Portage and Main re-opening 2016

[michelleb]

When Winnipeg has as much safe, fast, and well connected infrastructure dedicated to bikes as we do for motor vehicles, then we can complain about cyclist behavior.

[windypeg]

Honestly I think lack of safe infrastructure contributes to a cycling culture dominated by scofflaws because without a bunch of nice protected lanes, the only people who bike are people who are either a) very committed to it, or b) have no other choice. The folks in category A tend to know what they're doing, but B can be a gong show. They often don't really care about cycling or safe cycling practices. They would drive if they could but they can't afford a car, so they grab some old junk bike they have lying around and rip down the sidewalk like an idiot. Compare that with Europe, where cycling is so easy and safe, a lot more reasonable people decide to do it. In Winnipeg I'm sure plenty of those people who would be among the "good" cyclists choose not to cycle because it doesn't seem like a safe or practical option.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by windypeg

Honestly I think lack of safe infrastructure contributes to a cycling culture dominated by scofflaws because without a bunch of nice protected lanes, the only people who bike are people who are either a) very committed to it, or b) have no other choice. The folks in category A tend to know what they're doing, but B can be a gong show. They often don't really care about cycling or safe cycling practices. They would drive if they could but they can't afford a car, so they grab some old junk bike they have lying around and rip down the sidewalk like an idiot. Compare that with Europe, where cycling is so easy and safe, a lot more reasonable people decide to do it. In Winnipeg I'm sure plenty of those people who would be among the "good" cyclists choose not to cycle because it doesn't seem like a safe or practical option.

It's a very good point you make about the fact that often people may not follow the rules because there isn't proper infra in place to keep them safe. Think this is an often overlooked point.

And this is not to say that there are people who just go absolutely nuts and do anything, but grouping them in with average cyclists is like grouping people with addictions problem (may or may not live on the street) in with the average alcohol consumer against allowing people to drink on the street. The "problem" people are going to continue to be a "problem" whether there's rules/laws in place or not.

The only thing I would say though is you've left a huge chunk of cyclists out of your 2 groups – the casual person who wants the option (or has started) to bike to work or for activity/leisure but was skeptical of dangerous roads in the past or still is. I started biking to work this year because it's actually faster and much cheaper than driving. I am by no means an "avid" cyclist, and I'm not doing it out of necessity – there's a lot of people like me. Just look at all the bikes around Jazz Fest.

There's been surveys done across the country that have averaged a number around 60% of people who would like to bike to work (more,) if there was better/safer infrastructure. We're getting there, slowly. I think the Exchange upgrades happening now will be transformative in showing people how good and safe it can be. My eyes have been opened more, and I wasn't overly worried about road danger before – my bike to work (in Exchange) is 10-12 minutes, even in rush hour, and it's almost all protected or quite bike boulevard, with the exception of a couple short blocks crossing Marion/Goulet (that are treacherous with potholes).

[Ando]

Originally Posted by dmacc

I believe you used to have to. My dad was telling me of a day when little bike License plates were a thing. No plate on your bike then it gets impounded? That might be a little far. I'm not really against cyclists, I do however feel they should be subject to the same punishments as drivers. We both share the road and are both equally responsible to be safe.

I'm not sure what your issue is here. Cyclists on the road are vehicles, have to follow traffic rules and can be ticketed. Just like cars. It's a matter of enforcement. Cars break traffic rules all the time. So do cyclists. Not saying that is good, it's the way it is. A lot of people who don't like cyclists because they have to slow down for a seconds to get around them in traffic, so they get on the anti-cyclist bandwagon. In Europe, cycling is revered.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Ando

I'm not sure what your issue is here. Cyclists on the road are vehicles, have to follow traffic rules and can be ticketed. Just like cars. It's a matter of enforcement. Cars break traffic rules all the time. So do cyclists. Not saying that is good, it's the way it is. A lot of people who don't like cyclists because they have to slow down for a seconds to get around them in traffic, so they get on the anti-cyclist bandwagon. In Europe, cycling is revered.

I just feel cyclists should be enforced as much as vehicles. if a cyclist knows they will get a ticket for rolling a red I'm sure they will be more likely to obey.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Ando

I'm not sure what your issue is here. Cyclists on the road are vehicles, have to follow traffic rules and can be ticketed. Just like cars. It's a matter of enforcement. Cars break traffic rules all the time. So do cyclists. Not saying that is good, it's the way it is. A lot of people who don't like cyclists because they have to slow down for a seconds to get around them in traffic, so they get on the anti-cyclist bandwagon. In Europe, cycling is revered.

Originally Posted by dmacc

I just feel cyclists should be enforced as much as vehicles. if a cyclist knows they will get a ticket for rolling a red I'm sure they will be more likely to obey.

There are way more cars on the road than cyclists. Cars roll stop signs and right-on-reds all the time. I think you would be hard-pressed to find a single driver under 70 that comes to a full stop and waits the mandatory 3 seconds at a stop sign with no traffic coming.

I'd be very in favour of following many other cities changes to:

a) Allow cyclists to treat stop signs like yields (does not give them ROW, just doesn't force cops to give ridiculous tickets, if enforced)
b) Clearly state in law that cyclists have right to full lane if no bike lane (Minneapolis did this years ago and the world didn't end)

Hell, I'd even throw cars a bone and say that on residential non-arterial intersections, we can change a lot of the stop signs to yield. For example in River Heights on Grosvenor, Fleet, Mathers, Kingsway. This is how they do it in Saskatoon and Regina – in both established neighbourhoods and new suburbs.

[Ando]

Well, everyday I see cars going through red lights. A day does not go by that does not happen. So let's not get highhorse about this.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by buzzg

There are way more cars on the road than cyclists. Cars roll stop signs and right-on-reds all the time. I think you would be hard-pressed to find a single driver under 70 that comes to a full stop and waits the mandatory 3 seconds at a stop sign with no traffic coming.

I'd be very in favour of following many other cities changes to:

a) Allow cyclists to treat stop signs like yields (does not give them ROW, just doesn't force cops to give ridiculous tickets, if enforced)
b) Clearly state in law that cyclists have right to full lane if no bike lane (Minneapolis did this years ago and the world didn't end)

Hell, I'd even throw cars a bone and say that on residential non-arterial intersections, we can change a lot of the stop signs to yield. For example in River Heights on Grosvenor, Fleet, Mathers, Kingsway. This is how they do it in Saskatoon and Regina – in both established neighbourhoods and new suburbs.

I should have mentioned I'd like to see cyclist ticketed equally per capita. There was an article oon here that showed cyclists break the rules at about the same rate as drivers. I feel they should be ticketed at the same rate though. Granted I have no idea if they are or aren't at the moment.

[esquire]

Forcing cyclists to come to a full stop at every stop sign is like asking drivers to stop at a stop sign for a minimum 30 seconds each time. Unrealistic and pointless.

I realize what the law is, but sometimes laws can be less than ideal.

[windypeg]

Originally Posted by buzzg

It's a very good point you make about the fact that often people may not follow the rules because there isn't proper infra in place to keep them safe. Think this is an often overlooked point.

And this is not to say that there are people who just go absolutely nuts and do anything, but grouping them in with average cyclists is like grouping people with addictions problem (may or may not live on the street) in with the average alcohol consumer against allowing people to drink on the street. The "problem" people are going to continue to be a "problem" whether there's rules/laws in place or not.

The only thing I would say though is you've left a huge chunk of cyclists out of your 2 groups – the casual person who wants the option (or has started) to bike to work or for activity/leisure but was skeptical of dangerous roads in the past or still is. I started biking to work this year because it's actually faster and much cheaper than driving. I am by no means an "avid" cyclist, and I'm not doing it out of necessity – there's a lot of people like me. Just look at all the bikes around Jazz Fest.

There's been surveys done across the country that have averaged a number around 60% of people who would like to bike to work (more,) if there was better/safer infrastructure. We're getting there, slowly. I think the Exchange upgrades happening now will be transformative in showing people how good and safe it can be. My eyes have been opened more, and I wasn't overly worried about road danger before – my bike to work (in Exchange) is 10-12 minutes, even in rush hour, and it's almost all protected or quite bike boulevard, with the exception of a couple short blocks crossing Marion/Goulet (that are treacherous with potholes).

Yes that is sort of the point I was trying to make. The daredevils and stunt riders are going to be there anyway, but safer infrastructure would attract a lot more casual riders, who behave better and stay in the lanes they're supposed to be in, because they want to be safe. You get a critical mass of normal, average people like that riding and maybe people stop stereotyping cyclists as either hardcore spandex-wearing dudes and/or hooligans popping wheelies on their BMX's. The culture can change.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by buzzg

a) Allow cyclists to treat stop signs like yields (does not give them ROW, just doesn't force cops to give ridiculous tickets, if enforced)

[...]

Hell, I'd even throw cars a bone and say that on residential non-arterial intersections, we can change a lot of the stop signs to yield.

Considering actual stop signs on truly busy roads are very rare the simplest approach to these two ideas would be to change the HTA to allow rolling stops for all vehicles at all stop signs. Spin it is an "environmental friendly" thing as a motorized vehicle coming to a full stop as currently in the HTA causes more carbon to be produced.

[buzzg]

Agree with the environmental thing, but worry that allowing cars to roll through stops at all stop signs isn't the greatest idea as that means rolling right through crosswalks with a good chance of not seeing a pedestrian. There's also a significant difference with a street like Kingsway compared to Academy or Grant which are much busier.

I remember the city floating the idea to use yields a lot more at these types of streets several years ago, but I feel like they just didn't want to accept the cost of replacing signage (even though stop signs can be reused elsewhere in the future). We got "traffic circles" instead lol. There's definitely lots of 4-way stops that could be converted to 4-way yields, also commonly used in Sask.

[plrh]

The yield idea isn't that good at intersections with fences or buildings up to the property line because of pedestrian risk. I know it's exceptional but still does happen.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by esquire

The trouble is you don't often know until you're into the merge lane. No one is going to accelerate when they aren't sure what the conditions around the bend are like.

You can keep pointing fingers at other drivers, but the fact is people are responding very rationally to the conditions.

I just buy it, to be honest. Anyone with eyes can tell if they have room to merge ot if the turnoff throws them directly into traffic. Obviously nobody needs to carry 50+kmh INTO the corner, but that's not my point.

If these other drivers are rational, it's based on a lack of understanding. of course it's rational to slow down if you don't know what's going on. Not knowing which way is up, that's what I take issue with.

Originally Posted by windypeg

Honestly I think lack of safe infrastructure contributes to a cycling culture dominated by scofflaws because without a bunch of nice protected lanes, the only people who bike are people who are either a) very committed to it, or b) have no other choice. The folks in category A tend to know what they're doing, but B can be a gong show. They often don't really care about cycling or safe cycling practices. They would drive if they could but they can't afford a car, so they grab some old junk bike they have lying around and rip down the sidewalk like an idiot. Compare that with Europe, where cycling is so easy and safe, a lot more reasonable people decide to do it. In Winnipeg I'm sure plenty of those people who would be among the "good" cyclists choose not to cycle because it doesn't seem like a safe or practical option.

Very fair point.

Originally Posted by buzzg

There are way more cars on the road than cyclists. Cars roll stop signs and right-on-reds all the time. I think you would be hard-pressed to find a single driver under 70 that comes to a full stop and waits the mandatory 3 seconds at a stop sign with no traffic coming.

I'd be very in favour of following many other cities changes to:

a) Allow cyclists to treat stop signs like yields (does not give them ROW, just doesn't force cops to give ridiculous tickets, if enforced)
b) Clearly state in law that cyclists have right to full lane if no bike lane (Minneapolis did this years ago and the world didn't end)

Hell, I'd even throw cars a bone and say that on residential non-arterial intersections, we can change a lot of the stop signs to yield. For example in River Heights on Grosvenor, Fleet, Mathers, Kingsway. This is how they do it in Saskatoon and Regina – in both established neighbourhoods and new suburbs.

Coming to a complete stop at a stop sign is a relative non-issue for anyone, but bikes should atleast half-stop.

Originally Posted by Ando

Well, everyday I see cars going through red lights. A day does not go by that does not happen. So let's not get highhorse about this.

Really? I mean, I see cars enter intersections just as the light turns red, and if a cop sees it, they're nabbed. But I don't see cars running through a red that has clearly been red for a while. That's a much bigger issue for me.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Weird. Everything in the construction thread should be here and everything here should be in Everything Bicycles.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

I just buy it, to be honest. Anyone with eyes can tell if they have room to merge ot if the turnoff throws them directly into traffic. Obviously nobody needs to carry 50+kmh INTO the corner, but that's not my point.

If these other drivers are rational, it's based on a lack of understanding. of course it's rational to slow down if you don't know what's going on. Not knowing which way is up, that's what I take issue with.

Very fair point.

Coming to a complete stop at a stop sign is a relative non-issue for anyone, but bikes should atleast half-stop.


Really? I mean, I see cars enter intersections just as the light turns red, and if a cop sees it, they're nabbed. But I don't see cars running through a red that has clearly been red for a while. That's a much bigger issue for me.

Yes really, a day does not go by that I don't see cars going through red lights at some point. Especially during the morning when people are late and hyped up about getting to work.

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

That's not cautious driving, that's bad or incapacitated driving.

If they don't know how to merge, the shouldn't be driving.


Perhaps cyclists should earn their license to share the road, much like automobile operators do. I'm for it. Then they can actually get ticketed.

I didn't read the article but the majority of dumb or selfish cyclists out there is huge.

Licence

[Wpg_Guy]

City calls on consulting firms to submit draft plans for underground concourse

City hall’s Portage and Main project took another step forward Tuesday, with the release of a request for proposal (RFP) for a comprehensive assessment of the downtown Winnipeg underground concourse and plan for its rehabilitation.

The RFP was not unexpected, as it follows the release of an RFP two weeks ago for a work plan to begin reopening the Portage Avenue/Main Street intersection to pedestrians by the fall of 2019.

City of Winnipeg chief administrative officer Doug McNeil said at the time a RFP for the underground concourse, which is city-owned, would be released shortly.

This RFP calls for consulting firms to bid on a contract that requires an upgrade plan for the electrical, mechanical and structural components of the underground and the building envelope, including openings and entrances.

The project does not include Winnipeg Square, the adjacent underground mall, which is privately owned.

The winning consultant will be required to produce a plan on how to modernize the concourse and deal with several problem areas already identified by city hall, including water seepage and poor storm drainage, site access, connections to adjacent privately owned buildings and how the work can be completed while still being opened to the public.

This is the second part of the work city council authorized in October, when it set aside $1.5 million for planning on the concourse, $1.5 million for a plan to reopen the intersection and a further $500,000 for new sidewalks, curbs and trees for the plaza area in front of the Richardson Building.

The RFP states the city expects to award the contract by July 31, with the winning consultant required to submit a draft plan by Sept. 21 and a final report by Oct. 12 — 12 days before the Oct. 24 civic election.

The last council meeting before the civic election is Sept. 20.

The relevant dates for the intersection-opening RFP has that contract awarded by July 16, with a draft plan due Oct. 31 and a final report due Dec. 21.

BY THE NUMBERS
The request for proposal to upgrade and modernize the City of Winnipeg-owned underground Concourse says the area, once known as the Circus, was officially opened Feb. 24, 1979.

The total area of the Concourse is 1,630 square metres (17,545 square feet) and is located 2.44 metres underground.

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/lo...485983971.html

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by dmacc

I should have mentioned I'd like to see cyclist ticketed equally per capita. There was an article oon here that showed cyclists break the rules at about the same rate as drivers. I feel they should be ticketed at the same rate though. Granted I have no idea if they are or aren't at the moment.

The majority of cyclists in most Canadian cities who commute to and from work, do so simply because they cannot afford a car, and you want to burden them with traffic tickets? When is the last time a cyclist killed (or even injured) someone with their bike?

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

The majority of cyclists in most Canadian cities who commute to and from work, do so simply because they cannot afford a car

Source please?