07-10-2018, 01:04 PM
(07-10-2018, 12:35 PM)Chicopee Wrote:(07-10-2018, 12:39 AM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Good post on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/kitchener/comme...ling_on_a/
Good post indeed, and some useful dialogue as well.
I don't understand the logic of taking a road (Guelph Street in this case) identified as a priority cycling route, narrowing it, and posting signs for everyone to share the road. Instead of narrowing, why not create a proper bike lane with that space?
Iirc, aren't there designated bike lanes on Union between Lancaster and Breithaupt bush? I'm just trying to figure out why the approach by the city is so inconsistent around the design of these streets.
Every road does deserve individual consideration, I don't necessarily think it's inconsistent, to apply different tools in different contexts.
Shared roads are totally reasonable for cyclists to use, this is in fact the most common bike infrastructure in the Netherlands.
The problem is, that we're generally unwilling to build sharable roads. Narrowing is the right idea, but something more like 2.8 meters per lane, or less, and with substantial optical narrowing, where the edges have for example, cobbles. A road with low traffic, could even be only 1 lane with turnouts for passing. But our traffic engineers are lightyears away from being willing to build such a road--you can see, they weren't even allowed to use vertical diversions.
The latest BicycleDutch article has a great example of this:
https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com...lpad02.jpg
(Article here: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/...ly-opened/)
The colour, narrowness, vertical diversions, and wide gutters, make drivers slow and share the road safely.
They work great in residential areas, sometimes even get away without sidewalks, and are much safer for the residents of the road.
I don't think KW has more than one or two roads that would even qualify here (Market Ln. is close). Until we're willing to build such roads, I don't think sharing is a real option here.