1124 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Even slower cyclists on the Goose face aggressive behaviour from fast cyclists who will, believe it or not, tailgate slower cyclists until they can overtake.

 

On the road cyclists argue drivers are aggressive and don't give them enough care and attention. But then on the Goose pedestrians claim cyclists behave in the same way cyclists claim drivers on the roads do.

 

It all comes down to education and courtesy, but unfortunately the cycling lobby cares more about ensuring cyclists have unobstructed cycling super-highways rather than educating cyclists how to share infrastructure safely.

[Bingo]

I suppose we can expect to see John Luton on the goose campaign trail either as the tailgator or the tailgatee?

[VicHockeyFan]

...and skate boarders, scooters, kids in strollers, and the deaf and the visually impaired.

 

Surely the visually impaired ought not to use the trail.  If they need some exercise or fresh air, they can find any yard or parking lot and just walk in circles.  Same experience if you are blind.

[sebberry]

Yikes.

[Mike K.]

Visually impaired doesn't mean blind though. It's a public trail, everyone should be able to use it. Cyclists are disrupting the trail by not showing common sense by travelling as fast as they possibly can. Meanwhile the anti-speed brigade that wants drivers to slow to a trickle is actually finding ways to ensure cyclists can continue riding as fast as they possibly can instead of posting signage that reminds cyclists of their responsibilities.

[VicHockeyFan]

Bikes ought to be able to go as fast as they want.  There is no safer place for them to go fast.

[sebberry]

Sure, if the trail was for exclusive use by the cyclists I'd agree.  But it's not.

[VicHockeyFan]

Well, I'd support making it wider.  I like the idea that bikes can use it and get in and out of town fast.  When I set up at the bridge the other day, I was amazed how many bikers were leaving town between 6:45am and 7:30am.

 

 

[sebberry]

Why do they need to go fast?  Instead of costly infrastructure improvements, just restrict their speed so they're less of a danger to other trail users. 

[aastra]

 

Bikes ought to be able to go as fast as they want.  There is no safer place for them to go fast.

 

If I'm capable of riding 60KM/H on the trail does that mean I should be allowed to do it? No way. In some sections it might be a safe speed but in other sections it would be crazy dangerous.

[Bingo]

How about this surface for slowing things down?  

 

[dasmo]

I like that ^ make one side smooth and one rough. Go as fast as you want you will need to watch for head on collisions with other bikes though :-) it truly is a good idea for trouble spots.

[pherthyl]

Overall though if you want to go walking with your kids and your dogs, there are hundreds of better options.  Every road with a sidewalk is pedestrian friendly (no bikes) and every park is better for walking than the Goose.

 

Fact is, the Goose and Lochside is best suited for cyclists.   It is routed for commuting, and flat and straight.   It is literally the only infrastructure there is where cyclists are the primary users so messing with that would be crazy.   

 

Everyone should be respectful, but as traffic increases on the goose it will become less and less suitable for pedestrians.  That should be obvious and not necessarily a bad thing, since it is ideally suited as a bicycle commuting pathway.

Edited by pherthyl, 10 October 2014 - 12:22 PM.

[tedward]

When cyclists see the speed limit sign, they will realize that they're entering an area designed for people, not just vehicles. 

 

Given that in my experience cyclists believe that STOP signs are optional I see no point in adding any sort of signage to try and regulate speed.

[Mike K.]

Overall though if you want to go walking with your kids and your dogs, there are hundreds of better options. Every road with a sidewalk is pedestrian friendly (no bikes) and every park is better for walking than the Goose.

Fact is, the Goose and Lochside is best suited for cyclists. It is routed for commuting, and flat and straight. It is literally the only infrastructure there is where cyclists are the primary users so messing with that would be crazy.

Everyone should be respectful, but as traffic increases on the goose it will become less and less suitable for pedestrians. That should be obvious and not necessarily a bad thing, since it is ideally suited as a bicycle commuting pathway.

For someone who advocates bike lanes on roads predominantly used by motor vehicles I can't believe you're actually suggesting that we barr pedestrians from the Goose because you feel cyclists are the predominant users of that trail.

You don't see the irony here?

Anyways, I love the cobblestone idea. That's a great way to lower cyclist speeds where necessary. Second order of business should be to restrict racing teams from using the Goose. They'll queue up 30 at a time and their speeds can be quite high.

[VicHockeyFan]

Look, it's wildly popular.  Let's just widen it.

[Mike K.]

Great let's do it. Have the cycling community raise the necessary funds if they want to have a race track along the Goose, we'll see just how much these folks believe in their right to maximum speeds along the Goose when it's time for their wallets to open up.

Drivers through gas taxes pay for road maintenance, road improvements, cycling lanes, you name it, drivers pay for it. Then you've got the feel-good brigade coming down hard on drivers for, you know, using the infrastructure they paid for as it's intended to be used.

[dasmo]

It's a shared trail and I like it as such. I like to ride with my 4 year old son. Can't do that on the side walk. I do shoulder check when walking on it though. Bike people get can get so agro!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3nMnr8ZirI

 

 

 

[VicHockeyFan]

Great let's do it. Have the cycling community raise the necessary funds if they want to have a race track along the Goose, we'll see just how much these folks believe in their right to maximum speeds along the Goose when it's time for their wallets to open up.

Drivers through gas taxes pay for road maintenance, road improvements, cycling lanes, you name it, drivers pay for it. Then you've got the feel-good brigade coming down hard on drivers for, you know, using the infrastructure they paid for as it's intended to be used.

 

Property taxes pay the majority of all that.  We all pay property tax.

[Mike K.]

We collect more in gas taxes in this province then we spend on road maintenance.