I join with the cyclists in wanting the bike bylaws revised (SP July 26/11) but not necessarily with the revisions they proposed.
They want the bicycle recognized as a legitimate vehicle and legitimate form of transportation. I agree with them. Like other modes of transportation, bicycles should be licensed and have plate insurance. Like other modes of transportation, bike drivers should pass written and road exams. They should be ticketed for infractions as are cars. And they should be charged if their use of their vehicle causes harm to others - undue care and attention comes to mind.
They want the blanket bylaw ban on cycling on sidewalks revised to allow them use sidewalks when they deem it necessary. I disagree. Sidewalks are for pedestrians. If your bicycle is a vehicle, get on the road with the other vehicles. Or pay the fines as do other vehicle users when breaching the rules of traffic.
They state cyclists should have a right to use the middle of one lane like any other vehicle and no longer forcing cyclists to ride only in bike lanes on streets that have them. I agree. Get rid of bicycle lanes and all vehicles share the same road.
I don't understand why they want to scrap the requirement to always ride with at least one hand on handlebars. And if the ban on sidewalks remains, they won't have to worry about dismounting when passing pedestrians on a bridge.
In fact most of what they want won't be necessary if we go back to the first request that bicycles are vehicles. The rules of the road should apply to all vehicles.
Which brings to mind the old adage - be careful what you wish for because you might just get it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
The rules proposed are absolutely absurd. These people think that the cyclists should be treated as holy gods on the streets of Saskatoon (pretty much the smug attitude of these cyclists who believe they are saving the world and thus should be given every privilege).
ReplyDeleteThe cyclists would be better off trying to educate the cyclists in the city on obeying the current rules before trying to get new ones. I cringe every day on my way to work when one cyclist is impeding traffic on the bridge going 25 kmh during rush hour and another is riding alongside on the pedestrian path. They both can't be obeying the laws.
I would hazard a guess that maybe 10% of cyclists will routinely signal a turn or a stop (so much for safety first)
Cyclists rarely, if ever, come to complete stops at stop signs and traffic lights when there is not oncoming traffic.
I could go on and on..... isn't there an old saying about getting your own house in order before you start barking demands?
If you seriously think that putting cyclists and motorist together is the most efficient way of ensuring both safety and traffic flow for motorists and cyclists, by all means advocate for it.
ReplyDeleteIf you think that licensing cyclists is efficient and cost effective - despite ample proof from other cities and our own city admin that it isn't - then by all means advocate for it.
If you think that having a larger police presence to ticket cyclists is needed, including all those 5 year olds riding on sidewalks - by all means advocate for it.
Anon 844am - if you take the time to learn a bit about "these people" (i.e. Saskatoon Cycles - www.saskatooncycles.org) you'll quickly recognize that your assumptions on their motivations are a bit off the mark.
Also, in answer to your question about cyclist on the bridge - infact, both are following the current bike bylaw.
Once again in the minds of cyclists they are far and away the most valuable users of public roadways. All hail thee cyclists
ReplyDeleteHow about if I advocate for Saskatoon Cycles.org not speak on my behalf. I have been biking in this city for over 40 yrs and haven't had a problem that I couldn't handle. If cyclists and pedestrians approached their travels with one thing in mind there wouldn't be any problems and that is .... motor vehicles win over each in any collision. So if being right is all you are concerned with then .. YOU WILL BE DEAD RIGHT! Me, I approach my bike riding as making sure I don't get in there way. As to breaking a few rules on things like not coming to a complete stop.. Guilty but then again I also only signal when someone is around. Again just remember being safe out there can't be legislated.
ReplyDelete"As to breaking a few rules on things like not coming to a complete stop.. Guilty but then again I also only signal when someone is around."
ReplyDeleteThat is exactly how accidents happen, no different than a car gliding through a stop sign or uncontrolled intersection because they didn't see something around.
Maybe you should come check out what Saskatooncycles.org is all about. I'm sure their educated professionals could help you understand the RIGHTS of cyclists a little more and why we need push for better cycling laws.
Actually Anon 9:33, the cyclist on the pedestrian walk was not obeying the law. If he was he should have been dismounting his bike every 5 feet when he passed a pedestrian on the bridge rather than cruising on by them.
ReplyDeleteBut ya, just further evidence that the cyclists do whatever they want without any regard for others using the roadways.
"But ya, just further evidence that the cyclists do whatever they want without any regard for others using the roadways."
ReplyDeleteAs a pedestrian, several times a week I am almost picked off---at crosswalks---by drivers yacking on their phones and fingers so coated in chicken grease they clearly can't hold on to the wheel. Cyclists don't hold a monopoly on showing disregard for others and for the law.
Anon 1024, info that you didn't include in your original post.
ReplyDeleteGiven that the dismounting rule isn't enforced, it shows that the current bylaw is outdated.
Anyhow, I'm sure we can sit here and bring up countless examples of bad pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists all day.
At least some people are trying to highlight problems with our current system and are actively trying to do do something about it. If you don't like it, get out and get involved in your city, rally like-minded people around you and get organized like Saskatoon Cycles and countless other groups have....
Bet if I get a group called "Motorists Only" I could get way more people lobbying to make it illegal to rider anything but a motorized vehicle on the road. Not sure that would be the best thing but hell if that's how we are going to run things these days by folding to special interest groups instead of common sense I should get involved like they say.
ReplyDelete"if that's how we are going to run things these days by folding to special interest groups instead of common sense I should get involved like they say."
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea! Let's ensure that we squelch out any conversation with the exception of the dominant few.
These self-absorbed "special interest groups" have been ruining my city with things like their damn wheelchair access at sidewalks, community association neighbourhood parties, walking heritage tours, programs for those with disabilities... Oh! And don't get me started with those pig-headed "friends" of the Library.
I just wanna drive straight home so I can watch the big game on ABC. Stop making me consider anything beyond my immediate, short-sighted, and selfish needs.
Wanting the by-law changed to be able to ride in the middle of a lane blocking traffic because the city does a poor job of gravel removal is the type of comment in the article I am talking about. This isn't common sense it selfishness. You can point out the problems but many times the "special interest" group's resolve is selfish.
ReplyDeleteSo where is the enforcement on cyclists anyways. When was the last time anyone saw someone pulled over and handed a ticket for riding at night without lights?
I have often come across those gangs(with colours)of riders in tights riding two and three abreast as if they own the road. Not saying they can't if they aren't impeding motor vehicles but get serious you are a hazard and should be fined or better yet have your bike impounded.
I frequently walk around the river...from the Mendel to Circle Drive, across to the east side and back to the University Bridge.
ReplyDeleteI share this route with many cyclists. Or...wait, I continuously move out of the way of cyclists who seem to believe it is their right to take the whole path, riding 2 or 3 abreast. It's okay, I can jump out of your way, I wouldn't want you to be inconvenienced.
Very few, I dare say 10%, of the cyclists I encounter on my walk, are considerate enough to ring their bell to warn you of their proximity to you. A handful shout out that they will be passing you on your left. On top of it, they thank you when they pass.
Now, what to say about the other 90% who give you no advanced warning, no bells, no shouts, no thank you. Well, I could say alot but will choose to keep this clean today!! They pass you with no warning, sometimes actually brushing you as they go by...especially down the University Bridge and it's narrow walkway. There is no use yelling out to these inconsiderate cyclists and telling them exactly what your thoughts are...they wouldn't hear you as most of them are wearing ear buds or headphones and listening to their music.
My only point here is that the cyclists want consideration without giving consideration.
Pity to the one cyclist that does run into me one day...
So when the walking heritage tour wants to walk down the middle of 8th street telling people about the buildings then yes I would mean them. But get really wheelchair curbs, people with disabilities these are your responses to special interest?
ReplyDeleteCyclists already get preferential treatment on buses. Now they want their one bike lanes and trails. Maybe they should start paying for parking down town like the rest of us do. No more free rides of parking your bike to a pole or meter. Park only in designated spots and pay the meter man. Then we can talk.
Anon 1228pm, you would rather have that cyclist risk wiping out on the gravel and fall infront of your car then have to take a few seconds to properly signal and pass them?
ReplyDeleteLike it or not, cycling is a growing segment of our transportation system. We can either work towards making it safer for cyclist, pedestrians, and motorists all around by improving our infrastructure and additudes or we can keep doing things status-quo while the situation gets worse and worse.
"Maybe they should start paying for parking down town like the rest of us do. No more free rides of parking your bike to a pole or meter. Park only in designated spots and pay the meter man. Then we can talk. "
ReplyDeleteCool. And drivers can directly pay drivers' portions of the massive vehicle infrastructure and resultant health, environmental, and social costs from driving and maintaining the infrastructure.
Slippery slope, isn't it?
"you would rather have that cyclist risk wiping out on the gravel and fall infront of your car then have to take a few seconds to properly signal and pass them"
ReplyDeleteAre you serious? Have you ever experienced trying to signal and pass a cyclist? The general trend from cyclists when you do this is to get the middle finger.
"Have you ever experienced trying to signal and pass a cyclist? The general trend from cyclists when you do this is to get the middle finger."
ReplyDeleteThen you must be one awful driver.
I think the solution is simple. We tax drivers (via fuel tax, licenses, etc.) to build and maintain the roads.
ReplyDeleteThe only logical step is to do the same with cyclists. Tax them to pay for all the services they need. Each bicycle will be required to have a license, and/or cyclist a license, instead of allowing bicycles to lock to anything bring in actual stands and charge cyclists for parking downtown (after all once we eliminate the clutter of cars downtown, the next step will be eliminate the hassles of bicycles), have police stings set up to nail cyclists who don't obey rules/license information.
This is probably a good thing to start regulating in addition to the much need revenue to pay for everything the cyclists want. Kids should have to pass a cycling test before they can ride on the streets and once they pass their names could be registered with City Hall (along with their parents names who will be liable for any tickets and fines accrued as part of the Jr. License program).
We did it with pets and the pet police/fines. So we have a model on which we can design the cycling program to issue licenses and tickets. This will satisfy all parties, give the cyclists their credibility on the roads and help fund the costs associated with adapting the city to help them. Additionally, drivers will be able to know all cyclists on the road are trained in the rules of the road and if they disobey will be fined.
"Then you must be one awful driver."
ReplyDeleteNo, cyclists are just rude, self-entitled people who think they are morally superior for pedaling rather burning gas.
Nothing like self righteousness of a cyclist dogooder
It looks like the SaskatoonCycles.org have all 6 of their members out in full force today :P
ReplyDelete"Cool. And drivers can directly pay drivers' portions of the massive vehicle infrastructure and resultant health, environmental, and social costs from driving and maintaining the infrastructure."
ReplyDeletesocial costs? Are you off your meds again? Way to take it to an extreme. If a portion of fuel taxes goes to maintain roads then why should cyclists not chip in a PORTION of the costs of their infrastructure?
Oh ya, because they are 'saving the environment' and therefore entitled to whatever their hearts desire.
"social costs? Are you off your meds again? Way to take it to an extreme"
ReplyDeleteUh? If you didn't notice, that whole post was meant to be extreme.
Think you need to stop sitting in your closed garage while you warm your car up.
To be clear, fuel taxes are provincial/federal and not city administered. The majority of funds used to build and maintain roads in Saskatoon come from property taxes.
ReplyDelete"The majority of funds used to build and maintain roads in Saskatoon come from property taxes."
ReplyDeleteMajority or all costs? Once, again the issue was that cyclists should be contributing a PORTION of the costs associated with all their outrageous demands.
I walk the river trails daily and find the majority of cyclists rude. No bells, high speeds and they expect you to get off the trail.
ReplyDeleteWhy do we having bike lanes on the road along the river and they ride on the sidewalk.
I feel sorry for the seniors that are trying to enjoy the trails. Most of them are fearful.
I moved back to the city in April 2010. One of the things I was looking forward to was recreational riding on both the MVA trails and on regular streets all over the city.
ReplyDeleteI have been enjoying this great summer weather and have logged 450 km to date in 2011.
One of my main observations is this:
When on the paved MVA trails along the river bank it is important that we all recognize that they are designated as "shared" trails. I understand this to mean that they are shared equally by both pedestrians and cyclists. And also by skateboarders, roller-bladers, etc. In my experience, the cyclists I encounter "get it". As they approach me, I am on the right, they stick to my left. Just like vehicles do on a roadway.
Contrary to this simple concept, many pedestrians seem to not "get it". For their own safety, I would prefer that all pedestrians adopt this simple rule of right/left so as to not leave me guessing as to where they are going to wander after I have alerted them of my approach by sounding my bell.
I have a suggestion which may help to alleviate some of the problems on the paved MVA trails. Why not paint a dashed yellow line down the center? Just like a roadway. I believe it could be a step in the right direction to bring clarity to your expected behavior on our cherished MVA trails.
A lot of these trails are used by slow moving seniors that are having trouble walking. Maybe you don't get it.
ReplyDeleteI think they would be safer out in the street than the trails they helped build.
Anon 6:05: A perfect example of the smugness and inflated self worth that cyclists have of themselves. We're all so impressed with your 450km and that cyclists are the only other people who understand what you are doing on the trails. All those dumb pedestrians, no idea how to properly react when you approach them.
ReplyDeleteDid you ever think that the system in YOUR head differs from the perceived system in other cyclists heads? So that maybe pedestrians have no idea how to react as the expectation from you and from a different cyclist varies.
Not everyone is on your wavelength.