Tripleshot Cycling

As a commuter on the Goose, I constantly see people travelling down the middle. In every form of traffic - pedestrian, cyclist, skate/longboard, inline skates...

One cyclist I've seen has a stick hanging off the left side to indicate what I believe is a personal space allowance. As they rode down the center line... Yeah, where's the palm-to-face emoticon?
You can tell who's new to running when they run down the center of the path. And I've experienced people walking their dogs who see me at 30+ meters, look back at their dog and proceed to leave the dog on the leash across 50-75% of the path. Once, I nearly got closelined by a guy who threw up his arms in some gesture for a story to his girlfriend as I was passing - the guy was easily 6+ ft tall. It wasn't malicious, but it was irritating to hear them laugh it off.

Between hoodies and headphones, the idea of a bell is largely useless to me. And I don't like assuming responsibility for people who won't be accountable for their actions. Like the people who want to be fashionable by wearing black in the fall, travelling at night/low light with no reflective gear or concern to traffic when they step out or ride.

To me, the issue is largely about educating people about how they are not the only one using the trail/path. EVERYBODY should keep to the right. I wouldn't mind people walking abreast if they recognized that they created choke points in conjunction with oncoming traffic and would switch to single file momentarily. But that's hoping for a lot. The fundamental issue is culture.

Calgary has an amazing network of bike paths and in some heavy use areas (close to downtown in particular) there is a path for bikes and one for those on foot. If possible, I think it is a better solution than widening.

I thought I heard Calgary has enforced speed limits on its cycle commuter trails. That would really suck.

Kevin F wrote:I thought I heard Calgary has enforced speed limits on its cycle commuter trails. That would really suck.

Yes – Calgary occasionally lets its bylaw officers loose on the city's pathway system. I don't know the more recent numbers, but in 2011 they issued just shy of 200 tickets for cycling infractions. The typical fine back then was $100.

When crackdowns happen, they focus on heavily congested areas, pinch points and blind corners where the likelihood of collisions between pathway users is high. Speed limits in these areas (usually 20 km/h) are clearly posted. Those who exceed them are guilty not only of speeding but of recklessness, an overdeveloped sense of entitlement, and IQs that barely keep up with the back end of the bell curve.

Thankyou Lund( I believe its Steve)

Since I read that article in Fridays TC and the Letters to the Editor on Sunday about the Goose, Cyclists, Pedestrians etc.....I have discussed this with a few of both Parties ( including Tripleshoters.)

Despite what the above people say about: us( cyclists) or them( walkers, runners )
SHOULD be going right, left , in the middle, off the side on wider lanes or whatever... it is all B.S., unenforceable or a waste of money......

Bottom line cyclists: SLOW DOWN. The pedestrians, dogs and most runners don t need to slow down. A would like to see a Cyclists Speed Limit sign . Enforce it for a day or two. We will all know about it quickly like when the cyclists got the $176. tickets for not stopping by Panorama.

This may have to look like...US, slowing down on Sunday, after Burnside even more. At coffee a member said " do we even need to go on the Goose on Sunday...I would suggest we don't.

If someone really wants the pedestrians to switch from Right to Left...go for it. Let us know how that goes.

Happy Riding , pc

Paul C. wrote:Despite what the above people say about: us( cyclists) or them( walkers, runners ) SHOULD be going right, left , in the middle, off the side on wider lanes or whatever... it is all B.S., unenforceable or a waste of money......

Bottom line cyclists: SLOW DOWN. The pedestrians, dogs and most runners don t need to slow down. A would like to see a Cyclists Speed Limit sign . Enforce it for a day or two. We will all know about it quickly like when the cyclists got the $176. tickets for not stopping by Panorama.

Unenforceable eh? Pot, meet kettle...
"Enforcement" is only when there's an officer present. Whose time is better spent elsewhere than cracking down on cyclists doing 20+K... I don't think you're about changing things for the better, just venting for unrelated anger issues.

Speed isn't the issue so much as conduct. And that covers everyone.

So who is agoraphobic cyclist??
Interesting response.

Another form of awareness if we have a cyclists speed limit, are the unmanned digital speed limit signs we see on the road alot .

Another form of "enforcement" is having Victoria Police volunteers, called CRIME WATCH man these digital signs. With cars they can't give out tickets but if someone is speeding or reckless they phone it in with a car description and licence plates.

Applied to cycling ,with no licence plates it would sound something like " we spotted about 5 speeding cyclists wearing red and black outfits with the letters IRC on the back"....or God forbid: "about 20 cyclists on beautiful, expensive bikes wearing an argyle brown and maybe a turquoise kit, with two guys in a baby blue, pink, white and yellow jackets with triplesomething on the back."

For more information and ideas on using multi -use cycling trails ,like the goose, speeding, enforcement , etc., talk with, or search Victoria's John Luton, cycling advocate.

Hope to see you on the ride sometime A.C.

regards, Paul Christopher.

Who I am is a red herring, bordering on ad hominem.

I love the unmanned speed limit signs, so someone can post a "high score" chart on them... Or take the video of a guy who wanted to see if he could trip the speeding camera on his bike (he did)...

To me, enforcement means throwing people at the issue. Volunteers for this sort of thing run the lines of being "rent-a-cop" - people who want to leverage the experience into paid work in law enforcement. Which means heavy-handed stupidity for the hope of getting paid for it. The alternative is to use officers, who have better things to do and I'd rather my tax dollars go towards dealing with real crime. The idea of the sheer presence required screams "police state".

Not what anyone wants for a city that is recognized for a high number of cyclists and trying to appeal more and more to cyclists. There's enough of a struggle with people wearing helmets, which raises a good point. If the police instituted a policy where they'd rather you spend the money on a helmet than a ticket, how positive is cracking down on "speeding" cyclists? I have to wonder what the impact of a 20 K speed limit would do for things like Tripleshot group rides - the clubs would have to lobby for an exemption?

Then there's the old chestnut - license plates/identification and insurance... Last time I looked into insurance for my bike, it was cost prohibitive due to how easy it is to sell or strip a bike for parts. Again, counter-productive to getting people cycling/exercising more, when there's enough grief over wearing a helmet. I'm almost to the point in thinking that high visibility clothing, at least having reflective stripes, should be included with the helmet law.

I think a PR campaign would be less costly, more realistic and more in line with the goal of getting more people cycling.

I thought the Selkirk trestle had signs stating a 10 K speed limit around two years back. Can anyone confirm?

I'd like to know who you are too. One of the things I like best about this forum is the ability to freely exchange ideas among friends. Even those with fun forum names frequently sign their posts. So I'd ask you to do the same.

Peter L.

Plawless wrote:I'd like to know who you are too. One of the things I like best about this forum is the ability to freely exchange ideas among friends.

I'm interested in the original topic, not minutiae. How about you actually contribute, if you're as interested in exchanging ideas as you say...

Here's my signature: It's pathetic if who says something is more important than what is said...

counter offer: If you are unwilling to sign your name please feel free to NOT post on this Club's forum.

Peter

Plawless wrote:counter offer: If you are unwilling to sign your name please feel free to NOT post on this Club's forum.

Peter

+ 1

Agoraphobic Cyclist = Andrew Barnes (Wheelers).

Michael

Too bad the information is inaccurate - I lifted the name from the Wheelers forum. But it's not the difficulty - it's the desire, lack of respect, and overall useless piece of information that paints those who believe the act was required and/or justified for who they are. What a terrific example of invasion of privacy...

Some have their name clearly associated, while others failed to speak for - they did not have the courage to speak against either.

Perpetrators: If you are proud of yourself, you really should not be. Agreement/Consensus doesn't mean the policy is right, correct, or well thought out.

Sincerely, Not Mr. Barnes

Agoraphobic Cyclist = internet troll (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) ??

if the shoe fits...

CB

May I suggest that as of now we don't respond on this thread at all? I'd be happy to see it drop away into nothing.

If other comments are to be made about the Goose may I ask that a new thread be started?

Thanks all.

Peter