Traffic delays up to 20% alongside downtown cycle lanes, city predicts

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

What the hell are you talking about? The 7th street bike lane hooks up with all major paths and leads directly to the new Peace bridge. It's basically a perfect location. The problem is the cyclists that live west of Kensington like to cut off a maybe one-two minute bike drive by going illegally over the 10th street bridge, which for your reference, is mandatory that they get off and walk their bike across. I have never seen one person in my 6 years of walking across that bridge seen a cyclist follow the law and actually walk their bike across that bridge.

Your logic is ridiculous. If I don't like the city the lane built me to drive my car in because I want to be one block over, should I be allowed to drive up a sidewalk with my car and hit dozens of people and throw my hands up and say " Screw it, I wanted this road to be one block over." Unfortunate your attitude is shared by a sizeable portion of the cyclists in Calgary who chose to follow the rules of the road only when it benefits them, and is the big reason why such projects are met with such dismay by the general population. Why should people inconvenience themselves for cyclists when they are going to do whatever the hell they want anyways?

Firstly, calm down.

Secondly, driving your car on a sidewalk is illegal.

Riding a bike on a road 1 block from a bike lane is perfectly legal.

Until the 8th ave cycle track was open, the 7th street cycle track connected the Peace Bridge to... nowhere.

If you worked anywhere but 7th street, you were looking at riding on some 6 lane one way streets to get anywhere else in the heart of downtown. If you wanted to get south of the CP Rail tracks, you'd have to jog off 7th to get to the 8th street underpass, riding in traffic in narrow lanes.

That isn't how you attract casual cyclists. Many people that were already happy on the road weren't going to make their trip longer for the benefits they perceive as minimal to riding in a bike lane. The target user of the lanes is people that don't ride because they find riding downtown on the streets terrifying.

I'm comfortable riding on the streets, but I make the personal decision to use the bike lanes when possible as I feel they are safer, and also because I ride with the mantra of "don't screw up traffic". If I can get off the roads, it seems good for everyone. I can't make others follow that logic though, and they are in their right to ride on whatever road they want. Just as I never go 50km/h in my car down a residential street, because that seems like a dink thing to do. There are many dinks that will do it because it's legal.

If you want to make it illegal to ride on the road, we need a significantly larger cycle track network, which will just piss guys like yourself off even more.

[woob]

Those of you who argue that the ratio of cyclists disobeying the rules of the road is greater than drivers are either solely drivers yourself and have it out for cyclists or you're not being honest in your argument. The most casual of observers could discern that both sides of this argument cut corners all the time and as someone pointed out previously in this thread, the sooner you realize PEOPLE are lazy, the better you'll be.

But please continue your irrational tyranny against all things bicycle, it's immensely entertaining.

[Magnum PEI]

I don't understand the hatred cyclists get. If they aren't harming anyone who cares if they run a red or ride on the sidewalk? Not enough MYOB going on these days. When I see a car run a red I think "somebody's late for work". I don't log on to CP and post "I just saw like ten or twelve cars run a red light. Typical. They should all be banned." I think there's some bitter jealousy/emasculation thing going. Sorry for ruining your machismo by commuting without aid of a gasoline engine.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by woob

Those of you who argue that the ratio of cyclists disobeying the rules of the road is greater than drivers are either solely drivers yourself and have it out for cyclists or you're not being honest in your argument. The most casual of observers could discern that both sides of this argument cut corners all the time and as someone pointed out previously in this thread, the sooner you realize PEOPLE are lazy, the better you'll be.

Both do cut corners. But cyclists do it much more. And that's my observation from 25 years as both a cycle commuter and a motorists. There's is a hefty proportion of cyclists who ignore all rules of the road and do not communicate at all with other users of the road. I'd peg it at around 1/3, almost all fast riders, almost all males between 25 and 50. These are the guys who take a lane when it's convenient, then at a light cruise up the shoulder past all the stopped cars to get in front. The ones who never use hand signals. Who don't use a bell on the paths, or yield for pedestrians. The guys in a hurry, who see everything outside their bubble as an obstacle to be overcome, and who seem to revel in a Me vs Everyone outlook.

Are there drivers like that? Who routinely make illegal lane changes, never signal, blow through stop signs without slowing, and never slow or inconvenience themselves in any way to accommodate other motorists or pedestrians? Some. But not anywhere close to 1/3.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Bill Bumface did a pretty good job of summing up a lot of the great points.

I'd also like to point out that the people getting all riled up about cyclists breaking the laws are forgetting a few pretty important points:

1) There is a definite confirmation bias going on with the folks who have just decided that cyclists are horrible. When you are in your car you're not likely to see the cyclists that is doing everything right, but you sure as heck will see the cyclists that are doing something you think is horrible, and that will make it seem like there are a lot more bad cyclists on the road. In fact, the fact that you don't notice us when we are doing things right, is part of what makes it more dangerous for us to be out there.

2) Most drivers don't understand why some cyclists break the rules from time to time, yes some people are just jerks, but for others there are legitimate reasons to bend some rules. For example, I will sometimes scoot up the center line to the front of a line because I know everyone is turning right from/on to a 1 way. I'm getting out of everyone's way and making it safer for myself. The drivers should be happy, and I'm safer, win win.
As for things like rolling through stop signs, there is some evidence that this can make cycling safer and more appealing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...ugh-stop-signs

That article from the Hearald makes a good point, that the majority of opposition comes from the fact that people get angry if they think cyclists are being given some sort of advantage. Well yeah, maybe we should have some special rules in place, you know, because there should be some incentives for a more efficient means of travel, and because we have have different safety considerations than cars.

This is a great case where treating everyone fairly, is not necessarily the same as treating everyone equally.

3) Any argument of "Cyclists break the rules, why should we cater to them?" is just ridiculous on the face of it. Anyone who is making that argument, has either never driven a car, or is being intentionally ignorant. How many drivers a day do you see speeding, rolling through stop signs, stopping in crosswalks, not signalling? Some people are crappy at following the rules, is not a valid argument to remove infrastructure that benefits a much larger group of people.

One of my favorite examples of this, is the Centre Street bridge. I ride up it almost every day. The right lane coming out of downtown is designated as Transit, HOV, and Bicycles. I usually get honked at at least once a week by an angry motorist, and 95% of the time it is a single person in a car. They aren't even supposed to be in that lane. Because of that should I try to argue that Centre Street shouldn't be accessible to single occupant cars? Especially considering they could go up the hill at Edmonton Trail, a mere 3 blocks away? Of course not, it's a ridiculous argument, just as the "Cyclists on 8th st are horrible, therefore we shouldn't have a bike lane on 7th street".

[Addick]

I find that there is resentment toward both cyclists and pedestrians. Two major benefits of cycling and walking are that they are: a) very flexible modes of transport; and b) a blind eye can safely be turned toward more of the infractions they commit. Cyclists and pedestrians can stop in the middle of their journey to look at a shop window or chat with a passerby. While motorists only have leeway when it comes to rolling stops and going 10 over the limit, cyclists and pedestrians can safely perform cycling through reds, jaywalking and switching between on-street lanes and cycle lanes. Consequently, motorists get a bit envious when they see cyclists and pedestrians doing things they simply cannot.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

2) Most drivers don't understand why some cyclists break the rules from time to time, yes some people are just jerks, but for others there are legitimate reasons to bend some rules.

Bill you seem to be a good cyclist but there lies the problem when you think there're legitimate reasons to bend rules. The simple fact to me is there're no legitimate reasons to bend rules. Because soon as you defend bending rules, everyone and their uncle will come up with their own legitimate reasons to bend them.

Can you say because I got layoff so I have legitimate reason not to pay my taxes this year?

And cyclists makes up their own rule about turning, crossing, stopping and expect motorists to follow every different one of them. One time I have a cyclist telling me I am not suppose to pass them on the street because passing them endangers their lives.

As a driver I broke some rules sometime too but when I get caught, I don't have the luxury of coming up with my own legitimate reasons not to pay the fine. Why should cyclist be different?

[united]

I don't get why motorists get so upset and focused on cyclists who break minor rules. And I haven't cycled since I was a kid.

I speed every time I drive. If I approach a stop sign with no other traffic I roll through it. If I approach a red light late at night with no traffic or vehicle lights in sight I drive though it. When I'm a pedestrian at an intersection with no traffic I walk across, I don't stand around waiting for the walk sign to flash on. I jaywalk whenever convenient. Who cares about that stuff, whether it's a cyclist or a motorist?

Now if any cyclist or motorist intentionally breaks the rules and causes a danger or inconvenience to others that sucks, but I don't see the point in getting upset at minor violations which effect nobody.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by darklord700

As a driver I broke some rules sometime too but when I get caught, I don't have the luxury of coming up with my own legitimate reasons not to pay the fine. Why should cyclist be different?

Like drivers, cyclists break the rules. Leaving aside the fact that drivers do it in 1-2 pound machines capable of killing others, they probably have similar per-minute driving infraction rates.

Many people don't get caught. When they do, both get tickets. I break the law significantly more in my car than on my bike and in the past five years I've had 1 ticket for each.

[woob]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Are there drivers like that? Who routinely make illegal lane changes, never signal, blow through stop signs without slowing, and never slow or inconvenience themselves in any way to accommodate other motorists or pedestrians? Some. But not anywhere close to 1/3.

Aside from the blowing through stop signs part and pedestrians, any drive back on the Trans Canada from the mountains will put this number well above 1/3. In fact, I'd venture the 1/3 applies to those who aren't bending the rules.

Yes I realize this is not downtown, but just trying to illustrate my point about a large number of motorists bending rules.

[Coach]

Would a better solution to be having bike lanes as part of the sidewalk vs part of the vehicle traffic? Move the side walks out a foot 1/2 on each side, partition off the bike lane with a small curb (could be even smaller than now is on the roads, because a person veering into the bike lane isn't as dangerous as a car into bikes or vice versa) and you reduce the walking space a bit. I noticed the older lanes in Amsterdam were mostly like this. Sometimes there was a small fence-like divider between the sidewalk and the bike lane. Sometimes you get people walking on the bike lane and I'm sure cyclists get annoyed by it, but a simple bell ring makes you move. And it's a lot easier to move yourself than it is to move your car or your bike.

[Fuzz]

The problem with that setup is it makes bikes even less visible to traffic, which is an issue at intersections and alley crossings. In Amsterdam traffic generally moves slower. Plus our sidewalks in many areas are already to narrow.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Bill you seem to be a good cyclist but there lies the problem when you think there're legitimate reasons to bend rules. The simple fact to me is there're no legitimate reasons to bend rules. Because soon as you defend bending rules, everyone and their uncle will come up with their own legitimate reasons to bend them.

Can you say because I got layoff so I have legitimate reason not to pay my taxes this year?

And cyclists makes up their own rule about turning, crossing, stopping and expect motorists to follow every different one of them. One time I have a cyclist telling me I am not suppose to pass them on the street because passing them endangers their lives.

As a driver I broke some rules sometime too but when I get caught, I don't have the luxury of coming up with my own legitimate reasons not to pay the fine. Why should cyclist be different?

Firstly I'm not Bill.

Secondly, I'm not saying that every cyclist should make up their own rules and expect cars to know what they are doing.
What I am saying is that it is possible that what a cyclist is doing, that is technically breaking the rules, may not always be the problem motorists think it is. The example I gave was to show that sometimes "Breaking the rules" which you seem to think will make it difficult for drivers, is sometimes the exact opposite.

In that instance, I break a rule so that I can get out of drivers way, and make it safer for me. It doesn't take any extra attention from the drivers.
I'm removing myself from a potentially dangerous situation (drivers will often scoot pasty cyclists, then turn into them when they turn right), which protects me, and requires no reaction from drivers.

I absolutely don't think cyclists should be breaking rules when it puts themselves in danger, or causes drivers to have to react to what they are doing. But if there is a situation where a rigid rule, that does not consider cyclists needs, and is actually putting me in danger, and I can both remove myself from the situation, and not impact the drivers on the road, then I don't think it's unreasonable for me to break that rule. So yeah, I break rules from time to time, but you'd be pretty hard pressed to find a situation where I put myself in danger, or objectively impact motorists while doing so. That really cannot be said for motorists who break rules around me when I'm riding. I've be clipped by drivers who want to pass me too close, I've had stuff thrown at me on the highway, and I've had more than one instance of someone not looking, proceeding through a stop sign, and almost hitting me.
On an unrelated note, if you do that last one, don't lean out your window and say "Sorry, I didn't see you". I know you didn't see me, that's why you almost hit me. That's not an apology, that's an admission that you're not paying attention/are a crappy driver.

In any case, it's all moot, because using the fact that some cyclists break the rules for whatever reason, and therefore shouldn't be given consideration when it comes time to design/implement transportation infrastructure, is pretty ridiculous. Especially on a board where the vast majority of people (quite a few who are anti-cycling lane, for this exact reason) will argue to the death that speeding on Deerfoot is the safest way to travel.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Both do cut corners. But cyclists do it much more. And that's my observation from 25 years as both a cycle commuter and a motorists. There's is a hefty proportion of cyclists who ignore all rules of the road and do not communicate at all with other users of the road. I'd peg it at around 1/3, almost all fast riders, almost all males between 25 and 50. These are the guys who take a lane when it's convenient, then at a light cruise up the shoulder past all the stopped cars to get in front. The ones who never use hand signals. Who don't use a bell on the paths, or yield for pedestrians. The guys in a hurry, who see everything outside their bubble as an obstacle to be overcome, and who seem to revel in a Me vs Everyone outlook.

Are there drivers like that? Who routinely make illegal lane changes, never signal, blow through stop signs without slowing, and never slow or inconvenience themselves in any way to accommodate other motorists or pedestrians? Some. But not anywhere close to 1/3.

I think most people by nature are selfish. What discourages drivers from doing more illegal stuff in their cars for convenience sake is the potential consequences. A cyclist probably blows through a stop sign thinking no biggie, I'm quasi pedestrian, so a cop will probably not bother giving me a ticket, and I probably won't kill anyone if I hit them. A car blows through one, and the consequences are more likely for fines and serious injury.

Signalling, cars routinely don't do it either, which has been highlighted by many in the gear grinder thread, so I think they're just the same.

When caught in a traffic jam, you see just as many d-bag drivers going on shoulders, rolling onto boulevards to do illegal u-turns, etc. That's the same as cyclists cutting corners IMO.

[Torture]

Anybody that complains about cyclists breaking the rules had better stay under the speed limit if they respect the rules so much. Nevermind issues with signaling, u-turns, etc.

[CliffFletcher]

Okay, let's set aside the matter of bikes vs cars and look at cars vs cars and bikes vs bikes.

When I drive to work, I interact with a couple hundred other cars on the road - signalling, changing lanes, merging, yielding. On a typical drive, I don't have any problems. Maybe every third commute or so I'll encounter someone being oblivious or ######y in a way that affects my drive.

When I cycle to work, I encounter maybe a dozen or so other cyclists on the pathways. I'd say close to half behave in a way that shows a complete disregard for other cyclists, the most common being overtaking without ringing a bell or giving an 'on your left', or racing to pass pedestrians in a manner that makes me have to brake or ride off the path. And maybe one in three uses hand signals at all. Never mind such advanced techniques as ringing a bell when approaching a blind corner, or riding in single file instead of two abreast.

Basically, driving a car is treated as a regulated and orderly (if frustrating) endeavour that requires a high degree of communication with other drivers, while cycling is a solo free for all. Others have pointed out that the stakes aren't as high for cyclists, so they simply don't take it seriously. Which is probably true. But if cyclists really want to share the roads and be treated with respect, it's to time ditch the renegade free-for-all and take it as seriously as driving.

[Fuzz]

I think part of it, and it will take time, is that a lot of people aren't used to doing things like signalling and passing in crowded situations. Many riders are newish, and we've had from what I've seen, a massive increase in pathway traffic. I would hope that as we get more infrastructure and more users, people will pick up on what others do and do it themselves.

Maybe the city could add some signs on the pathways and cycle tracks (especially around dense use areas like the peace bridge) along the lines of "don't forget to signal!" I'd absolutely like to see signs about ringing bells, not just for bikes, but so pedestrians know we are doing it for a reason, not to tell them to get out of the way and yell at us. I've had people wave at me when I signal a right turn, becuase they think I'm waving at them...some people just have no clue, a few educational signs wouldn't hurt.

In the end though, we will have to remember that some people(far to many!) don't signal in cars either, and they will always exist, no matter how they travel.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I think part of it, and it will take time, is that a lot of people aren't used to doing things like signalling and passing in crowded situations. Many riders are newish, and we've had from what I've seen, a massive increase in pathway traffic. I would hope that as we get more infrastructure and more users, people will pick up on what others do and do it themselves.

Maybe the city could add some signs on the pathways and cycle tracks (especially around dense use areas like the peace bridge) along the lines of "don't forget to signal!" I'd absolutely like to see signs about ringing bells, not just for bikes, but so pedestrians know we are doing it for a reason, not to tell them to get out of the way and yell at us. I've had people wave at me when I signal a right turn, becuase they think I'm waving at them...some people just have no clue, a few educational signs wouldn't hurt.

In the end though, we will have to remember that some people(far to many!) don't signal in cars either, and they will always exist, no matter how they travel.

This is a pretty good point. We are dealing with a new/growing system, so of course there are going to be areas to improve, and a bit of a learning curve, and neither of those are reasons to say it's a failure, or not worth it.

No system works prefectly on the first day, I certainly wasn't a confident cyclist who understood all the rules on day 1, and as we encourage the system to grow, and more people to use it there will be an influx of people who don't understand how to use it properly, and we're just going to have to accept that it's part of the process and that it will get better as time goes on.

[jammies]

I am 95% a pedestrian and I see bikes break the law far more than cars. Cliff_Fletcher is a cyclist and he sees bikers riding unsafely and discourteously all the time. So maybe it's not "jealousy", but an actual problem where cyclists are far worse "drivers" than motorists.

This can, by the way, be the case even if motorists are generally bad drivers and break the law. Maybe the confirmation bias isn't where some of you think it is.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by jammies

I am 95% a pedestrian and I see bikes break the law far more than cars. Cliff_Fletcher is a cyclist and he sees bikers riding unsafely and discourteously all the time. So maybe it's not "jealousy", but an actual problem where cyclists are far worse "drivers" than motorists.

This can, by the way, be the case even if motorists are generally bad drivers and break the law. Maybe the confirmation bias isn't where some of you think it is.

I bought a bike a few months ago because the new cycle paths allow me to travel 95% of the way from home to work without having to ride in traffic. Prior to that, I walked everywhere. I never drive. If I were to have a bias in this debate, it would definitely be towards cyclists and pedestrians and against motorists.

And yet, I'll second (third?) the anecdotal evidence that my fellow cyclists are far more likely to dangerously disobey traffic laws than motorists are on a per capita basis. In the three months that I've been biking to work, I can't tell you how many times I've been stopped at a red light when another cyclist will overtake me from behind and plow right through the intersection without stopping to wait for the green. This is not a rare occurrence. I see this every single day (and sometimes multiple times per day). Then there are the cyclists I see riding on the sidewalk even though there is a dedicated bike lane literally three feet next to them. Don't even get me started on those idiots.