Calgary Releases Cycling Strategy

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by pylon

If you drive a black Ford Ranger, you are a massive puss. Some guy in a black Ranger did that to me on 14th street, at a light, and I almost went ass over tea kettle into his tailgate while I was shoulder checking the car next to me. Pulled up next to him, and he acted like a massive coward when I asked him if he would like to discuss his "etiquette" in the parking lot, right over there.

Because you are lazy, or out of shape, or just a general dick of a driver, which you sound like... you don't have a right to endanger the life of a cyclist. If you have EVER ridden a real road bike, you would get that these things can travel at car like speeds. Blocking the path of a cyclist with a 3000 pound obstacle, that stops faster, is a complete a-hole thing to do, whether the cyclist is right or wrong. There has never been a case of a cyclist killing a driver, but there has certainly been thousands of deaths the other way around. What is the worst the cyclist is going to do, besides slow your day up by 20 seconds? Is that worth causing a torn sack, a broken wrist, or worse... just so you can be the King of the Road?

It is the same as seeing a guy speeding 10 over, and taking the law into your own hands by throwing out a spike belt to impede his progress. The sad thing about guys like you is, whenever you guys get called out, you cower like the spineless twerps you are, and just speed off.

For effen sake you guys. Read what I am saying and don't make me into this awful road rager who is cutting off cyclists and cars.

I am talking about the situation where the person on the bike can't keep up to traffic and we have to pass him more than once. Then the next set of lights he passes all the cars that are waiting. So then we have to pass him again because he can't keep up with traffic.

So the next time I stop at a red light and I see him two blocks back I will stop close to the curb so he can't get by me. I am not doing this at 50 km/h. I do this as I come to a stop. I watch the guy on the bike and don't just shoot over there.

That is two of you guys jumping to conclusions and calling me names over it. Effen calm down and pay attention before you start attacking somebody.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

For effen sake you guys. Read what I am saying and don't make me into this awful road rager who is cutting off cyclists and cars.

I am talking about the situation where the person on the bike can't keep up to traffic and we have to pass him more than once. Then the next set of lights he passes all the cars that are waiting. So then we have to pass him again because he can't keep up with traffic.

So the next time I stop at a red light and I see him two blocks back I will stop close to the curb so he can't get by me. I am not doing this at 50 km/h. I do this as I come to a stop. I watch the guy on the bike and don't just shoot over there.

That is two of you guys jumping to conclusions and calling me names over it. Effen calm down and pay attention before you start attacking somebody.

If he isn't keeping up with traffic, why do you have to keep passing him ?

Seems like he is making it stoplight to stoplight just as quick as the drivers (i.e. his average speed is the same as the cars even though his maximum speed is slower).

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by firebug

If he isn't keeping up with traffic, why do you have to keep passing him ?

Seems like he is making it stoplight to stoplight just as quick as the drivers (i.e. his average speed is the same as the cars even though his maximum speed is slower).

The speed limit is 50. He is doing at most 30.

He is making it to the next set of lights and then weaves between the stopped cars to go to the front of the line.

This person is not following the rules of the road and is causing delays in the traffic as people have to pass him again and again.

This discussion is a perfect example of how cyclists and car drives don't get along. The cyclists are getting upset at me and calling me names when they don't truly understand what is happening.

I have a few friends who ride their bikes to work. I am not a bike riding hater. Everyone of my friends who cycle to work say they agree with what I am saying. If the person is not following the rules of the road and is not keeping up with the traffic they need to get off of that road. They are all fine when I say I pull to the side at the next set of lights in an attempt to block them.

Like I also said. The three times I have done this in my life the cyclist stopped behind me. He got the message.

This scenerio would be resolved if they had a bike lane for the person to ride in.

[Bill Bumface]

^ This is the exact problem they are trying to fix. There should be enough options that cyclists don't even need to go on roads that are that narrow.

If you are riding on a road that is wide enough that cars can pass you without having to move out of their lane, I find no one cares if you pass everyone at the red lights (as long as you make way for the right turners so they can still turn on the red). On the bike, it's nice as you can slowly pass the stopped column of traffic and do your best to time it so you don't have to stop and clip out.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

The speed limit is 50. He is doing at most 30.

He is making it to the next set of lights and then weaves between the stopped cars to go to the front of the line.

This person is not following the rules of the road and is causing delays in the traffic as people have to pass him again and again.

This discussion is a perfect example of how cyclists and car drives don't get along. The cyclists are getting upset at me and calling me names when they don't truly understand what is happening.

I have a few friends who ride their bikes to work. I am not a bike riding hater. Everyone of my friends who cycle to work say they agree with what I am saying. If the person is not following the rules of the road and is not keeping up with the traffic they need to get off of that road. They are all fine when I say I pull to the side at the next set of lights in an attempt to block them.

Like I also said. The three times I have done this in my life the cyclist stopped behind me. He got the message.

This scenerio would be resolved if they had a bike lane for the person to ride in.

Again, how is the cyclist delaying traffic? Would you be further ahead if he were not there (weaving or otherwise)? It would seem like it is either the traffic light or all the other cars on the road that are causing delays and not the cyclist.

From my view what is the real problem is the part that I underlined above and that you feel it your personal duty to enforce that one particular section of the traffic code exclusively upon cyclists.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

So the next time I stop at a red light and I see him two blocks back I will stop close to the curb so he can't get by me.

Why do you do this? Pride? Ego? Just being a jerk? Please explain.

It makes NO sense. If the cyclist keeps getting past you, even if you block him, he will pass you again, and again, and again once the light turns green. Unless of course you intend to keep blocking him.

I drive my car, I ride my motorcycle, and I ride bicycles. So I can see it from every angle. Sometimes you have to just take the 'live and let live' attitude. NEVER have I intentionally blocked the path of a cyclist, for whatever motivation there may be. It is just rude, and most importantly, dangerous, as there is so many more things you have to pay attention to besides guys blocking the shoulder when you are on a bike.

You might want to reconsider how you treat people trying to make a difference for their health, and the environment. However, and most importantly, since it seems to be all about you, they are de-congesting the roads for your 3/4 ton deisel truck you are going to pick up a can goldfish food in, at Walmart.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

This person is not following the rules of the road and is causing delays in the traffic as people have to pass him again and again.

I think this is from where the confusion stems. Every vehicle does not have to follow all of the rules of the road; some laws are only pertinant to certain vehicles. In this case, bicycles can and should move safely to the front of the queue. I can understand some safety concerns, which should be addressed, but otherwise it's just a case of haters hating.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

I have a few friends who ride their bikes to work. I am not a bike riding hater. Everyone of my friends who cycle to work say they agree with what I am saying.

What if they're agreeing with you just so they don't have to argue with you endlessly? Wouldn't be the first time I've seen that happen.

[moncton golden flames]

i haven't read all the replies in this thread, but a recurring theme is obvious. motorists vs cyclists and the education of both. let's just build a cyclist infrastructure that eliminates as many car vs bike encounters. isn't that what this report is getting at?

[JustAnotherGuy]

Okay. I give up. You haters win. You are not even trying to understand the logic of what I am saying. You think I have a hate on for the bike riders. I don't. I would prefer that there is a lane for the bike riders. Issue solved.

But come on the cyclist needs to have some logic as well. If the road is not wide enough for cars to pass him as he goes 20 km below the speed limit then he needs to come up with a plan B.

I will pass him twice if need be. But I will not pass him a third time. I will block him at the next red light. If he has a problem with that then go around. I will turn off and get away from the dangerous situation that he is causing if he does.

With the traffic like it is at times if there is somebody going 30 km in a 50 zone then the cars start to line up. Then people start passing in a dangerous manner. That is when people start being jack asses as they pass him. (Not me.)

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

i haven't read all the replies in this thread, but a recurring theme is obvious. motorists vs cyclists and the education of both. let's just build a cyclist infrastructure that eliminates as many car vs bike encounters. isn't that what this report is getting at?

That would be ideal.

A driver awareness campaign, that outlines bike routes, and outlines what to expect from cyclists that use them. Eg: if you are on a marked cycling route, be prepared for cyclists to come up your right side at stop lights. Be prepared to have to pass them 10 times on the same road. If you don't like it, use a different road. If you did this on a dual lane road (like Elbow) my guess is that in time, the right hand lane would be taken over by cyclists.

Same thing for non bike routes. If you choose to cycle on them, be prepared for guys like justanotherguy blocking you out.

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by Addick

I think this is from where the confusion stems. Every vehicle does not have to follow all of the rules of the road; some laws are only pertinant to certain vehicles. In this case, bicycles can and should move safely to the front of the queue. I can understand some safety concerns, which should be addressed, but otherwise it's just a case of haters hating.

What is the law in regard to cyclists when the speed limit is 50? Do they have to do 50 as well?

I am talking about those roads where the lane is not wide enough to pass the cyclists without swinging partially into the oncoming lane.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

You understand that I am talking about when I am at the red light? I move over right to the curb so he can't pass me. 100% of the time the cyclist got the message and stops behind me and waited like everybody else.

What it sounds like, to me, is that you don't feel like a cyclist should be allowed to ride in the curb lane, on the right hand side of the vehicles, but should instead take up a full lane, like any other motor vehicle, right?
Well according to the City of Calgary's "On-Street Cycling Saftey" document:

• When lane width is less than 3.5 metres, it is legal to take the whole lane by riding in the
centre of the lane.

That, to me, implies that when a lane is wider than 3.5 meters, it's A-okay for a cyclist to ride to the right of vehicles, in the same lane. Why should this change suddenly, if the light turns red? Is the cyclist supposed to suddenly cut into traffic and occupy the whole lane when the light turns red?

When travelling on city roads, keep the following in mind:
• Ride predictably and in a straight line.
• Use the right-hand curb lane (except when it becomes a right-turn only lane) and stay at
least one metre from the curb to avoid roadside hazard

http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/BU/...y_handbook.pdf

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

What is the law in regard to cyclists when the speed limit is 50? Do they have to do 50 as well?

I am talking about those roads where the lane is not wide enough to pass the cyclists without swinging partially into the oncoming lane.

If the lane isn't wide enough (<3.5m) the cyclist can take the entire lane, and it would be illegal for a motor vehicle to just swing into the oncoming lane. The motor vehicle would have to treat him like a slow moving car, and wait until he is legally allowed to pass, in a passing lane.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

What is the law in regard to cyclists when the speed limit is 50? Do they have to do 50 as well?

I am talking about those roads where the lane is not wide enough to pass the cyclists without swinging partially into the oncoming lane.

speed limit signs indicate a maximum speed limit, not a minimum. i'm not sure how you don't understand that.

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

What it sounds like, to me, is that you don't feel like a cyclist should be allowed to ride in the curb lane, on the right hand side of the vehicles, but should instead take up a full lane, like any other motor vehicle, right?
Well according to the City of Calgary's "On-Street Cycling Saftey" document:

That, to me, implies that when a lane is wider than 3.5 meters, it's A-okay for a cyclist to ride to the right of vehicles, in the same lane. Why should this change suddenly, if the light turns red? Is the cyclist supposed to suddenly cut into traffic and occupy the whole lane when the light turns red?


http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/BU/...y_handbook.pdf

The Alberta Traffic Safety Act defines the bicycle as a vehicle. When traveling on the road, cyclists have all of the same rights and responsibilities as a motor vehicle. To operate safely in traffic, all road users including cyclists, must obey the same road rules.

For example, as a vehicle a cyclist must yield to pedestrians, stop at stop signs, and travel with the flow of traffic. Conversely, motorists should not give cyclists the right-of-way at crosswalks unless they are walking their bicycle. When you walk your bike you are a pedestrian. When you ride your bicycle you are a vehicle.
Bicycles are legally permitted on all Calgary roads except:
• Deerfoot Trail from 64 Avenue North to Marquis of Lorne Trail in the South.
• Stephen Avenue Mall (8 Avenue SW) from 1 Street East to 3 Street West from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Generally bicycles travel slower than other vehicles. Based on this assumption it is important to remember the following general road rules:
• Slower traffic stays right.
• Slower traffic must give way to faster traffic when safe and practical.


That is what I am saying. If the guy is slowing up traffic on a road that is difficult to pass then he should go with a plan B. I understand he has a right to be there and to drive slow and all that. But on a practical sense it is not the best idea.

This combined with me passing him once and then me waiting at a light and have up ride by me as I wait and then I have to pass him again that is still fine. But if there is a third light and I see he is coming along I will stop to the right and not give him a lane to pass me. Simple as that. Call me what you want. But that is how I see it.

This topic is been talked to death. Respond if you wish. I am done.

Not don't whine about me being controlling and saying when the conversation is ended. I am just tired of the topic.

Go Boston Go.

[Bigtime]

Sexy legs...

Meanwhile, the great debate continues. I prefer to try and keep my commuting to the bike paths, but it would be great to have some real bike lanes on roads complete with decent signage and paint.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

Bicycles are legally permitted on all Calgary roads except:
• Deerfoot Trail from 64 Avenue North to Marquis of Lorne Trail in the South.
• Stephen Avenue Mall (8 Avenue SW) from 1 Street East to 3 Street West from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Has that changed recently?

I remember looking that up one time and I thought that bikes weren't allowed on pretty much any of "Trails" in Calgary (i.e. Macleod, Crowchild, Glenmore, Blackfoot, etc.). I'm sure I read that on the City's web site sometime within the last 5 years. I think the official rule was any roadway with a speed limit of 60km/h or greater, and the rule of thumb was any road with "Trail" in its name.

Also, Stephen Avenue seems like it would be the best place downtown to allow bicycles. They should just designate the road part of the street for bikes during the day, although, traveling North-South downtown seems to be a bigger problem on a bike than traveling East-West.

[Badgers Nose]

Rode to work again this morning - about 10 km through Fish Creek. Lovely!

I think a lot of people will get hooked on this method of transport if we create more safe routes to the river pathways.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

The Alberta Traffic Safety Act defines the bicycle as a vehicle. When traveling on the road, cyclists have all of the same rights and responsibilities as a motor vehicle. To operate safely in traffic, all road users including cyclists, must obey the same road rules.

For example, as a vehicle a cyclist must yield to pedestrians, stop at stop signs, and travel with the flow of traffic. Conversely, motorists should not give cyclists the right-of-way at crosswalks unless they are walking their bicycle. When you walk your bike you are a pedestrian. When you ride your bicycle you are a vehicle.
Bicycles are legally permitted on all Calgary roads except:
• Deerfoot Trail from 64 Avenue North to Marquis of Lorne Trail in the South.
• Stephen Avenue Mall (8 Avenue SW) from 1 Street East to 3 Street West from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Generally bicycles travel slower than other vehicles. Based on this assumption it is important to remember the following general road rules:
• Slower traffic stays right.
• Slower traffic must give way to faster traffic when safe and practical.


That is what I am saying. If the guy is slowing up traffic on a road that is difficult to pass then he should go with a plan B. I understand he has a right to be there and to drive slow and all that. But on a practical sense it is not the best idea.

This combined with me passing him once and then me waiting at a light and have up ride by me as I wait and then I have to pass him again that is still fine. But if there is a third light and I see he is coming along I will stop to the right and not give him a lane to pass me. Simple as that. Call me what you want. But that is how I see it.

This topic is been talked to death. Respond if you wish. I am done.

Not don't whine about me being controlling and saying when the conversation is ended. I am just tired of the topic.

Go Boston Go.

I'm not calling you anything.
I just think it's a little hypocritical that you want to be able to swerve around around slower moving cyclists on narrow streets, but you don't want them to be able to pass you while you're stopped.
If a cyclist should be confined to a full lane like a motor vehicle and not allowed to cut to the front of a line when there's room in the curb lane, the cyclist should also be treated like a motor vehicle when you're driving behind him in a narrow street ie. you don't pull into the oncoming lane and speed past him; you wait until you have a passing lane.

"why should this guy on a bike get to cut to the front of the line when everyone else has to wait their turn?! He should be in line just like every other vehicle!" "god this guy on the bike is taking up an entire lane and going slow, why doesn't he move over so I can go past!?"

If you want to cyclists to have to follow all the rules of the road like a motor vehicle, you have to treat him that way. Not just when it's convenient.