking up a lane that could otherwise be used for vehicle traffic. Bike lanes should be removed on these streets and avenues and reoriented to less busy thorough fares.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts
The fact Gullfoss is not banned for life on here is such an embarrassment. Just a joke.
I think most traffic engineers would suggest this is the correct way of looking at the problem
Dedicated bike lanes likely reduce traffic flow rates on high volume roads by taking up a lane that could otherwise be used for vehicle traffic. Bike lanes should be removed on these streets and avenues and reoriented to less busy thorough fares.
Depends what you think ‘the problem’ is when building a Cycle Track. Is the problem ‘how do we move cyclists efficiently and safely?’ Is it ‘How do we minimize vehicle traffic?’ Or is it ‘how do we balance the first two without losing any parking?’ The problem the traffic engineers were given for the cycle Track Network was the third one. The parking issue is a lot less of a problem now, as the success of the Cycle Track Network has led to more protected lanes going up (like 2nd St) and some where parking is indeed being removed to accommodate protected lanes (the work in 14th and 15th Ave).
The issue with the less used thoroughfares, at least as they pertained to the original network plans and layout, is that they failed all problems. They don’t allow cyclists to move efficiently or safely because they lose priority crossing busy streets. The light priority is either terrible, or there aren’t lights at all.youve failed problem 1. So to mitigate that you would need to improve the priority on these routes, which would negatively affect vehicle traffic, notably on 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th Streets. You’ve failed problem 2. But to do it in the first place, you fail problem 3.
12th Ave was picked because it allowed the traffic engineers to deal with all the problems. They could convert a permanent parking lane to a cycle track, and use a flow lane as a temporary parking lane, which would maintain parking spots most of the day but also maintain lane kilometres during peak traffic flow. Because it’s busy thoroughfare, the cycle lanes would benefit from the same light and travel priority as vehicle traffic, allowing efficient movement that could be expanded in the future to connect the Elbow River Pathway all the way into Sunalta.
Given the restrictions and parameters they were working under, the traffic engineers dealt with the problems pretty darn well all things considered. So well the network is being expanded, which I take as a sign of success.
The Following User Says Thank You to Roughneck For This Useful Post:
