Comments on: The Middle Road: Cycling a Better Way http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/cycling-a-better-way-1380.htm making the journey as rewarding as the destination Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:52:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Patricia Dunham http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/cycling-a-better-way-1380.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2739 Patricia Dunham Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:55:55 +0000 http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/?p=1380#comment-2739 Designating sidewalk spce is a much better idea than painting off small lanes for cyclists that make driving lanes for cars even more narrow. I am tired of sharing lane space with careless cyclists. Vehicle drivers pay a lot of money for the right to use the roads - drivers & vehicle licences, tire tax, gas tax etc. - that cyclists do not pay. Plus, regardless of how careless some cyclists are, drivers are always held accountable for accidents with cyclists. It's time we get some fairness in the issue for drivers. Designating sidewalk spce is a much better idea than painting off small lanes for cyclists that make driving lanes for cars even more narrow. I am tired of sharing lane space with careless cyclists. Vehicle drivers pay a lot of money for the right to use the roads – drivers & vehicle licences, tire tax, gas tax etc. – that cyclists do not pay. Plus, regardless of how careless some cyclists are, drivers are always held accountable for accidents with cyclists. It’s time we get some fairness in the issue for drivers.

]]> By: Allan Harder http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/cycling-a-better-way-1380.htm/comment-page-1#comment-1930 Allan Harder Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:36:50 +0000 http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/?p=1380#comment-1930 Hi Donna, thanks for your comments. I'm a little late in response, but your points make a good discussion. Note that these comments are my own personal opinion and not necessarily those of the MCAC: (1) I agree and there is more and more discussion being generated regarding the widening of multi-use trails to make a "bikes only" section. It's a great idea and is used by all the cycling-friendly cities around the world. (2a) For paths that would not have the safer option of separate bike path demarcations, why not walk on your left and roll on the right? It works on the road a lot better than bikes surprising walkers/joggers from behind. Walkers have much better vision to move aside if need be. (2b) Again, if the path had no separate bike section, perhaps have a guideline of using a safe/reasonable speed based on the amount of traffic and conditions. No one needs fixed speed limits on a bicycle, do they? If there did require a speed limit, I would pick 30 - 35 km/h. Cyclists who can pedal that fast can safely handle their bikes at that speed. Remember that bicycles are a lot more than coasting in the park. These trails are also used by people with schedules and business destinations. (3) YES! The Cycling Master Plan - scheduled for public review in Spring 2010 - is rating the most needed cycling commuter areas that you listed. I agree that the city/region needs to rethink the use of sidewalk space and consider adding in some "cycling highways" along the sidewalk space. I would guess none to few cyclists have been maimed by pedestrians, although both the pedestrian and cyclist are equally prone to injury if they collide (save for the likelyhood that the cyclist has a helmet and the pedestrian doesn't). Hi Donna, thanks for your comments. I’m a little late in response, but your points make a good discussion. Note that these comments are my own personal opinion and not necessarily those of the MCAC:
(1) I agree and there is more and more discussion being generated regarding the widening of multi-use trails to make a “bikes only” section. It’s a great idea and is used by all the cycling-friendly cities around the world.
(2a) For paths that would not have the safer option of separate bike path demarcations, why not walk on your left and roll on the right? It works on the road a lot better than bikes surprising walkers/joggers from behind. Walkers have much better vision to move aside if need be.
(2b) Again, if the path had no separate bike section, perhaps have a guideline of using a safe/reasonable speed based on the amount of traffic and conditions. No one needs fixed speed limits on a bicycle, do they? If there did require a speed limit, I would pick 30 – 35 km/h. Cyclists who can pedal that fast can safely handle their bikes at that speed. Remember that bicycles are a lot more than coasting in the park. These trails are also used by people with schedules and business destinations.
(3) YES! The Cycling Master Plan – scheduled for public review in Spring 2010 – is rating the most needed cycling commuter areas that you listed.
I agree that the city/region needs to rethink the use of sidewalk space and consider adding in some “cycling highways” along the sidewalk space. I would guess none to few cyclists have been maimed by pedestrians, although both the pedestrian and cyclist are equally prone to injury if they collide (save for the likelyhood that the cyclist has a helmet and the pedestrian doesn’t).

]]> By: Donna Flemming http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/cycling-a-better-way-1380.htm/comment-page-1#comment-1255 Donna Flemming Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:28:06 +0000 http://www.mississaugacycling.ca/?p=1380#comment-1255 I believe "MINDSETS" about cycling must evolve by the public, government and engineers. Roads and Pedestrian Ways, including multi-use trails, must be safe for all users. 1. A Bicycle doing 20km/h or more should not be allowed on multi-use trails but they do need a separate lane safely away from motorized cars, trucks and buses. Their space would be better beside a multi-use trail. 2. Signage and education for using multi-use trails requires: a) All move forward on the right and pass on the left. Signage: Walk/Roll on the Right b) Speed limit less than 20 km/hr. 3. Bicycle lanes must be designated by more than a line of paint and the odd sign. I believe cyclist need to quit competing with the roads department and start competing for space designated for road splash, boulevards, sidewalks, signage etc.except in the downtown cores, this area is seldom used. Access for young and old cyclists to get to schools, rec centers, churches, shopping, commercial and business areas etc must be made available for all types of rollers. I would go so far as to say that all sidewalks could be designated as multi-use ways to encourage children and seniors to ride more and feel safe and secure. HOW MANY CYCLISTS HAVE BEEN KILLED OR MAIMED BY PEDESTRIANS VS THE NUMBER OF CYCLIST WHO HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED BY CARS? Hope some of this has made sense to you. Yours truly, Donna I believe “MINDSETS” about cycling must evolve by the public, government and engineers.

Roads and Pedestrian Ways, including multi-use trails, must be safe for all users.
1. A Bicycle doing 20km/h or more should not be allowed on multi-use trails but they do need a separate lane safely away from motorized cars, trucks and buses. Their space would be better beside a multi-use trail.

2. Signage and education for using multi-use trails requires:
a) All move forward on the right and pass on the left. Signage: Walk/Roll on the Right
b) Speed limit less than 20 km/hr.

3. Bicycle lanes must be designated by more than a line of paint and the odd sign. I believe cyclist need to quit competing with the roads department and start competing for space designated for road splash, boulevards, sidewalks, signage etc.except in the downtown cores, this area is seldom used. Access for young and old cyclists to get to schools, rec centers, churches, shopping, commercial and business areas etc must be made available for all types of rollers. I would go so far as to say that all sidewalks could be designated as multi-use ways to encourage children and seniors to ride more and feel safe and secure. HOW MANY CYCLISTS HAVE BEEN KILLED OR MAIMED BY PEDESTRIANS VS THE NUMBER OF CYCLIST WHO HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED BY CARS?

Hope some of this has made sense to you.
Yours truly,
Donna

]]>