Police Trap : For Cyclists?

I think she means the pathways that are mixed use. If you look at the city's cycling maps, they're noted.

AGEsAces wrote:Are there really routes designated as shared?

I haven't seen any signs of such. (don't go near Taylor often though).

I've seen signs designating people to walk bikes, but none that say "no bikes' or "shared sidewalk".

The Sidewalk along the south side of Taylor from Kenaston to Waverley is marked as shared. So is the sidewalk on the east side of Waverly from McGillvary to Taylor.

anny wrote:I think she means the pathways that are mixed use. If you look at the city's cycling maps, they're noted.

Yes...that I understand...I just had not seen any signs actually marking any paths as shared yet. I'll have to take a ride over that way and have a look.

And the city's cycling maps are wrong.
They have several areas noted as ok for bicycles...which are not.
I have already sent an e-mail to the city department that made the map to let them know the errors.

Deank wrote:

St Norberter wrote:

Deank wrote:"Perhaps that explains the increased number of cyclists riding on the sidewalks?"

I blame global warming

Global warming my ass! Don't you remember the last eight months of temperatures before this week?

That's it - a punch in the head for you 'cause you used that term!

ouch!....

LOL!!!!

I can accept the term 'climate change', but considering how cold it was for the past 8 month - those that use the term 'global warming' get punched in the head!

AGEsAces wrote:

anny wrote:I think she means the pathways that are mixed use. If you look at the city's cycling maps, they're noted.

Yes...that I understand...I just had not seen any signs actually marking any paths as shared yet. I'll have to take a ride over that way and have a look.

And the city's cycling maps are wrong.
They have several areas noted as ok for bicycles...which are not.
I have already sent an e-mail to the city department that made the map to let them know the errors.

Which ones are you talking about? I just took a quick look at the map and the ones in the south west corner all seem to be correct.

In the Portage & Main area they indicate a couple of sections for cyclists which would not be possible.

There's also an indication around the Forks I saw.

I don't have the map in front of me.

AGEsAces wrote:In the Portage & Main area they indicate a couple of sections for cyclists which would not be possible.

There's also an indication around the Forks I saw.

I don't have the map in front of me.

I'm not sure what you mean. There are no marked shared sidewalks in the portage and main area. I did notice that the section of Fort between Graham and Portage is marked as sharrows on the map, but it is actually a painted bike lane ( should be solid blue line, not dashed light blue).

From what I understand, the map is to be updated every couple of years to keep it current.

St Norberter wrote:

AGEsAces wrote:In the Portage & Main area they indicate a couple of sections for cyclists which would not be possible.

There's also an indication around the Forks I saw.

I don't have the map in front of me.

I'm not sure what you mean. There are no marked shared sidewalks in the portage and main area. I did notice that the section of Fort between Graham and Portage is marked as sharrows on the map, but it is actually a painted bike lane ( should be solid blue line, not dashed light blue).

From what I understand, the map is to be updated every couple of years to keep it current.

Yes...not marked sidewalks...but the map indicated there's marked bike areas.
There are no markings on the roads for bikes in that area. It's strictly driving lanes.

The only exception is approaching Main heading East on Portage, a sign
indicates that buses & cyclists are allowed to turn left from the
third lane, rather than being pushed into the 4th.

AGEsAces wrote:

St Norberter wrote:

AGEsAces wrote:In the Portage & Main area they indicate a couple of sections for cyclists which would not be possible.

There's also an indication around the Forks I saw.

I don't have the map in front of me.

I'm not sure what you mean. There are no marked shared sidewalks in the portage and main area. I did notice that the section of Fort between Graham and Portage is marked as sharrows on the map, but it is actually a painted bike lane ( should be solid blue line, not dashed light blue).

From what I understand, the map is to be updated every couple of years to keep it current.

Yes...not marked sidewalks...but the map indicated there's marked bike areas.
There are no markings on the roads for bikes in that area. It's strictly driving lanes.

The only exception is approaching Main heading East on Portage, a sign
indicates that buses & cyclists are allowed to turn left from the
third lane, rather than being pushed into the 4th.

There are diamond lanes along main. The sign indicates both buses and bicycles, so that's signed. There are bike lanes painted on both Fort and Garry from Ellice (Garry) and Portage(Fort) down to Assiniboine. I think they are also painted on Carleton and Hargrave.

Yes...but not ON Portage...which...being a primary route through the city...needs it more than the others.

And..considering it's one of the highest traffic areas for pedestrians as well...enforcement of keeping cyclists off the sidewalks should start there.

AGEsAces wrote:Yes...but not ON Portage...which...being a primary route through the city...needs it more than the others.

And..considering it's one of the highest traffic areas for pedestrians as well...enforcement of keeping cyclists off the sidewalks should start there.

Okay, but the map doesn't label Portage west of Main as a suggested bike route at all. The section east of main is labeled as a high traffic route though.

Ages,
A lot of the newer sidewalks in the Taylor, Kenaston, Sterling Lyon parkway area (and others like the trail on Gateway/Raleigh) are shared ped/cyclists routes. One of the reasons is the speed limit on Sterling Lyon and Kenaston makes it dangerous for cyclists and the section along Taylor from Harrow to approximately Lindsey/Renfrew has been a sidewalk bike route for many years. There are stop signs along that section for the cyclists at the intersections of entry ways and crossings of shopping malls (IGA/Sobeys) and at MB Hydro as well as at the ReFit Centre and Taylor Tennis.

I had an incident last week along McPhillips on the new diamond lane that was quite interesting. From Selkirk to Inkster both ways is a rush hour designated diamond lane. I was on my way to the Wellness at 7 Oaks on Friday after work so used the diamond lane and travelled quite quickly. I did have one vehicle pass me way too close and not make the required right hand turn at the next available intersection so he got a yell from me. But the funny one was a lady in a minivan pulled up behind me and gave me the horn (I was in the middle of the rightr hand tire track so she would have had to slow down substantially). I ignored her and kept on my way. She everntually passed me and pulled back into the diamond lane. I caught up with her at the next set of lights, proceeded to pull in front of her and basically block her from travelling at her speed. As I pulled away from the intersection I pointed upward to the overhead signs designating the diamond lane. When I again caught up to her at Inkster and McPhillips, I knocked on her passenger window, she rolled the window down and I asked her if she knew what the diamond lanes were and the rules that she was to follow. She proceeded to tell me "I can't read English" to which I asked her if she couldn't read English how the hell did she get her driver's license (she was not born in Canada and by her language skills only recently arrived here). I just shook my head and proceeded on my way. It is this type of situation and these excuses that cause me great concern, if driver's can't read the signs how the hell are they expected to understand the laws of the road?????

I agree 100% there Holly about the drivers.

I realize there's SUPPOSED to be a standard, otherwise how are they allowed to drive? Ironically though...that's why there's symbols on the signs, and not words...there's not even any English on the signs anyway...just some numbers.

Me personally...I look like I could be a cop (an out of shape one...but still viable)...and I probably would've asked to see her license (done it before...posted the story on here somewhere). Not to give her a ticket...moreso to scare her back to where she belongs. If she really doesn't speak English...there's a VERY good chance she comes from a country where cops are tyrants...and it would spark enough fear in her to learn how to drive.

But...OTOH...I would probably not have stayed in the right tire track anymore either if there is a nuisance driver. I would've stayed in the left tire track and held the whole lane...and should she have been as ignorant as that to keep passing me...I probably would've taken her mirror off on my next pass.

I have little tolerance left for idiots & morons. Everyone is afraid to do/say anything, for fear of being ridiculed themselves...so the idiots get to run rampant.

That said...I do drive around Kenaston quite often, and SLP...but have not noticed any "shared sidewalk" signs. Of course I'm usually driving a company vehicle, not my bike...so I will have to look when I'm down there again.

I was on the SLP this weekend and the pathway is a long way off the road so you really have to look for the bike path signs. And the signs are a mile high on the lamp posts so again you do have to look. This section is part and parcel of the Assiniboine Forest pathway system and the non paved section going into Fort Whyte is quite nice as well.

I'm noticing (as a pedestrian) a lot of drivers driving in the painted bike lanes on Princess. Seems they don't know which line to line up with. Also seems the bicycle symbols did not get painted on this lane.

There's been no public education or PSAs about the new bike lanes. I'm not surprised people don't know how to use them. I didn't even know about half of them until a recent bike ride.