|
Re: 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?: msg#00158culture.transportation.humanpowered.trikes
rgb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Guy Briggs) wrote: >Ottawa doesn't have such a beast called a "bike path", so any ignorant >motorists that tell me to use it, I tell them no such thing exists if I >get the chance. We have on-road bicycle lanes and non-road "shared >recreational pathways" that are shared with pedestrians, toddlers, >strollers, dogs, kids trikes, skateboards, rollerblades, wheelchairs... > If my history is correct, I believe the first Ottawa paths (both sides of the canal, plus the western one along the river) were created and promoted specifically as "bike paths". But then pesky joggers and roller skaters found out about them, and let's not even get into those "walking" types out for a Sunday stroll! ;o) And to satisfy all users the bike paths indeed eventually became "shared recreational pathways". The ones here are great for a scenic ride, and at certain times of day one can fly along due to dearth of users. But overall, the road is what ones uses to get somewhere at a decent pace. >I have a similar problem, my GTV being a metre (39.25") from axle to >axle. The numbers I have heard are 1.5m (4.5') for one lane of a bike >lane or shared recreational pathway. Many of the bike lanes here are >less than 1m and some are as little as 75cm. The old shared >recreational pathways are barely 1m per lane, but all the new ones are a >decent 1.5m. > My cargo trike, being 4'4" in width, *just* fits inside the new standard width! And that's too much on a busy path, as there's sometimes no room to manouver. Safe to say that I ride that machine on a path only if it's quiet or after dark, since its lights do a fine job of making it visible (though I'm not sure what oncoming folks think is headed towards them!). >I'm not a big user of shared recreational pathways, using them only the >alternatives are out of my way, or I'm not in such an agressive riding >mood. The pathways here did have a recommended posted limit of 15km/h >(9mph) but in the last decade or more it has been set at 20km/h (12mph). >The amount of traffic on the path and the speed limits usually determine >if I use it. > >The use of walkmans and reluctant pedestrians is another reason to use a >combination of bell and horn. > I know from experience that an Air Zound at full blast (after tapping out a couple of warning toots) can send a headphone-wearing rollerblader off into the tall grass! I didn't want him to do that, of course, but after looking back to make sure he was OK I will admit that I did start to snicker... :P Yes, I deserve to rot in Naughty Cyclist Hell. ;o) Mark ======== "And the turtles of course... all turtles are free. As turtles and, maybe, all creatures should be." -- Dr.Seuss web: http://drumbent.com "Download your pictures for free at ftp://www.ihpva.org/incoming/" trikes mailing list - trikes@xxxxxxxxx http://www.ihpva.org/mailman/listinfo/trikes %(disclaimer)s |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: es] 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?: 00158, Moz |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?: 00158, Rob Hague |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?i: 00158, Mark Garvey |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?: 00158, Rob Hague |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |