Pathway Speeds, Bylaw Enforcement, and Etiquette

Submitted by Richard Z on

As reported today by the CBC, City of Calgary Bylaw will soon "crack down" on cyclists exceeding the speed limit of 20 km/h (posted 10 km/h limits in certain areas).  So it's perhaps time to remind everyone that almost all of Calgary's pathways are shared with other users.  To be sure, those other users often do not follow the rules -- there are a lot of problems with people walking their dogs and not controlling them or letting them run off-leash, and runners using the bike-only parts of twinned pathways -- and the City should also address these issues.  Nevertheless, cyclists have the responsibility to be courteous and safe when using the pathways.  Ride at a safe speed, signal, announce your approach, yield to the right, and light up at night.

Bike Calgary's position has always been that Calgary's pathways are excellent for recreational cycling but (with exceptions) when shared with pedestrians are not perfectly appropriate commuter infrastructure especially because of the speed differential between cyclists and other pathway users.  Consequently, Bike Calgary has in the past opposed raising the speed limit on shared pathways.  The only solution, of course, would be to provide efficient, safe, direct, and dedicated infrastructure (on and off street) for commuter cyclists to ride at speeds above 20 km/h.

Forums: 

Roller bladers

Submitted by RichieRich on

Please let's not forget about some of the swiftly-moving rollerbladers out there on the MUPS that the 'Fuzz' seem to ignore during their crackdowns.  During this time of year I frequently see 'bladers whipping along at well over 20km/hr, taking up the entire width of the path, making narrow passes (both in same "lane" and oncoming), happily bopping to some tunes, with extremely limited ability to stop or take off-path evasive action should it be required.  If these folks want to go fast then they need to get off the MUPs and sidewalks and go into the traffic lane.  oh oh wait, that "logic" only applies to cyclists... 


My point being is that singling out cyclists specifically on the MUPS is blatant discrimination when the reality is that there are many users failing to obey the bylaws.  OK blog-dogs, unleash your fury...

DOM

Submitted by RichieRich on

Dirty Old Man.  you are guilty... I'm not of course, I just find I can't go that fast and it's too dangerous to pass so have to reluctantly remain in the back. 


But seriously you raise an interesting point about riding attire - what is comfortable for some may not be appropriate.  Every year there's this one gal who rides her bike... seat is far too low, her shirt is fine, but that thong coming out of her shorts looks way uncomfortable.  I've shared many a chuckle (and ogle) with other cyclists in her vicinity.  Whilst that may bring some amusement to some (like us DOM's), it can be inappropriate to others (like some dudes going shirtless on the paths).

Anti Discrimination

Submitted by gyrospanner on

For years, I have thought about cataloging, on a daily basis, the number of off-leash dogs I see on my commute, but my male work-avoidance gene is as strong as the Force was in Luke Skywalker...

Given what I saw today

Submitted by bclark on

I fully support efforts by bylaw to ensure pathways are safe, especially during the afternoon rush hour on the south side Bow River Pathway west of downtown.  Here's why...

The pathway is extremely busy and people are travelling at a wide variety of speeds.  There is absolutely no reason anyone should be travelling above the posted 20kph speed limit when it is this crowded.  There is no reason anyone should be crossing the yellow line and passing into oncoming traffic.  There is no reason anyone should be passing into a blind corner.  Specifically, those people heading west and passing through the blind corner under the east side of the 14th Street SW bridge...THIS IS NOT SAFE!  The pathways in this area are neither wide enough, nor do they have good enough sight lines for this kind of behavior. 

One of Bike Calgary's roles is to advocate for an improved cycling environment.  Part of this is advocating for cyclists safety and this includes working to ensure our pathways are safe for cyclists of all ages.  Speeding and reckless passing do not make our pathways safe.

It's not always the case, but today, from my perspective, these types of unsafe behaviors seemed to originate from within the cycling demographic.

PLEASE keep the safety of other pathway users in mind when you are cycling busy pathways.  If you are already doing so, GREAT and THANK-YOU.

My sentiments exactly

Submitted by sherryrunswest on

Common sense seems to be lost on some.  I shake my head at people at least once a day on my commute home - but on sunny, warm days that annoyance goes up dramatically especially because I'm trying to do the right thing.  It's about showing respect for others, it goes a long way. 


 


 


 

different law?

Submitted by mikewarren on

I really think a law like (maybe literally ;) "don't be a jerk" would work better: then there's no excuse about needing a speedometer on your bike, and bylaw doesn't need to be set up with radar guns to "catch" people being assholes. Plus, as with nearly anything, assigning a number in kilometers/h to "being a dick" isn't possible. On Nose Creek at 3pm, 40km/h is fine. As bblark hints, sometimes 20km/h is too fast.

unless bike computer/odometers are mandated

Submitted by goforstars on

I agree that caution and common sense for slowing donw cycling speed when there is ongoing bike path traffic, etc.


It's also tough to get cyclists to know how fast they are going, if  bike computers/odometers are not required, for them to check their own speed.

Speed and Bike Computers

Submitted by Ubermoogle on

Gotta agree with goforstars on this one. It wasn't until I picked up a dock and smart-phone app to monitor my speed while biking that I realized just how fast my 29er was going on the pathways. My average speed (including starts and stops) is around 21kph, and on straight stretches without stops, spikes into the 35-40kph range. Both of these are about 10kph over what I suspected I was doing, but until I actually started tracking it, I had no idea, nor would anyone else unless they had one as well.


 


I am curious though about how/where they're going to be enforcing these, or if they're just going to go on their usual summer crackdown for a week and then forget all about us again...


 

Shall I be the Devils'

Submitted by Julie Gregg on

Shall I be the Devils' Advocate here? Knowing the exact speed one is traveling becomes irrelevant if one is travelling in an unsafe manner. All I mean by that is yes, if you are in bylaw radar the "number" is important, but for safe and courteous riding it matters what the "pack" is doing. Sherry says it well.

contextual speeds

Submitted by Ubermoogle on

Is that with a headwind, or a tailwind? On a straightaway, or a section of the pathway that has a lot of curves? High traffic day? Low traffic day? On your commuter, mountain bike, or road bike? There are so many variables that even that is completely unreliable as a method for estimating speed. 

I do agree though that travelling at an unsafe speed should be what this is about, especially in areas where the pathway is shared between bikes and pedestrians, and even moreso in particularly congested routes mentioned above. I may be cynical, but I also think that it's more likely that the speed traps will be set up at 7:00 AM on a work day in a busy location, e.g. Peace Bridge, 10th St LRT bridge underpass, and maybe on one of the east downtown bridges. 

 

I just hope we get handed out warnings for the first while, you know, like all the drivers have had in the 10th St. bike lanes...

 

Cynical

Submitted by jondub on

From what I have heard and read, the problems that have arisen recently have occurred at the weekend between 'leisure' pathway users. I am probably cynical but I suspect that rather than targetting enforcement over the weekend (when they probably have to pay overtime rates), they will simple set up at 7am on one of the sections of pathway where bikes and pedestrians are segregated and hand out as many tickets to commuters as they can. At least that is what they seem have done in the past.

Texters, Bladers, etc.

Submitted by math4life on

Does any speed limit apply to the bladers? They can be just as fast and dangerous as cyclist on the paths. The path near Prince's Island is too congested for commuting. Too many parents let their tykes run out of control aimlessly on this path. I find it is best to go slow to know exactly what could jump out at me; expect the unexpected. We need etiquette established for pedestrians and those with children on the pathways. Also, no one should be wearing headphones, texting, phoning, or using distracting devices while on the paths. You need to hear what is around you even as a walker. Step off the pathway if you need to take a phone call. Also, please pick up after your pets and do not litter or drop cigarette butts everywhere. At night, please have a light on you to be visible no matter how you travel. MY LED reflects off signs 100ft away.

Another Dumb Question

Submitted by gyrospanner on

You put 2 things together - cyclists (by the way, a really evil lot) and earbuds (another evil thing) and you get SUPER EVIL. It's so evil, I'm so scared I'm gonna go hide in my basement!!!

Oh wait, I'm one of those cyclists who often listens to my iPod, so I'll sleep in my bed.

least courteous

Submitted by billrennie on

As a daily commuter both winter and summer, I'd have to say that joggers with their ear buds are the least courteous. They saunter along in their own world oblivious to all others. Next in line is cyclists with ear buds, followed by joggers in a group 3 abreast. However by far the most dangerous are the road racing cyclists - those who feel that 35 kph should be allowed on the MUP. You're probable the same folks who think 125 kph is ok and safe on the QE II and the Deerfoot. The next most dangerous are the new MUP users  - often walkers or mothers with strollers who think the MUP is a sidewalk.

speeds

Submitted by 2wheeler on

35 should be allowed on some of the MUP,  especially when you ride the empty ones in the NE or SE of the city.  While 20 kph is reasonable for that Bow River stretch west of the city, not all MUPs are created equal. 

 

Oh and btw 125 kph is safe and ok on the QEII when the traffic is light too. 

Obeying the law

Submitted by billrennie on

I'm curious, how do you decide which laws to obey? Is it  just the ones you feel like on a particular day? If you  think a law or rule should be changed, then lobby the "rule makers" and get it changed, but until it is changed, obey it. Driving 125 kph on QE II puts others in danger, not just youself or the occupants of your vehicle - and you my friend don't have that right. It is selfish attitudes like yours that are the cause of most of the accidents.

just a little self righteous?

Submitted by 2wheeler on

nonsense.  If you did ever spend the time to watch traffic you would see that nearly everyone disobeys laws all the time, wether it be not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign, not crossing a crosswalk when there is a pedestrian in it, driving 10 kph over the speed limit, accelerating to pass another car; there are numerous expamples. Everyone disobeys driving laws all the time. The flow of traffic on the QEII is oftern close to 125 kph, then is the safer speed to travel at, not at a 110 kph and shake your fist at all the hooligans.  There is no evidence that travelling with the flow of traffic increases the risk of accidents.  

 

I didn't say....

Submitted by SpeedyJ on

I didn't say I was perfect, but at least I can recognize when I'm in the wrong. Every cyclist I talk to has thier own set of rules and justifications, I've worked hard over the last 10yrs to to stop that (or at least reduce it) and conform to the law as much as possible (see, even I leave an out for myself). I used to a have a self-rightous streak a mile wide and the to conficts to prove it, now I've mellowed with age and rarely have the same issues with other road users any more.

 

I've found that when I follow the law (and by-law rules) I have far fewer conflicts with with other road and path users. Sometimes the law doesn't make the most sense, however, it does provide a frame work of expectations (responsibilities) and predictibility for the roads. In my opinion, being able to predict what the people around you are going to do (and vice versa) is an important part of avoiding accidents.

 

In response to your MUP speed-limit crack - I switched to a single-speed a few years ago, the bike is geared so that I'm pretty spun out by about 27km/h, my comfortable cruising speed is 18-24km/h on that bike. It reduces the temptation to speed on the MUPs and keeps me out of truoble.

My point is if you truly

Submitted by billrennie on

My point is if you truly believe a law should be changed then get it changed, whether it is stopping at stop signs, signaling, or the speed limit, but until it is changed, then obey it, or be prepared to rack up the fines. If, as you seem to believe, driving "with the flow" at 125 kph is safer, they you shouldn't have any trouble getting it changed.

If you are going to argue...

Submitted by mercator on

... at least agree on your frame of reference.  One side appears to think the laws are intended to protect society and improve safety, the other way of looking at it is the laws are intended to to be obeyed, regardless of efficacy, because we can't afford to let citizens use their own judgement. 

I would note, however, that in the case of the QEII, a lot of accidents are 'caused' by the slower drivers changing lanes unexpectedly.

The law

Submitted by SpeedyJ on

The law provides consistancy and allows us to anticipate the users around us. I doesn't matter if the intersection at the end of your street should have a yield sign when it has a stop sign. If it has a stop sign you should stop, it's that simple!

You just can't run around making up your own rules based on your 'common sense' (I really hate that term!).

 

Your interpretation of what is safe and reasonable is far to variable to be useful to the rest of us. Wasn't it George Carlin that said 'Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a mania?'.

 

If you don't like the law, then you have to change it, you can't just disobay it, the Idaho stop law is a fantastic example of this.

political

Submitted by 2wheeler on

You seem to miss the point.  The streets are made up entirely of people doing what they consider to be reasonable, and alot of that involves disobeying laws. That is simply the reality, a reality which you to are complicit.  The idea that people are going to obey all traffic laws (or pathway rules) is not the reality of this or any other place I've ever lived. 

What I don't get is you admit to speeding on the pathways and disobeying the law, so what is the difference between your actions and mine?

 

Semantics

Submitted by SpeedyJ on

I'm working towards order and complience where where breaking the law is the exception, you seek to justify breaking the law and make that the norm.

 

Do people break traffic laws here? Absolutely. But look out your window, you'll find that drivers are complient more often then not. It's not exactly Moscow or Mexico City out there, and that's a good thing.

 

 

jeeez... told you so

Submitted by RichieRich on

see my comment from last week about live and let live: http://bikecalgary.org/comment/27044#comment-27044

frequent MUP users can easily testify that 20km/hr is virtually unobtainable just about every day... once going into work with the heavy westerly tail winds pushing ya along well over 20km/hr and once going home against the sam winds when 20km/hr is a real struggle.  The bylaws are supposed to be a "common-ground" or "fit-all" approach which generally works when adhered to. Give it a go... it generally works!

Agreed.

Submitted by xcrider on

What a stupid question that they knew the answer of anyway. Just another way for a crappy local paper to generate controversy against cyclists. 

Yard Apes

Submitted by gyrospanner on

Soooo.....

I'm riding home last night through Bowmont Park and I came up to a lady pushing a stroller, with 3 little boys in tow who looked like they were about 5 or 6 years old. One of them saw me coming and thought he'd be cute by repeatedly jumping over the yellow line or faking that he was going to jump in front of me.

Not a good idea as I was going 30+.

No incident, but I was a little pissed off.

Next time, I'm going to circle back and spray him with my water bottle!

Selective Enforcement

Submitted by mikewarren on

If all the laws we had were actually enforced 100% of the time (say with shock-collars on everyone, or something) then we'd all go crazy because so many of the laws are stupid -- and *should* only be enforced selectively. The legal system seems to love very, very exact laws, however, so things like "don't cross the road unsafely" doesn't work, but "cross anywhere except a corner and you lose" does. "Don't go too fast on a MUP" is the law we all really seem to want, but of course instead we had to come up with an exact number (which is stupid).

Of course, the selective enforcement goes the other way when you have a dick of a cop or bylaw officer, but luckily that's "mostly" the exception...

It's illegal to swear in public, for example -- haven't seen that one enforced very much (and a good thing for me, or I'd be getting that shock-collar a lot). It's also illegal to get drunk at a bar or to be out in public while intoxicated. Anyone here do those things on occation?

If you're going to break the law...

Submitted by seacloud on

...do it knowingly with the full realization that all consequences are yours too. We all make choices about our behaviours and when to stick within the law and when not to. When you decide not to, realize that you are fully responsible for your actions and that these actions impact those around you. Also, don't complain if you get 'busted', or merely criticized. You are free to be in the wrong, just know that you are in the wrong. 

As was said earlier by @mikewarren, it's likely more important to not be a jerk. If you're behaving respectfully to those around you, your absolute speed will hardly be noticed (even though you may still be eligible for a ticket). On the flip side, you can be well within the law and still execute an assinine pass on the MUP.

Ding Ding

Submitted by chaingunsofdoom on

Bells are mandatory and based on just my last few rides, people don't seem to care. If you pass me and you don't use a bell, I will ring mine to remind you. Multiple times even! IF they can even hear it with their earbuds on. Ugh.

Careful!

Submitted by xcrider on

In this city someone may feed you that bell. By the way it is required to have one it isn't required to use it. A voice warning is good enough for the bylaw, I guess we could just sing along with our music and that would cover it.

 

Bells and such

Submitted by Tandemcaptain on

If you're the rider who gave me the finger a couple of weeks ago because I complained you didn't ring a bell or otherwise warn me you were going by (you startled the crap out of me), I'm hearing challenged (it's even worse into a headwind) and I don't always hear the heavy breathing of you sneaking up behind me. I usually can, however, hear a bell even without my hearing trumpet. Given that a tandem and two riders is somewhere between 400#s and 300#s (depending on how faithful I've been at Weight Watchers) I would hate to zig for a dog, a kid, a sneeze or road furniture right about the nanosecond you pass me at 40+ km/hr on the pathway. It would hurt you Embarassedmore than it would us. A lot more hurt. Think about that for next time. A bell or other warning doesn't necessarily benefit only the person you are passing.

Login to Post Comments

June

M T W T F S S
 
 
 
 
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 

Sponsors

Alliance for Biking and Walking Member

RSS news feed

Subscribe to Syndicate