HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2017, 9:31 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is online now
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 5,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Authentic_City View Post
The Criminal Code is different than the Provincial Statute. I haven't seen any recent case law related to charges under the MB Act, but the language seems pretty vague: "No person... who is, through drunkenness, unable to drive or ride it with safety to other persons who are on a highway or bicycle facility..." There is no quantum of blood alcohol specified, therefore open to wide interpretation. I'd doubt there are any charges under the statute. I suppose you could be fined, but it would not be a criminal charge any more than a traffic ticket is.
You are correct. It isn't a DUI, but you can be given tickets and fines. So still not legal in the technical sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2017, 9:41 PM
StNorberter StNorberter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
The onus is on the cyclist because they are considered the same as motor vehicles. And I disagree that it is only a "dangerous environment because of drivers".
But why should cyclists have to put themselves in positions where they are uncomfortable because of the actions of drivers. And yes, it it a dangerous environment because of drivers. If you think it's because of cyclists, you're completely delusional. How many of the cyclist fatalites in car-bike collisions have been the fault of cyclists? 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
How many cyclists do you see that actually observe and follow general traffic rules? There are some for sure, but now how often do you see bikes weaving in and out of streets using the sidewalk when convenient, slipping up between lanes of traffic or between cars and the curb at stop lights? People driving cars can definitely be dangerous to cyclists, but a lot of the time, cyclists aren't exactly angels either, so let's not pretend otherwise.
How many of those actually endanger you as a driver? 0.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
As for "who really cares?" I do. Just as a bike is at a severe disadvantage to a car, a pedestrian is at a severe disadvantage to a bike.
So you care because a bike is bigger and pedestrians are at a disadvantage ( what does that even mean?), but your logic doesn't hold wrt car-bike interractions

Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
"Slowing down as they pass pedestrians and giving them room". That's funny, it's certainly not been my experience.
Experience? Or perception? If you're a pedestrian, at walking speed, you would perceive cyclists to be speeding by you, not because they are, but because of the difference of speed. If I pass a pedestrian at 15 km/hr, they probably think I am speeding past them, as opposed to the reality of me having dropped my speed by at 10 km/hr as I pass them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2017, 5:17 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,775
Nice article and the mistaken rush for dedicated bikeways on roadways.

http://business.financialpost.com/op...moting-cycling
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2017, 7:18 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Nice article and the mistaken rush for dedicated bikeways on roadways.

http://business.financialpost.com/op...moting-cycling
Correction: Nice opinion piece, written by Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute, a division of Energy Probe Research Foundation.

"Energy Probe is a non-governmental social, economic, and environmental policy organization based in Toronto, known for denying man-made climate change.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Probe

Remember, opinions are like ***holes. Everyone has one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2017, 11:32 PM
windypeg windypeg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Nice article and the mistaken rush for dedicated bikeways on roadways.

http://business.financialpost.com/op...moting-cycling
I can't help but notice that he has absolutely no data to prove that bikes are causing any of the problems he attributes to them, other than a vague observation that some of the roads with bike lanes also have traffic congestion. Anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills can tell you that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.

Cyclists breathe in more pollution than others? That's an argument against cars and the fumes they spew out, not an argument against bikes. Cyclists get injured more often? That's an argument for safer infrastructure, and again a problem not cause by bikes but rather by cars that run into bikes. Plus he doesn't even try to show that those health costs outweigh the benefits - because they probably don't. Cycling infrastructure costs money? We spend as much on one single underpass for cars as the global cities he mentions are spending on their cycling revolutions. There's not a single intelligent point to be found in this thing. It's a propaganda piece and you just ate it right up.

Last edited by windypeg; Dec 3, 2017 at 11:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2018, 6:00 PM
tree's Avatar
tree tree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 134
i just saw this - sorry if already posted elsewhere



http://winnipeg.ca/publicworks/pedes...lanesystem.stm

awesome looks like construction starts this year - unless something has changed which i don't know about :|
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2018, 7:39 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,528
^ Is that all? Doesn't seem like a particularly ambitious construction timetable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 12:39 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,255
^At least it's something I guess. Would be nice to see it built and connected to the new bridge over the Assiniboine River: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...town-1.4474688.

Also, I would like to seem some connections from Downtown to the West End. The city is planning to route bikes from Omand's Creek to St. Matthews (along Empress). But St. Matthews doesn't really connect to downtown. Wonder if there is a long term plan here?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2018, 4:58 PM
tree's Avatar
tree tree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
^ Is that all? Doesn't seem like a particularly ambitious construction timetable.
Do you mean the finished product isn't ambitious or the timetable / construction details are lacking? If the latter - I don't know but it seemed all last year the bike paths were just forgotten so glad to see acknowledgement. I recall the Garry st water work was done as mentioned in 2017 so seemingly they are on schedule.

As for current project - its a start and I think the bike paths on Sherbrook are pretty great. Still wish they would do 1-way bike paths on Garry AND Fort instead of the 2-way bike path on the 1-way Garry street but I guess for sake of minimal disruption I'm thinking they went with this. I'm hopeful that in a few years they will do the Northbound 1-way on Fort.

We need more absolutely but this will be a major artery - if they make Graham or St.Mary the East-West bike corridor ("the portage ave of bikes") and Garry the North-South corridor ("the main street of bikes") then they only need one more or two to the North (from plan looks like maybe Notre Dame but not sure) and one more to the West (Memorial/Colony seem easy options here) to have something resembling a connected grid that serves MOST of the core area. (Assiniboine kind of the "Broadway" of bikes for the south)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Authentic_City View Post
^At least it's something I guess. Would be nice to see it built and connected to the new bridge over the Assiniboine River: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...town-1.4474688.
Nice thing about this route is since it terminates in the south at Assiniboine it will automatically access the new bridge via that bike lane. Will be possible to bike from Exchange to Osborne almost entirely protected.

Quote:
Also, I would like to seem some connections from Downtown to the West End. The city is planning to route bikes from Omand's Creek to St. Matthews (along Empress). But St. Matthews doesn't really connect to downtown. Wonder if there is a long term plan here?
I'm not aware of full plan at all for St. Matthews but thinking about it now it does make a lot of sense if they can run the bike lanes all the way down to where St. Matthews terminates at Maryland. By the time you're at Maryland you're minutes (seconds by bike) from UW and UW will be a major connection point for this infrastructure - so its close enough to downtown to make sense.



Looking at the map its a very easy connection to Sherbrook, UW and from there relatively close to some of the other downtown bike infrastructure.

I despise the 'construction pole' bike Paths on St Matthews around St.James (Winnipeg half-assedness at its finest) but if its temporary until they can make real bike lanes then i'll take it for now. I'm not hugely familiar with bike infrastructure in other major cities so its possible too I'm just being greedy by wanting everything to be nice bikelanes like we see on Sherbrook and Assiniboine lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2018, 7:13 PM
GreyGarden GreyGarden is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 50
I did not realize this but apparently Hamilton Ontario has a bike-share system. Does anyone in know have any insight if there has been interest in Winnipeg for a bike-share system?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2018, 8:22 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyGarden View Post
I did not realize this but apparently Hamilton Ontario has a bike-share system. Does anyone in know have any insight if there has been interest in Winnipeg for a bike-share system?
I was only in very brief contact with a group that's thinking about it so I don't know how much I should say, but yes, someone is looking into it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2018, 1:39 PM
buzzg buzzg is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree View Post
Do you mean the finished product isn't ambitious or the timetable / construction details are lacking? If the latter - I don't know but it seemed all last year the bike paths were just forgotten so glad to see acknowledgement. I recall the Garry st water work was done as mentioned in 2017 so seemingly they are on schedule.

As for current project - its a start and I think the bike paths on Sherbrook are pretty great. Still wish they would do 1-way bike paths on Garry AND Fort instead of the 2-way bike path on the 1-way Garry street but I guess for sake of minimal disruption I'm thinking they went with this. I'm hopeful that in a few years they will do the Northbound 1-way on Fort.

We need more absolutely but this will be a major artery - if they make Graham or St.Mary the East-West bike corridor ("the portage ave of bikes") and Garry the North-South corridor ("the main street of bikes") then they only need one more or two to the North (from plan looks like maybe Notre Dame but not sure) and one more to the West (Memorial/Colony seem easy options here) to have something resembling a connected grid that serves MOST of the core area. (Assiniboine kind of the "Broadway" of bikes for the south)



Nice thing about this route is since it terminates in the south at Assiniboine it will automatically access the new bridge via that bike lane. Will be possible to bike from Exchange to Osborne almost entirely protected.



I'm not aware of full plan at all for St. Matthews but thinking about it now it does make a lot of sense if they can run the bike lanes all the way down to where St. Matthews terminates at Maryland. By the time you're at Maryland you're minutes (seconds by bike) from UW and UW will be a major connection point for this infrastructure - so its close enough to downtown to make sense.



Looking at the map its a very easy connection to Sherbrook, UW and from there relatively close to some of the other downtown bike infrastructure.

I despise the 'construction pole' bike Paths on St Matthews around St.James (Winnipeg half-assedness at its finest) but if its temporary until they can make real bike lanes then i'll take it for now. I'm not hugely familiar with bike infrastructure in other major cities so its possible too I'm just being greedy by wanting everything to be nice bikelanes like we see on Sherbrook and Assiniboine lol.
IIRC UofW's plan was to create a path from where St. Matthew's ends at Maryland right into the heart of the campus near the RecPlex. If you look on Google maps you can see where it would go, cutting north through some parking lots to connect with Furby Place/Richardson Corridor. Essentially it would extend St. Matthews into the campus, but for AT only. I believe the do own most of the (empty) lots in that area, so it might not be that far off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2018, 11:21 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzg View Post
IIRC UofW's plan was to create a path from where St. Matthew's ends at Maryland right into the heart of the campus near the RecPlex. If you look on Google maps you can see where it would go, cutting north through some parking lots to connect with Furby Place/Richardson Corridor. Essentially it would extend St. Matthews into the campus, but for AT only. I believe the do own most of the (empty) lots in that area, so it might not be that far off.
Looking at the map, I can see what looks like a potential route, but it would require some sort of crossing infrastructure at Maryland and Sherbrook. Also, there have been some recent safety concerns and incidents along the path between UW's main campus and the Science Building on Langside and Portage. To connect with St. Matthews, you would basically extend this route further west through some other dodgy areas. I think the folks at UW may not be so keen to do this, especially since they no longer have students housed at Lions Manner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 9:55 PM
buzzg buzzg is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Authentic_City View Post
Looking at the map, I can see what looks like a potential route, but it would require some sort of crossing infrastructure at Maryland and Sherbrook. Also, there have been some recent safety concerns and incidents along the path between UW's main campus and the Science Building on Langside and Portage. To connect with St. Matthews, you would basically extend this route further west through some other dodgy areas. I think the folks at UW may not be so keen to do this, especially since they no longer have students housed at Lions Manner.
Don't think this possible route is any dodgier than where many UW buildings in the area already are. And people won't be forced to use it lol. Right now there is no SAFE way to bike to campus. Ellice and Portage are horrible for bikes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2018, 10:01 PM
buzzg buzzg is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,704
Been travelling for a few weeks, currently in Vancouver, and have an observation about our cycling infra...

We have very similar infra to lots of very bike-friendly cities like Vancouver (obv not as much yet), which has lots of not ideal forms like painted lanes between parking and traffic, and painted ones on the edge where there's streets with no parking...

The biggest difference I've noticed is that literally every other city (including Saskatoon) actually has proper signage. For cyclists, pedestrians, and vehicles. It's very clear to people using any form of transportation who goes where, what to look out for, how cyclists treat different intersections etc. I just don't understand why Winnipeg is soooooo bad at proper signage.

Another thing aside from safety signage we're lacking is Bike Route signage. Just putting up the "Bike Route" signs is useless. What route are you on? Where does it go to? Would love to see the city develop naming/numbering system for routes like they're bus routes. Easy to follow and know where you're going. They've already devised the routes, just make the wayfinding info better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 6:55 AM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzg View Post
Don't think this possible route is any dodgier than where many UW buildings in the area already are. And people won't be forced to use it lol. Right now there is no SAFE way to bike to campus. Ellice and Portage are horrible for bikes.
I agree, there is no safe way to connect from St Matthews to UW campus without riding on sidewalks or taking a roundabout route. I'm just not convinced UW will take the lead developing this route. They already encourage students to use Portage Ave rather than the path at night because of safety issues.

I would ride up to Ellice before St. Matthews deadends and Maryland and ride the last few block that way. Not ideal, but it keeps me off sidewalks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2018, 11:20 PM
buzzg buzzg is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,704
Now that we're actually getting somewhere with downtown bike lanes – it's time the city actually take a stance and make a decision on shared pathways, specifically on Main.

Are the sidewalks actually shared use paths? It doesn't say that anywhere, but it tells cyclists to yield to peds, but cycling on sidewalks is illegal. If it is for bikes too – where does it end going south? At what point downtown does it end? What happens at P&M?

I'm all for these being shared, at least until (if ever) a better solution is found, but 4 things need to happen:

1) These (and any) shared-use AT paths need to be labelled as such – Saskatoon does it everywhere. It needs to be apparent to all that all have the right to use it. The "cyclists yield to peds" signs are dangerous as it tells peds they don't have to be alert, make room, or look out for bikes – it's the cyclist's problem.

2) WIDER CURB CUTS! All over the city, but especially on St. Mary's/Main, the curb cuts are barely 3 feet wide – if there's a bike and a ped or another bike crossing, there's not nearly enough room, they need to be wider. It's brutal in front of Santa Lucia.

3) These decorative planters (with half dead trees) need to be removed from the Main Street Bridge. Not only do they take up a ton of room and narrow the path, but they create an extremely dangerous blind corner that's just begging for accidents. I almost had one the other day.

4) This parking lot entrance has to be closed off. Almost every single day I bike by there's a car waiting to turn literally blocking the entire bike lane so no one can get in or out. It's out of control dangerous. Even if there wasn't a bike lane there, having a somewhat blind entrance to a high speed bridge there is brutal.


Honourable mentions:

* The city needs to raise or clearly paint where the sidewalks/bike crossings cross roads everywhere, not just if it's a new designated bike lane. Important at these paths as well.
** It would be so simple, amazing, and effective if the city pushed the vehicle stop line back 10 feet on any road that is marked as a bike route, or has a bike lane/AT path on it. It's so difficult and dangerous to turn left here, and this would allow cyclists to SAFELY cue up for left turns without blocking crosswalks, or having to illegally bike on sidewalks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2018, 4:56 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 441
Just throwing this out there to see how others feel about the situation.

Does anyone believe that there should be a User's Fee payable to the City for use of these bike paths and extra bike lanes located throughout the city that the City has specially built for bicycle traffic?

Some taxpayers still do not have sidewalks in their areas for kids and seniors to walk to ammenities in the area, but there are paved bike paths all over the City. It is agreed that bikes do take some strain off the environment, but do load it up in other ways. Therefore, bicyclists should be paying part of the bill through user fee or taxation contribution.

Secondly, should it not be mandatory for bicycles to have an I.D. plate and insurance plan similar to autos and motorcycles that use the roadways of the City and the Province? If a bicyclist hit a pedestrian or auto, should they not have liability insurance to cover the claim by the injured party?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2018, 5:34 PM
DancingDuck DancingDuck is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
Just throwing this out there to see how others feel about the situation.

Does anyone believe that there should be a User's Fee payable to the City for use of these bike paths and extra bike lanes located throughout the city that the City has specially built for bicycle traffic?

Some taxpayers still do not have sidewalks in their areas for kids and seniors to walk to ammenities in the area, but there are paved bike paths all over the City. It is agreed that bikes do take some strain off the environment, but do load it up in other ways. Therefore, bicyclists should be paying part of the bill through user fee or taxation contribution.

Secondly, should it not be mandatory for bicycles to have an I.D. plate and insurance plan similar to autos and motorcycles that use the roadways of the City and the Province? If a bicyclist hit a pedestrian or auto, should they not have liability insurance to cover the claim by the injured party?
Both of these seem like ways of discouraging more people from choosing biking as their form of transportation. While I understand why some may push for it, or at least a discussion of it, there are a few problems I have...

The first, in regards to a user fee, is that it seems counter productive. If people are forced to pay to use infrastructure designed specifically for them, would it not make more sense more sense for them to continue biking on either the street or sidewalk, and simply not use the bike lanes themselves?

Another issue is how to implement it? Do you pay x-amount of dollars at the beginning of each year in order to have access to all the bike paths/lanes? Or is it charged based on the distance travelled? If it's a per year cost, and your routes barely use the designated paths, why use them at all... Alternately, if it's based on distance travelled, and you bike to/from work on designated path the entire way, it may be cheaper to alter you route to avoid those paths, thus rendering then useless in the first place

It would also be difficult what to do about paths that are built for both pedestrians and bikes (Bishop Grandin Greenway as an example): do both cyclists and pedestrians pay the user fee? Or just cyclists or just pedestrians? To play devils advocate, I guess it would only be fair to start charging a users fee to people that walk on sidewalks, seeing as that is infrastructure built specifically for them...

In regards to the discussion of registration, I'd be a bit more supportive, but even here I think it may not solve much. The biggest question is again how is it applied? Does every single bike need insurance and a license plate? I'm not sure that a child learning how to ride a bike poses the same "risk" as someone biking 20km/h. Perhaps it could be done by age, but that would still come with problems

Another issue is that it's just one more inconvenience to those who choose to bike. Someone who bikes everyday may not have a problem with it, but my grandparents who bike only a few time in the summer may decide it's not worth it, not to mention those that struggle to pay for basic costs of living and now have to suddenly pay to register a bike...One major positive of mandatory licensing would be that stolen bikes would in theory be easier to return to the owners of found, but that would pretty much be the only reason I support it.

If cyclists are going to have to start having to pay liability insurance, everyone else should as well, such as people on rollerblades, skateboards, joggers (doubly so if they're pushing a massive baby carriage) and especially the person yesterday who was jogging with earbuds in and ran in to me cause they didn't look before they cut me off...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2018, 5:46 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,255
^Cyclists already pay for city infrastructure through property taxes, just like everyone else. Should motorists pay a user fee to drive on roads and bridges? Should pedestrians pay to use sidewalks?
The city and/or province could choose to license and regulate bicycles if they want. However, there would need to be enforcement and an infrastructure set up to support this. Not sure it would be worth the cost or the effort. Society seems to be getting on just fine without this, and I can't think of a North American jurisdiction that licenses bicycles like other motorized vehicles, so I'm guessing this is why Winnipeg doesn't do it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:44 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.