Agreed, for most of the exposed steel sections there will be shrubs covering most of it, but parts will be exposed permanently.
|
|
|
Calgary Bike Lanes and Bike Paths
- Thread starter Cowtown
- Start date
I guess time will tell how the path works out, and who yields to who. The pathway section east of Centre street has continuous asphalt paving for the cycle path. I think subliminally it has given the cyclists the right of way, as pedestrians typically yield to the passing cyclists. The section by the Simmons building is wide open for both cyclists and pedestrians, but cyclists (good ones at least) usually slow down through that section.
niteryder
Active Member
The West Confederation bike pump track opened last Saturday. Pic taken Sunday night:
TysonR
New Member
I drove past that ^ this evening and it was packed full of people. I wasn't sure what it was, thanks for posting.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Glacier path has been cleared now, I'm impressed how much it melted, was down to about 15".
Col du Edworthy
Active Member
Anecdotally I've felt the bike lanes downtown have been as busy as I've seen them so I tried to use the city's counters to validate. Disappointedly these "critically important" things that were needed to get the lanes built have very interrupted data. I was able to find one counter that seems to have reliably kept chugging along and if you trust the numbers May 2023 was our highest monthly volume on 5th street in the sample window (not sure if there is more historical data available at the counter)
It is starting to feel this year that we're reaching a kind of tipping point (in a good way) with the system. With a couple year hiatus due to Covid this is the first summer cycling period we've had in a while. I also feel that the on-going green line utility relocation work and lane closures could be helping the cause.
It is starting to feel this year that we're reaching a kind of tipping point (in a good way) with the system. With a couple year hiatus due to Covid this is the first summer cycling period we've had in a while. I also feel that the on-going green line utility relocation work and lane closures could be helping the cause.
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
University District take note.
MichaelS
Senior Member
A discontinous bike lane next to an undeveloped lot (despite outline plan approval nearly same time as UD) or what we currently have with University District.... I think it is Currie Barracks that should be taking note.....
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
It’s hard to tell from the photo, but the bike lane is meant to go all the way through. There’s some sort of construction still happening on part of it and an East/west Rd. Intersecting it as well.
I prefer University District overall of course, but I give Currie Barracks the victory when it comes to bike lanes.
I prefer University District overall of course, but I give Currie Barracks the victory when it comes to bike lanes.
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
We need more women cycling in Calgary; the last official data had 3 men cycling for each woman. There was an interesting study going around from Australia about how to attract more women to cycling. While the gender differences were being focussed on, the actual data suggested more commonalities than differences -- that cyclists and potential cyclists really valued safe, separated facilities. Men put a little less importance on this (like it was 6 in 10 men rather than 7 in 10 women who put protected facilities on top), but it was still the most requested thing from men.
There were three key differences I could see in the full study, though. One was around cyclist culture, bike shop culture and so on -- women not being respected, being taken advantage of, intimidated and so on. That's mostly a culture thing, and I don't know if that's different here than in Australia which can be a little bro-ey. The second was around structures like underpasses, where women had safety concerns beyond just having a lit, smooth path. This also makes sense; there are some sketchy corners that I don't necessarily like riding around late at night and would definitely avoid if I was a woman. That needs to be taken into account in facility design and upgrading over the years.
The third one was around separated facilities like cycletracks and pathways. Both men and women really valued the safety of these facilities - in particular avoiding being hit by cars. But women had additional concerns. One was in falling off their bike, being blown off their bike by wind, etc. and possibly going into traffic that way. The second was in being slow, holding up other cyclists and so on.
What those problems have in common is that they are an order of magnitude worse on a one-way cycle track than on a two-way one, where there is space for you to fall into if that happens, and space for cyclists to pass you as well if you're going slower than they want. Two-way cycle tracks also work better for wider vehicles -- personal interest here, I'm buying a recumbent trike -- as well as for people riding socially (as long as they let oncoming traffic through). They're also easier to maintain, since both directions can be snow-cleared or swept at the same time. And they don't take up any more space (and need half as many barriers).
So two-way cycle tracks should be the default with one-way as an odd exception. But it seems -- both in the above image and in the recently released 8th St plans -- that one-way tracks are being used more. I'm baffled by this.
There were three key differences I could see in the full study, though. One was around cyclist culture, bike shop culture and so on -- women not being respected, being taken advantage of, intimidated and so on. That's mostly a culture thing, and I don't know if that's different here than in Australia which can be a little bro-ey. The second was around structures like underpasses, where women had safety concerns beyond just having a lit, smooth path. This also makes sense; there are some sketchy corners that I don't necessarily like riding around late at night and would definitely avoid if I was a woman. That needs to be taken into account in facility design and upgrading over the years.
The third one was around separated facilities like cycletracks and pathways. Both men and women really valued the safety of these facilities - in particular avoiding being hit by cars. But women had additional concerns. One was in falling off their bike, being blown off their bike by wind, etc. and possibly going into traffic that way. The second was in being slow, holding up other cyclists and so on.
What those problems have in common is that they are an order of magnitude worse on a one-way cycle track than on a two-way one, where there is space for you to fall into if that happens, and space for cyclists to pass you as well if you're going slower than they want. Two-way cycle tracks also work better for wider vehicles -- personal interest here, I'm buying a recumbent trike -- as well as for people riding socially (as long as they let oncoming traffic through). They're also easier to maintain, since both directions can be snow-cleared or swept at the same time. And they don't take up any more space (and need half as many barriers).
So two-way cycle tracks should be the default with one-way as an odd exception. But it seems -- both in the above image and in the recently released 8th St plans -- that one-way tracks are being used more. I'm baffled by this.
lemongrab
Active Member
I love that one light standard in the middle of the lane (presumably those lights are fairly new, too?)
Also odd that there is only a lane on one side.
MichaelS
Senior Member
The challenge with 2-way cycle facilities is when crossing driveways or road intersections. Drivers look left for oncoming traffic at higher speeds (faster than walking). If you are intercepting a 2-way facility, you run the risk of not seeing a faster moving bicycle on the right.
You can argue drivers should be more careful, but if infrastructure requires a fundamental change to how most motorists approach an intersection, well, good luck.
That's not to say unidirectional facilities are not without their fault (as you pointed out), just think that local context for each facility should be considered, rather than have a blanket default.
You can argue drivers should be more careful, but if infrastructure requires a fundamental change to how most motorists approach an intersection, well, good luck.
That's not to say unidirectional facilities are not without their fault (as you pointed out), just think that local context for each facility should be considered, rather than have a blanket default.
whatchyyc
Active Member
26th Ave S.W. Mobility Improvements
We are looking to make improvements to help increase safety & mobility in the SW communities to make it more enjoyable for everyone. Provide your feedback!
engage.calgary.ca
Option 1 seems like a no-brainer to me.
lemongrab
Active Member
I believe 26th is slated for repaving this year? Hopefully they can execute this project at the same time (probably delay the repaving by a year?)...
I strongly prefer Option 2. I hate the up and down and up and down of a MUP, especially on an avenue with short blocks. I'd hate to ride eastbound worrying about a car turning northbound off 26th. All of the commerce is on the south side, and there is generally more reason to turn south (Marda Loop, Currie) if not going all the way east, so I'd find it very clumsy to get onto the north side at 37th and cross back over again.
But I suspect this is most heavily used as a throughway to/from beltline/downtown, where I'd still prefer the efficiency of staying on road level. The eastern terminus is a bit clumsy where you are supposed to use 14A street --> 25 Ave to cross 14th street - this would be a bit better with option 1, but I always jump over to 25 Ave at 20th Street, because 25th is way more pleasant and safer than continuing on 26th.
I strongly prefer Option 2. I hate the up and down and up and down of a MUP, especially on an avenue with short blocks. I'd hate to ride eastbound worrying about a car turning northbound off 26th. All of the commerce is on the south side, and there is generally more reason to turn south (Marda Loop, Currie) if not going all the way east, so I'd find it very clumsy to get onto the north side at 37th and cross back over again.
But I suspect this is most heavily used as a throughway to/from beltline/downtown, where I'd still prefer the efficiency of staying on road level. The eastern terminus is a bit clumsy where you are supposed to use 14A street --> 25 Ave to cross 14th street - this would be a bit better with option 1, but I always jump over to 25 Ave at 20th Street, because 25th is way more pleasant and safer than continuing on 26th.
Would be nice it it could be a hybrid of option 1 and 2 with the MUP being at road level, like option 2, but both directions on one side. My preferred style is like what we have on 12th ave.