[amnesiajune]

I don't understand why cycling culture in North America is so against using sidewalks as cycling infrastructure.

Just to add to this, when I was in Washington, DC they had a much more sensible sidewalk ban - only in downtown. Outside of downtown you're allowed to bike on the sidewalks if you want, as long as you aren't using a power-assisted bike.

 

[steveintoronto]

don't understand why cycling culture in North America is so against using sidewalks as cycling infrastructure.

It's not just sharing with pedestrians, a very valid point, it's *intersections*. Good cycling infrastructure, as the Danes and Dutch epitomize, accounts for the radius and awful sight-lines of where cyclists must cross the intersection. It's not just North Ams against this, it's physics and human limitations. Intersections and cycling are dangerous enough as it is even with cycling lanes on the road:

[...continues at length...]
http://www.bikesense.bc.ca/bikesense/ch4.htm

[...continues...]
http://www.bike.cornell.edu/pdfs/Sidewalk_biking_FAQ.pdf

[...continues...]
http://pudstrand.fatcow.com/blog/?p=905

Some municipalities in York Region are allowing cycling on sidewalks, but it has inherent dangers, as many blogs point out. The solution is to have *dedicated cycle lanes* with an engineered for safety design.

Sherbourne and Roncesvalles both host 'raised' cycle lanes, and I find them psychologically beneficial, albeit know that they're not that much safer than a separated lane on the road, if safer at all. The big problem (esp with the Roncy lanes) are the discontinuity of them, and the false sense of security many cyclists presume when using them. I've seen no shortage of dumb-ass moves by many cyclists on Roncy, not the least not looking behind them to see if they have the lane before swinging out past parked cars.

Sidewalks in almost all cases are optimized for pedestrians.

Edit to Add:
1. Re: Prózna St, bikes and a balloon
05 April 2014, 17:01
Hi

Próżna is indeed under heavy reconstruction, there is only half of a sidewalk available on either side of the street. I don't know the official completion dates, to me it looks it'll take them a couple of weeks more to finish it.

The exhibition you mention was in 2012, I don't know what happened to it - but it is no longer there.

Regarding the bikes. There are some specific rules indeed. For the particular case you mention:

1. You can ride on the sidewalk when two of the three conditions are fulfilled:

- the sidewalk is at least 2m broad,

- there is no bike path / lane available,

- the maximum speed allowed on the street is more than 50 km per hour.

50 km per hour is the speed limit almost all of the streets in Warsaw, except for very few. Between 23 and 5 am the limit is raised to 60 km ph - so the 3rd condition is not met by default.

2. You can also ride your bike on the pavement during a bad weather or when you accompany a minor under 10.

3. When riding on a sidewalk, you cannot ride your bike on pedestrian crossings - you must get off your bike and walk it towards the other side of the street (unless the bike crossing is available of course).

These rules are not followed too strictly, however people are getting more and more aware of them (I heard stories about people getting tickets e.g. for not observing rule #3).

Regarding the Stacja Balon - it's April now. The website is here: http://stacjabalon.pl/ - sorry, Polish only. But the very first news says they'll change the location, no details are available yet. They open in May.

It may be busy in June - but rather during sunny weekends. As we don't know the new location - it's hard to predict how it'll be in the new location...

Edited: 05 April 2014, 17:04
https://www.tripadvisor.ca/ShowTopi...n-Warsaw_Mazovia_Province_Central_Poland.html

 

[LNahid2000]

I don't understand why cycling culture in North America is so against using sidewalks as cycling infrastructure.

Because riding on the sidewalk is dangerous, unless you dismount every time you see a pedestrian and every time you approach an intersection.

 

[amnesiajune]

Because riding on the sidewalk is dangerous, unless you dismount every time you see a pedestrian and every time you approach an intersection.

If bikes and pedestrians are incapable of safely sharing sidewalks anywhere in Toronto, then why don't we go ahead and ban bikes on multi-use trails too? They're often busier than a lot of the city's sidewalks.

If it's dangerous for a bike to approach an intersection on a sidewalk, then why do we consider it safe for bikes to approach an intersection on a separated bike lane? They're both equally visible to cars, and they're both physically separated from the road.

 

[LNahid2000]

If bikes and pedestrians are incapable of safely sharing sidewalks anywhere in Toronto, then why don't we go ahead and ban bikes on multi-use trails too? They're often busier than a lot of the city's sidewalks.

If it's dangerous for a bike to approach an intersection on a sidewalk, then why do we consider it safe for bikes to approach an intersection on a separated bike lane? They're both equally visible to cars, and they're both physically separated from the road.

Multiuse trails are much wider than suburban sidewalks. It's difficult to pass a pedestrian safely on a narrow sidewalk.

Separated bike lanes are closer to the road than sidewalks. If you scroll up to the rendering of the highway 7 separated bike lane, you'll see it veers toward the road at intersections...this is done for a reason. Drivers can much more easily see a cyclist on a separated bike lane than they can on a sidewalk. Separated bike lanes are designed for cyclists going 20km/h+ while sidewalks are not. A driver isn't going to see you coming at 20km/h on the sidewalk, especially at a non-signaled intersection.

Read more at this link, which Steve posted above: http://www.bike.cornell.edu/pdfs/Sidewalk_biking_FAQ.pdf

 

[steveintoronto]

then why do we consider it safe for bikes to approach an intersection on a separated bike lane?

Cyclists and motorists alike should always approach an intersection in a safe manner. A well-designed cycle lane incorporates safe angles and visibility into that junction, albeit unfortunately many in Ontario fail in that regard, but no matter how you cut it, a separated cycle lane is better than a sidewalk in terms of visibility of drivers and cyclists alike, not to mention the cycle lanes offer the same requirements and protocols of the HTA. Cycling on a sidewalk doesn't.

 

[steveintoronto]

I Googled again last night, all the hits I found were out of date. What I did find is places like Newmarket are establishing bike lanes now, and in Newmarket's case, it's bi-directional one side, which I think is going to become the new standard in many instances.

https://www.yorkregion.com/news-sto...o-promote-active-transportation-in-newmarket/

Even though the buffer is absolutely minimal, psychologically that looks far more inviting and comfortable than a single lane half that width each side. How homeowners feel about it might be a concern, but that's another matter. Twinned lane is going to be the solution for a lot of narrower roads, and that includes Bloor! It also permits *more* parking on the other side of the street, and right next to the sidewalk, so passenger as well as driver door prizes are eliminated. Sight lines are also vastly improved. That picture reminds me of parts of Cambridge...Hespeler to be exact. Oh man....only weeks away...the muscles are up and avid.

Just realized what it is about bi-directional lanes like the above, even having minimal buffer, and yet feeling safer:

It's because the cycle lane direction next to the vehicle lane is *opposing*...and you can see the oncoming traffic, rather than it coming up behind you, and your not knowing the clearance. The same direction cycling lane is well removed (buffered) from the vehicle lane, and even though you can hear traffic approaching from behind, you have much more trust in the clearance.

 

[MisterF]

http://www2.markham.ca/markham/ccbs/indexfile/Agendas/2013/Development Services/pl131022/Hwy 7 Town Centre to Sciberras Presentation.pdf

The section of Highway 7 between Warden and Kennedy will feature a different bike lane design in which the bike lane is beside the sidewalk and is set behind the trees and shrubs and far away from the curb.

When the bike lane is approaching an intersection, for what I'm assuming is increasing visibility to cars, the bike lane will veer towards the roadway and run alongside the roadway while crossing the intersection before veering back to rejoin the sidewalk.

The setup is similar to the photo I posted earlier, but the bike lane and trees/shrubs will switch places.

It's a promising design which will allow the bike lanes to be separate from traffic while also making them prominent at intersections. Unfortunately they're paving them with concrete, which is a worse surface to ride on than asphalt. I don't know why York Region does this. It basically ensures that the bike infrastructure will be used only by casual cyclists while serious cyclists will continue to use the road.

 

[steveintoronto]

Unfortunately they're paving them with concrete, which is a worse surface to ride on than asphalt. I don't know why York Region does this. It basically ensures that the bike infrastructure will be used only by casual cyclists while serious cyclists will continue to use the road.

This point intrigues me.

Thanks to Wilson for posting the link. I'd found that link and a number more when searching yesterday, but disregarded them due to the 2014 date, which was a mistake. Resolution on some pages is poor, but I can now see what they're doing. Credit to York for bringing that stretch into the modern age.

The concrete v. asphalt thing. I'd never made that distinction, but oddly, thinking about it, *even if the ride characteristics are similar*, psychologically I sense F's point. I'm the same with highest-quality crushed limestone. Done well, it's as 'fast' as asphalt, but vastly more inviting somehow. Whether that's a rational impression or not is a good question, it's mostly based on familiarity of doing distance cycling, nowadays much of it rail-trail. Some of the latest crushed limestone mixtures contain a resin that sets it up firm and smooth, whether they roll it or not is a good question, but it sets up like rolled asphalt in almost all ways save for more give in an accident, and much more environmentally friendly. I would dread going down on concrete, whereas asphalt has a bit more give, at least for the machine.

Googling using the tag "cycling" is rendering results like the following:

Concrete outperforms asphalt in life-cycle analysis

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Concrete Sustainability Hub has released two reports regarding life-cycle assessment (LCA) of concrete pavements and buildings and one examining life-cycling costing for streets and highways. Among the findings: over 50 years, the mean real price of concrete decreases by 20% and the mean real price of asphalt increases by 95%.
[...]

http://www.pwmag.com/roadways/concrete-outperforms-asphalt-in-life-cycle-analysis_o

Which is probably York's reasoning.

Further digging using "cyclist" ("cycle" or "cycling" gets the life-cycle results) in the search shows this:

The Rails to Trails Conservancy in America has a section on trail surfaces which compares a wider range of surface types.

https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/general/for-government-and-business/2862/

I note the claim for concrete: "greater rolling resistance than asphalt". That takes me by surprise, albeit the whole "rolling resistance" debate has been turned on its head in recent years, especially as that relates to tire cross-section. I also note the lack of distinction or inclusion of the latest crushed limestone formulas on a lot of sites. "Gravel" is always a bad material for cycling as it doesn't bond into a contiguous surface, even if very finely crushed.

The Cottontail Trail uses gravel in an off-road section, God only knows why. http://www.wellington.ca/en/discover/Cottontail-Road-Trail.asp

Any more detail you can offer on that F?

Edit to Add: The claim for "Greater rolling resistance than asphalt" above is a typo, as it's oddly listed as an advantage.

See:
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/research/TS/2014/201429TS.pdf

http://www.trucknews.com/features/cement-association-of-canada-touts-benefits-of-concrete/

 

[steveintoronto]

Just reading up to see if the G2G Trail is open the entire length yet. Various claims of it being so over the past couple of years have proven false, but in checking, I tripped across this:

https://www.facebook.com/pg/G2GRailTrail/posts/

Read the replies, some agreeing, others disagreeing. For me? Just looking at that pic rings every alarm, sixth sense or otherwise. At least that truck is well over a metre away, I've had some just brush past.

Sometimes you get stuck on stretches like that doing cross-country via back-roads, more often than not I get off and push the machine, even if I lose an hour or so. It's just not worth the risk, let alone 'riding in fear' (the fear is fully justified). Better to retain the sense of mental freedom by walking than sacrificing it for the sake of saving an hour. Or losing your legs or life.

Btw: G2G isn't up to "day trip" standard yet for me. I like making good time, and that means quality packed limestone or paving. It's not about speed per-se, it's about predictable pace to reach the destination in time to catch transit back into Toronto. I'm very familiar with the Kissing Bridge Trail, which unless it has deteriorated further, is a very fast trail. The last year or so weed growth has been a problem. There's the option of ending the G2G going eastward north of Waterloo and catching the GO bus to Toronto from there, but might have to leave the G2G for another year.

 

[PinkLucy]

If bikes and pedestrians are incapable of safely sharing sidewalks anywhere in Toronto, then why don't we go ahead and ban bikes on multi-use trails too? They're often busier than a lot of the city's sidewalks.

Which is why I avoid them whenever possible.

 

[steveintoronto]

Which is why I avoid them whenever possible.

The irony of "shared use trails" is in many cases not cyclists sharing them, but pedestrians! The worst example I can think of is the Lakeshore Humber bridge, where pedestrians insist on not only using the shared use trail (there is a pedestrian only one adjacent) but taking up the full width.

I rang my bell and politely asked some folks to let me by some weeks back, only to have one of them yell "This is a shared use trail!" at me. I lost it, and yelled back: "Well for &^%$ sakes, share it! Keep to the right". They were adults, they have a responsibility to know how to share. It's the un-minded toddlers where the real danger lies. Where are their parents?

Along the Waterfront stretch mid-town, I do as you do, just take the road rather than deal with unpredictable pedestrians.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The Humber bridge is a tourist destination in itself, it's always busy. Even on busy weekends I've never had an issue biking slowly across it though. Obviously you can't book it across, but that should be expected.

 

[PinkLucy]

That whole area can be dangerous, not least because of the idiots riding through there at speed. It is under review and hopefully will see some improved infrastructure.

 

[steveintoronto]

The Humber bridge is a tourist destination in itself, it's always busy. Even on busy weekends I've never had an issue biking slowly across it though. Obviously you can't book it across, but that should be expected.

If I didn't make it clear, I meant approaching it, specifically climbing the hill up from the east. I'm more than willing to share on the "shared path", that's just plain courtesy, but when pedestrians block cycle traffic climbing the hill by being four across, are tinged with the bell, then asked if they could allow me and others to pass, and then got snarky...who is at fault? I could have been a pedestrian and walk far faster than what they were doing, in fact I do walk fast most times.

Would you drive that way? Hardly....
What is wrong with "slow traffic keep to the right"? There is a pedestrian only track immediately adjacent. So why purposely block cyclists? I was slowed to the point of not being able to maintain balance. So were others behind me. That's impeding traffic, pedestrian and cyclist alike.

On the bridge itself is complete milieu most times, and like the Waterfront, one is best to dismount and walk through it.

82
Toronto Multi-Use Trail Design Guidelines
Toronto Multi-Use Trail Design Guidelines
83
DESIGNATION SYMBOLS
Designation symbols typically communicate shared-use,
or single use. At minimum, designation symbols should
be placed at the beginning of a trail, the entrance to any
stage of a crossing, and shortly after a crossing. They can
also be placed at intervals along the length of a trail to
remind trail users to keep to the right. Directional arrows
are used in conjunction with designation symbols in most
situations except for at crossings
[...]
7.6. Passing Areas
Passing areas are simply widened parts of a trail,
continuous with the trail surface. They are located
strategically at areas where slower users can move
aside (to the right) and allow faster users to pass on
their left. The minimum widening should be 0.3 metres
on each side of the trail, and should be increased to
accommodate higher use or higher levels of potential or
reported conflicts. Passing areas should be at least five
to ten metres long, and should be signed with an info
sign placed adjacent to the start of the widened part of
the trail.
Passing areas should be implemented in the following
situations:
•
where trails intersect or merge, leading to a localized
area of high use;
•
on slopes;
•
in areas of restricted visibility such as densely
vegetated areas or sharp curves in the trail;
•
intermittently through areas where trail widths are
less than desired; and/or
•
adjacent to, or occasionally in place of fully-developed
resting and viewing areas
[...]

https://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toronto/Transportation Services/Cycling/Files/pdf/TORONTO MULTI-USE TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES-December 2014_Fina_4.pdf

• Contact
• Guide
• About
• Search

Ask Toronto Cyclists: Where do I walk?
http://www.ibiketo.ca/blog/2007/11/05/ask-toronto-cyclists-where-do-i-walk

More of this is needed: