Cycle Track Made Permanent

[kertejud2]

Only amendment is for cycle track team to work with Green Line project for ultimate alignment of the 12th Ave track where there may be conflict with the future Green Line alignment.

Also comes with $1.65M from existing budget to improve it.

For: Woolley, Carra, Farrell, Nenshi, Colley-Urquhart, Pincott, Chabot, Keating, Pootmans, Jones

Against: Magliocca, Chu, Demong, Sutherland

Absent: Stevenson

A 10-4 vote is more members than voted Yay on implementing the pilot project in the first place (which was an 8-7 vote). DCU was one of the people who flipped, forget who the other was.


Larry Heather is likely going to run for some sort of position in the next election so the people who feel so angered by this do have their savior moving forward.

[Sentry]

I heard they were also going to expand it? Although I may have that mixed up with the approval to "improve" it for 1.65M

[jacky4566]

Dont worry. Larry Heather has the full story. LOL.
https://twitter.com/CalgarySenate

[schocker]

Not a surprise. 12th ave still needs to be majorly fixed though. Such a mess.

[RealJimmyJames]

Can they put it underground like the green line?

[J-hop]

Originally posted by schocker
Not a surprise. 12th ave still needs to be majorly fixed though. Such a mess.

My favourite is the phantom lane change mid intersection at that one spot. Definitely easy to navigate in winter when you've never driven it before

[Sugarphreak]

...

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Sentry
I heard they were also going to expand it? Although I may have that mixed up with the approval to "improve" it for 1.65M

Yeah it's going to improvements. Changing dividers, signals, driveway entrances etc. It's the money that was saved in setting up the track in the first place, basically.




I see the city just fudged all the data they needed

People want them to collect data but don't believe it when they get it anyway. No pleasing some people.

Chu and Magliocca's independent data of the Peace Bridge to show how inflated the numbers are was also conspicuously absent.

[JfuckinC]

Worst. Council Vote. Ever.

:banghead:

Honestly Just 5th St sucks..

[Dycker]

For such an insignificant project, I'm surprised at the emotion generated on both sides.

Insignificant costs.
Insignificant traffic delays.
Insignificant bike access outside of the inner city.

Yes, 12th does suck, but most likely will be moved to 10th when all the construction slows down between 10th St and 4th St.

[Mitsu3000gt]

I literally moved because of this. The usage data is well known to be skewed and inaccurate. It appears I made the right decision.

[Quizzes]

How much more would it cost to remove the bike lanes if they voted against it? Likely more than the $1.65M improvement budget.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by Quizzes
How much more would it cost to remove the bike lanes if they voted against it? Likely more than the $1.65M improvement budget.

Probably one of the major reasons it wasn't voted to be removed.

Does anyone actually believe these weren't permanent once they were complete a year ago? Hah!

[RedDawn]

Lol at the people in here claiming the data is skewed. The bike counter data is pushed daily to a publicly accessible website that anyone can audit:

http://www.eco-public.com/ParcPublic/?id=4190

[finboy]

Originally posted by RedDawn
Lol at the people in here claiming the data is skewed. The bike counter data is pushed daily to a publicly accessible website that anyone can audit:

http://www.eco-public.com/ParcPublic/?id=4190

This is what they are referring to

https://www.google.ca/amp/calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/manning-report-criticizes-citys-methods-of-collecting-cycling-data/amp?client=safari

[flipstah]

12 ave isn't bad now as it was before. Still sucks but not as much.

[RedDawn]

Originally posted by finboy


This is what they are referring to

https://www.google.ca/amp/calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/manning-report-criticizes-citys-methods-of-collecting-cycling-data/amp?client=safari

Lol, that article is from 2014.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by RedDawn
Lol at the people in here claiming the data is skewed. The bike counter data is pushed daily to a publicly accessible website that anyone can audit:

http://www.eco-public.com/ParcPublic/?id=4190

I lived across the street from the 12th ave cycle track since it was built and there is no way their numbers are accurate on the sections I could see or the sections I walked along daily unless the majority of riders come out in the middle of the night, which I think is highly unlikely.

Also, social media would drum up all the hipsters and Nenshi lovers and organize large numbers of people to ride up and down the cycle tracks all day to heavily skew numbers and make it appear much more popular than it was when it was getting media attention.

There were numerous issues with the data, but the city never looks at that - we all know decision to keep it was made before the cycle track was even put in (this is generally true for most City decisions, not just the cycle track - the "research" and "info sessions" are just optics".

12th ave sees more than *25 times* the weekday average of cyclists in vehicle traffic every day and yet they effectively removed 3 of the 4 free flowing vehicle lanes to accommodate what amounts to a tiny fraction of users. That is beyond comprehension, especially since most cyclists continue to use 10th ave because it has no lights and ALREADY had a bike lane, or they use the sidewalk . Furthermore, when weather isn't ideal (like 4-6 months of the year in Calgary) you see ridership drop as low as UNDER TEN users on some days, but vehicle traffic remains largely the same. At the very most, this should have been a summer-only project and it should have been done on 10th ave or literally anywhere other than 11/12 avenues. If the flames are playing it can take an hour to go from 14th street to the Saddle Dome and not a single bike in sight.

[RedDawn]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


I lived across the street from the 12th ave cycle track since it was built and there is no way their numbers are accurate on the sections I could see or the sections I walked along daily unless the majority of riders come out in the middle of the night, which I think is highly unlikely.

Also, social media would drum up all the hipsters and Nenshi lovers and organize large numbers of people to ride up and down the cycle tracks all day to heavily skew numbers and make it appear much more popular than it was when it was getting media attention.

There were numerous issues with the data, but the city never looks at that - we all know decision to keep it was made before the cycle track was even put in (this is generally true for most City decisions, not just the cycle track - the "research" and "info sessions" are just optics".

12th ave sees more than *25 times* the weekday average of cyclists in vehicle traffic every day and yet they effectively removed 3 of the 4 free flowing vehicle lanes to accommodate what amounts to a tiny fraction of users. That is beyond comprehension, especially since most cyclists continue to use 10th ave because it has no lights and ALREADY had a bike lane, or they use the sidewalk . Furthermore, when weather isn't ideal (like 4-6 months of the year in Calgary) you see ridership drop as low as UNDER TEN users on some days, but vehicle traffic remains largely the same. At the very most, this should have been a summer-only project and it should have been done on 10th ave or literally anywhere other than 11/12 avenues. If the flames are playing it can take an hour to go from 14th street to the Saddle Dome and not a single bike in sight.

:rofl:

How do you explain the display they have on 5th Street showing the live count?

You can ride your bike over the counter right beside the display and watch the display update by one. Hang out there and watch other people ride over it and you'll also see it increment accordingly. At the end of the day, that number matches the one on the website.

How is that rigged or skewed?

Counter in Street View:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0445641,-114.0739199,3a,40y,27.91h,86.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU_YA8EsB8arHWEUEe0hxvA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Counter Public Webpage:
http://www.eco-public.com/public2/?id=100022541

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt

I lived across the street from the 12th ave cycle track since it was built and there is no way their numbers are accurate on the sections I could see or the sections I walked along daily unless the majority of riders come out in the middle of the night, which I think is highly unlikely.

Also, social media would drum up all the hipsters and Nenshi lovers and organize large numbers of people to ride up and down the cycle tracks all day to heavily skew numbers and make it appear much more popular than it was when it was getting media attention.


If they were just lying about the numbers why would they need to drum up people to use them all day to skew the numbers?

[Mitsu3000gt]

I don't think you read my post at all...

You're telling me you see no room for error whatsoever in a public counter easily manipulated by literally anyone who passes by? :rofl: We already know mass cycling events were regularly organized specifically with the intention of skewing the numbers, just to name one scenario.

Anyways, it's obvious you like the cycle track so you will selectively ignore all opposing information such as vehicle traffic statistics.

The decision to move from a place I liked wasn't an easy one and not something I did on a whim. I lived beside the 12th ave track since installation and spent a lot of time analyzing it. It ruined the area enough that it was easier to just leave. I lived there for 6 years before the track was put in so I am well aware of the conditions before and after. I also think everyone agrees that by far the poorest implementation of the track in the city was 12th ave, 2 blocks from an existing track which is much more popular due to there being so few stop lights, a main artery downtown, and one of the main routes to the Saddle Dome.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
I don't think you read my post at all...

You're telling me you see no room for error whatsoever in a public counter easily manipulated by literally anyone who passes by? :rofl: We already know mass cycling events were regularly organized specifically with the intention of skewing the numbers, just to name one scenario.

Anyways, it's obvious you like the cycle track so you will selectively ignore all opposing information such as vehicle traffic statistics.

What you said is that the traffic wasn't there to justify the numbers, and when the traffic was there to justify the numbers it was fake traffic.

Why would you expect anybody to take such an impossible-to-please stance seriously?


I also think everyone agrees that by far the poorest implementation of the track in the city was 12th ave, 2 blocks from an existing track which is much more popular due to there being so few stop lights, a main artery downtown, and one of the main routes to the Saddle Dome.

Yeah I looked at the 10th Ave track when I would go up and down and it was never as popular as you say it was. Your data is skewed. :rolleyes:

[RedDawn]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
I don't think you read my post at all...

You're telling me you see no room for error whatsoever in a public counter easily manipulated by literally anyone who passes by? :rofl: We already know mass cycling events were regularly organized specifically with the intention of skewing the numbers, just to name one scenario.

Anyways, it's obvious you like the cycle track so you will selectively ignore all opposing information such as vehicle traffic statistics.

The decision to move from a place I liked wasn't an easy one and not something I did on a whim. I lived beside the 12th ave track since installation and spent a lot of time analyzing it. It ruined the area enough that it was easier to just leave. I lived there for 6 years before the track was put in so I am well aware of the conditions before and after. I also think everyone agrees that by far the poorest implementation of the track in the city was 12th ave, 2 blocks from an existing track which is much more popular due to there being so few stop lights, a main artery downtown, and one of the main routes to the Saddle Dome.

So, they've been organizing mass cycling events every single day of the bike lanes existence? If you open up the cycle data webpage, the data is pretty consistent. By your logic, the only way that could be happening is because they've organized mass cycling events for ~500 days straight now. :rolleyes:

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by RedDawn


So, they've been organizing mass cycling events every single day of the bike lanes existence? If you open up the cycle data webpage, the data is pretty consistent. By your logic, the only way that could be happening is because they've organized mass cycling events for ~500 days straight now. :rolleyes:

See, you aren't reading. Nowhere did I say anything even remotely close to the words that you have chosen for me above. This is a pointless discussion.

The issue is that they took 4 free-flowing lanes and made it a single free-flowing lane to accommodate approximately 1/25th the volume compared to vehicle traffic (and that's assuming only one person in every car which is not the case), or more like 1/1000th of the volume in bad weather. That is the main problem in my opinion and the one that had a very significant, negative daily effect on the area.

Also unless you live along 12th ave and use it daily, I don't think you have any idea what I'm talking about.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


See, you aren't reading. Nowhere did I say anything even remotely close to the words that you have chosen for me above. This is a pointless discussion.


there is no way their numbers are accurate on the sections I could see or the sections I walked along daily unless the majority of riders come out in the middle of the night, which I think is highly unlikely.

and

social media would drum up all the hipsters and Nenshi lovers and organize large numbers of people to ride up and down the cycle tracks all day to heavily skew numbers

So which is it? Are the numbers only accurate if people are riding at night or are they drumming up large numbers of people to ride up and down the tracks all day?

In other words, you don't believe the numbers they are using because you don't see the people to justify them, but if you do see the people to justify them it is because they're faking it. These are your words, if you want to clear them up go right ahead.

[rx7_turbo2]

Was anyone shocked by this? I think we all knew this was a "pilot" project in name only.

I know a few people who live on 12th and none of them believe The City's numbers based on their own observations. That's anecdotal though and will always play second fiddle to the data collected by The City. I don't believe there's one clandestine entity fudging numbers and manipulating data. I do think there's a few different groups who have worked hard to make sure things have gone their way, but that's true of the supporters of any cause. My big issue is the implementation of some of these projects, and people willing to throw support behind them simply because they support the ideology behind bike ridership, regardless of how flawed the design may be.

For the record, I've personally viewed the counter tally 2 events when only one occurred. Just happened to be walking by on my way to a meeting and figured I'd stop for a moment and watch. Could be a "one off" but I got a chuckle none the less.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2


For the record, I've personally viewed the counter tally 2 events when only one occurred. Just happened to be walking by on my way to a meeting and figured I'd stop for a moment and watch. Could be a "one off" but I got a chuckle none the less.

Not a one-off. I have watched it many times on many different days and have witnessed double, and even occasional triple counts from a single event.

Like you say, it was never just a "pilot" project, I think everyone knew that. I moved before the final announcement and the outcome was exactly as expected.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Not a one-off. I have watched it many times on many different days and have witnessed double, and even occasional triple counts from a single event.

Like you say, it was never just a "pilot" project, I think everyone knew that. I moved before the final announcement and the outcome was exactly as expected.
Did you notify anyone of the discrepancy? I sent an email to my Councillor, who happens to be Sean Chu. I should have taken a video but I'm honestly kinda over it, I've always seen this project as a permanent thing that had little to no chance of being scrapped regardless. I don't live downtown and my new job very rarely sees me having to go down there so....

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2
Was anyone shocked by this? I think we all knew this was a "pilot" project in name only.

Ironically the bike groups didn't.

8-7 to implement with not super enthusiastic support from some of the suburban councilors (Chabot, Keating, and Pootmans) had people less than optimistic about it getting through unscathed. 5th was the only surefire leg.

So it getting through with just a report on 12th, with two councilors flipping. Not what people supporting the track expected at all.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Ironically the bike groups didn't.

8-7 to implement with not super enthusiastic support from some of the suburban councilors (Chabot, Keating, and Pootmans) had people less than optimistic about it getting through unscathed. 5th was the only surefire leg.

So it getting through with just a report on 12th, with two councilors flipping. Not what people supporting the track expected at all.
Drivers felt the writing was on the wall. Cyclists felt if they wanted it to be permanent they'd have to work for it, I guess it's like everything depends on what side you found yourself on.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

Did you notify anyone of the discrepancy? I sent an email to my Councillor, who happens to be Sean Chu. I should have taken a video but I'm honestly kinda over it, I've always seen this project as a permanent thing that had little to no chance of being scrapped regardless. I don't live downtown and my new job very rarely sees me having to go down there so....

No, I firmly believe it would have been a complete waste of time and we all know any investigation would have just been for optics. I think no matter what the ridership numbers show they city would leave it in place.

I don't live in the Beltline on 12th ave anymore so it doesn't affect me nearly as much, but it was truly awful and the reason I left.

I fully support bike lanes in general, just not the way many of them have been implemented, negatively affecting over 95% of that road's traffic to keep under 5% happy and only when the weather is ideal for riding.

[RY213]

I drive 12th Ave every day in the morning and never had any issues with the flow of traffic. Seems to me a lot of people are just upset with any kind of change. The bike lanes are fantastic for people living in the core.

[msommers]

Originally posted by RY213
I drive 12th Ave every day in the morning and never had any issues with the flow of traffic. Seems to me a lot of people are just upset with any kind of change. The bike lanes are fantastic for people living in the core.

You drive AND you aren't bothered?! You dirty Communist!

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by RY213
I drive 12th Ave every day in the morning and never had any issues with the flow of traffic. Seems to me a lot of people are just upset with any kind of change. The bike lanes are fantastic for people living in the core.

That's crap 12th is a cluster fuck every morning. Between the random lane jogs, the random parked cars which drop the road to a single lane and the fact that turning left is sketch as fuck in and out of driveways due to parked cars/trucks next to the cycle track being taller than cyclists...

I live on 12th and bike downtown it's such a epic shit show of fail. Whole thing should have been scrapped and moved to either 10th or 13th. Instead we got this half assed retard solution.

[Type_S1]

Don't argue with the bike guy. He either works directly for the city on these projects or is leading an extremist peddle bike group. Either way the guy ignores logical arguments against bike lanes because he is an extremist when it comes to the topic.

As other posters said, this was never a pilot project....these things were here to stay and Nenshi et. Al. once again are pandering to their own ideological beliefs instead of what the majority of citizens want in the city. The next step will be banning cars in the core....

[know1edge]

.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

Drivers felt the writing was on the wall. Cyclists felt if they wanted it to be permanent they'd have to work for it, I guess it's like everything depends on what side you found yourself on.

I've said it before, that it can't possibly matter as much as the drivers have been whining about if they didn't do anything.

Again, it was a shaky 8-7 that was based around making the track network smaller vote that managed to turn into a 10-4 vote without changes when the data was presented and councilors dealt with their constituents. Despite affecting 'over 95% of traffic negatively' these councilors apparently care more about ideology (in some cases that they didn't even have the first time) than re-election. I guess we have some pretty unique politicians in this city (or very few that plan on running again).

[BMDUBS]

Plain old idiocy is what this is. I agree with the sentiment that this was never a pilot project.The construction of this was far too elaborate to be a pilot. The link to the Manning center report goes to show how blatantly this was pushed through. It actually disgusts me.

I can give two shits about the incompetent Councillors that voted for this or flipped.This project defies logic and ignores the greater good. That is what bothers me about this the most.

I strongly disagree with the majority having to accommodate the minority for this project and all other situations where minority or special interest groups get precedence. I believe it needs to be the other way around where majority rules. I no longer live in the core so this doesn't directly effect me but I lived for 28 years in this area and rode my bike all around these areas without issue on the existing roads sharing the lanes drivers.

We are a winter City for fuck sakes where it is too cold to ride more often than not. Sickens me that projects like this get pushed through and shoved down our throats on the tax payers dollars.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by RY213
I drive 12th Ave every day in the morning and never had any issues with the flow of traffic. Seems to me a lot of people are just upset with any kind of change. The bike lanes are fantastic for people living in the core.

Yes it's fine if you drive it every day and have memorized which lane jogs, which lane turns into a left turn only and at what time. But the one or two people in your group of traffic that don't know end up snarling the rest of traffic making for a really inefficient route.

When you design efficient roads you need to go in with the mindset that every driver is driving the road for the first time and make decisions and signage based on this idea NOT with the mindset that people will eventually get it.

I drive that road every couple of weeks, I know which lane to be in and when. But every time I drive it I just shake my head. If it's your first time driving it and snow is covering the lane markings it will be an absolute nightmare.

At least in the short term this has definitely caused a negative environmental impact...

[JfuckinC]

Originally posted by kertejud2


I've said it before, that it can't possibly matter as much as the drivers have been whining about if they didn't do anything.


Or it's the same reason we don't bike to work, we don't have the time/are lazy :rofl:

[Type_S1]

I'm 50/50 that the bike dude on this forum is Agustin Louro, the president of the Calgary Bike club or directly involved with the project and working for the COC.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
I've said it before, that it can't possibly matter as much as the drivers have been whining about if they didn't do anything.

Again, it was a shaky 8-7 that was based around making the track network smaller vote that managed to turn into a 10-4 vote without changes when the data was presented and councilors dealt with their constituents. Despite affecting 'over 95% of traffic negatively' these councilors apparently care more about ideology (in some cases that they didn't even have the first time) than re-election. I guess we have some pretty unique politicians in this city (or very few that plan on running again).
I said my beef was with people who supported this infrastructure out of ideology regardless of how poorly it's implemented. I didn't say anything about Councillors disregarding the opinion of the voting populace in favour of an ideology :dunno:

I think the bike lobby and cycletrack supporters were extremely vocal. I also think vehicle operators were not, as you suggested. I think this has to do with the "it's a done deal" mentality. You said cyclists and the track supporters felt this was anything but a done deal, so they got out and organized and became very vocal. As I mentioned I think motorists felt the writing was on the wall and took a "what's the point" position.

[thetransporter]

i seen cyclists with a gasoline motor attached to their bikes in the bike lane. so it sort of seems like a lane for hybrid vehicles.

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1CsasIXXXXXbUXFXXq6xXFXXXs/-Ship-from-US-font-b-Motorized-b-font-font-b-Bicycle-b-font-Bike-80cc.jpg

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by thetransporter
i seen cyclists with a gasoline motor attached to their bikes in the bike lane. so it sort of seems like a lane for hybrid vehicles.
I've seen a homeless guy pushing one shopping cart while pulling another in the Northland Drive cycle lanes :rofl:

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

I said my beef was with people who supported this infrastructure out of ideology regardless of how poorly it's implemented. I didn't say anything about Councillors disregarding the opinion of the voting populace in favour of an ideology :dunno:


Why would councilors pick ideology over the will of the voting populace?

[dirtsniffer]

:rofl: :rofl:

Have you looked at the province lately

[RealJimmyJames]

Originally posted by J-hop


Yes it's fine if you drive it every day and have memorized which lane jogs, which lane turns into a left turn only and at what time. But the one or two people in your group of traffic that don't know end up snarling the rest of traffic making for a really inefficient route.

When you design efficient roads you need to go in with the mindset that every driver is driving the road for the first time and make decisions and signage based on this idea NOT with the mindset that people will eventually get it.

I drive that road every couple of weeks, I know which lane to be in and when. But every time I drive it I just shake my head. If it's your first time driving it and snow is covering the lane markings it will be an absolute nightmare.

At least in the short term this has definitely caused a negative environmental impact... Traffic Expert has spoken.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Why would councilors pick ideology over the will of the voting populace?
They wouldn't, certainly not in an election year. Did I claim otherwise :dunno:

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


That's crap 12th is a cluster fuck every morning. Between the random lane jogs, the random parked cars which drop the road to a single lane and the fact that turning left is sketch as fuck in and out of driveways due to parked cars/trucks next to the cycle track being taller than cyclists...

I live on 12th and bike downtown it's such a epic shit show of fail. Whole thing should have been scrapped and moved to either 10th or 13th. Instead we got this half assed retard solution.

^^ Funny how the only people who say it isn't bad don't actually live there.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

They wouldn't, certainly not in an election year. Did I claim otherwise :dunno:

Why else would you think the cycle track was a 'done deal' when it was implemented?





On a related note, people will be happy to know that a lot of the $1.6M will go to tweaking 12th Ave. They would have made changes sooner but because of the uncertainty of the future of the track it was decided to not spend any money on continued changes in the latter half of the project.

[thetransporter]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

I've seen a homeless guy pushing one shopping cart while pulling another in the Northland Drive cycle lanes :rofl:

best post.
i can imagine the faces of residents

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Why else would you think the cycle track was a 'done deal' when it was implemented?
Why do you think other people viewed it as a done deal?

Originally posted by thetransporter
best post.
i can imagine the faces of residents
There isn't a whole lot of residents down that stretch, couple of schools and a church. Out of all the cycle infrastructure that stretch might be the most useless in the whole city, I've also seen an older Asian man pushing a child stroller full of cans and bottles.

[rage2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2
I've seen a homeless guy pushing one shopping cart while pulling another in the Northland Drive cycle lanes :rofl:
I spent 1/2 an hour fixing my bike on the Northland Drive bike lane and didn't block anyone. My old review:

http://forums.beyond.ca/st2/northland-drive-cycle-track-bike-lane/showthread.php?s=&postid=4456541#post4456541


Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
^^ Funny how the only people who say it isn't bad don't actually live there.
I don't live there and it's terrible. Since the bike lanes, I haven't really frequented any businesses south of 9th Ave. Coupled with the 8th street underpass construction, the terrible light timing of intersections that hits cycle tracks, it was just too inconvenient to drive to/from that side of downtown.

We've pretty much moved all our lunches to Chinatown or Kensington, which says a lot considering how shitty both areas are in terms of traffic and parking. Bitching hasn't worked. Letters hasn't worked. Twitter hasn't worked. It's a done deal and we're getting ignored like Trump supporters. Only other thing to do is just to adjust, move away, and vote elsewhere with our money. Northland Mall? I haven't been there since they added the concrete barriers separating the cars. Is that Best Buy still alive?

One thing I couldn't get away from is how busy 9th and 10th Ave is in the evening rush hours now that many people stopped using 12th Ave and moved onto these 2 roads. It's not as brutal as 12th Ave, but it certainly has added 5-10 mins of commute time to the Saddledome on game nights. 12th ave to the Dome? You're missing puck drop haha.

[flipstah]

12 Ave past Safeway is a bitch. Hence I turn left before it and go to 10th.

I live on the damn route. :rofl:

[ercchry]

it took me over 25min to get from bankview to the dome last friday at ~6:30pm using 12th ave... its a complete shitshow

[RY213]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


That's crap 12th is a cluster fuck every morning. Between the random lane jogs, the random parked cars which drop the road to a single lane and the fact that turning left is sketch as fuck in and out of driveways due to parked cars/trucks next to the cycle track being taller than cyclists...

I live on 12th and bike downtown it's such a epic shit show of fail. Whole thing should have been scrapped and moved to either 10th or 13th. Instead we got this half assed retard solution.

No, I just know how to drive and look further ahead than what is right in front of me.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

Why do you think other people viewed it as a done deal?

Because it was more appealing to think it was a done deal so they could continue to bitch and whine without having to do anything about it (because they're lazy, I guess)?

There's a reason I'm asking you.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
There's a reason I'm asking you.
I know.

It's your standard operating procedure. You play "all around the mulberry bush" answering people's questions with questions until you get to the point you feel you have them in a position where the topic benefits your expertise and not theirs :rolleyes:

You're on my ignore list, I figured with the latest news on this topic you might have some insight from the other side of the issue so I read your posts. It quickly turned out to be the same merry-go-round as always. If you have something earth shattering to drop on us that will completely own me just do it already.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

I know.

It's your standard operating procedure. You play "all around the mulberry bush" answering people's questions with questions until you get to the point you feel you have them in a position where the topic benefits your expertise and not theirs :rolleyes:

You're on my ignore list, I figured with the latest news on this topic you might have some insight from the other side of the issue so I read your posts. It quickly turned out to be the same merry-go-round as always. If you have something earth shattering to drop on us that will completely own me just do it already.

I think he's on a lot of ignore lists. He's been on mine for ages. I occasionally see snippets of comments from other people quoting him and it's the same-old predictable pattern (exactly as you describe). You're wasting your time engaging him, doesn't matter what you say you get the same regurgitated responses.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

I know.

It's your standard operating procedure. You play "all around the mulberry bush" answering people's questions with questions until you get to the point you feel you have them in a position where the topic benefits your expertise and not theirs :rolleyes:


Ignore list be damned. I asked the question because I honestly don't know why you would think the cycle track was a done deal when the cycle lobby didn't. You couldn't answer and still haven't.

You did a very good job at explaining that the cycle lobby did what they do after I gave you their perspective, but didn't provide anything beyond that. Particularly to the question I asked.

8-7 vote in a car mad city, a vote that only got to 8 by trimming down what the pilot project would have to win a couple suburban councilors, and the vote to keep it right before an election year.

So again, because you haven't answered it, what did you see that the cycle lobby didn't? Why did you think it was always a done deal? Is the cycle lobby completely off base in their efforts and just wasting energy fighting a battle they won over a year ago?

But I get why you don't like me asking questions. You need to know something, anything, to answer a question.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
...
Yes, no, maybe, could be, it's possible, true, false.

Just pick the response you're looking for, revel in your superiority and we'll go back to the way things were when I wasn't reading your posts. No matter what answer I give you'll respond with some question trying to lead the conversation down whatever rabbit hole you think will give you the best chance of feeling like you won whatever game it is you're playing.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2

Yes, no, maybe, could be, it's possible, true, false.

Just pick the response you're looking for, revel in your superiority and we'll go back to the way things were when I wasn't reading your posts. No matter what answer I give you'll respond with some question trying to lead the conversation down whatever rabbit hole you think will give you the best chance of feeling like you won whatever game it is you're playing.

Me and the underemployed hipsters will certainly revel as we continue to just bike around the track in a constant loop all day to boost the numbers, all without being seen.

[Xtrema]

I vote for 12 Ave bike lane but with rush hour parking restriction similar to 5th ave and fix that damn lane jog at the school.

It quite a good route.

As for the green line, I think it should be located on 10th so it has the least impact on businesses. There ware very few shops east of 2nd St. SW.

But if it does go on 12th, at least it give Beltliner some credence.

Rush hours driving have not been fun in Calgary for a decade or more now. I enjoy riding bike in good weather whenever possible. And in reality, it's actually faster than public transit for me and I have to ride 20km with 300m elevation through out.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Me and the underemployed hipsters will certainly revel as we continue to just bike around the track in a constant loop all day to boost the numbers, all without being seen.
See, was that so tough? You won, you should have just started gloating from the beginning :thumbsup:

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by RY213
No, I just know how to drive and look further ahead than what is right in front of me.

:facepalm: You must also have a flying car that flies over the fucked up traffic because the whole road goes from 3 lanes down to 1 because some guy is parked. What do I know though? I live on the damn street and have to drive that shit show multiple times a day. :rolleyes:

v
Originally posted by Xtrema
I vote for 12 Ave bike lane but with rush hour parking restriction similar to 5th ave and fix that damn lane jog at the school.

That's already the case dude there's rush hour parking restrictions and people being towed every morning... The problem is people leave their cars in the way or decide to throw the hazards on in rush hour and drop the whole damn road down to a single lane. They need to remove parking completely on the whole road if they really want to fix the mess they made. That or move the damn bike lane to 10th or 13th. My personal favorite is the city garbage truck picking up garbage parked in the right lane. Completely fucks traffic...

[J-hop]

Originally posted by kertejud2



Ignore list be damned. I asked the question because I honestly don't know why you would think the cycle track was a done deal when the cycle lobby didn't. You couldn't answer and still haven't.

You did a very good job at explaining that the cycle lobby did what they do after I gave you their perspective, but didn't provide anything beyond that. Particularly to the question I asked.

8-7 vote in a car mad city, a vote that only got to 8 by trimming down what the pilot project would have to win a couple suburban councilors, and the vote to keep it right before an election year.

So again, because you haven't answered it, what did you see that the cycle lobby didn't? Why did you think it was always a done deal? Is the cycle lobby completely off base in their efforts and just wasting energy fighting a battle they won over a year ago?

But I get why you don't like me asking questions. You need to know something, anything, to answer a question.

How could the lobby not have seen it was a done deal? Are they daft? The amount of money sunk into it right off the bat and the amount of semi-permanent to permanent features would have made it a moronic choice to reverse even for the people most opposed to it.

What pisses me off is most of the people I talk to that think it's a great idea aren't even serious commuters. They commute 15-20minutes by bike. They can't understand why the rest of Calgary doesn't bike. Well most people (myself included) can't afford to live close enough to make biking an intelligent choice of transportation. I've been biking in an average of 3 days a week for the last 3 months, I have over a 20km ride one way. I'd say I'm a serious commuter logging more in one day than most do in an entire week. I don't believe it's an intelligent way to commute around our city and the only reason I'm doing it is to get in shape. Until inner city becomes cheaper to live trying to make the city bike friendly is silly.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by J-hop


How could the lobby not have seen it was a done deal? Are they daft? The amount of money sunk into it right off the bat and the amount of semi-permanent to permanent features would have made it a moronic choice to reverse even for the people most opposed to it.

Sunk costs don't matter if it is a re-election issue for councilors. Especially when the sunk costs are under $6M for a department with a $1.4B capital budget.

It is a pretty insignificant amount of money in the grand scheme, but it still required giving up parts of the pilot project to sell it to the bare minimum of councilors. The committee gave no recommendation to council heading into the vote, and three Yes councilors have high numbers of car driving constituents and their support was generally shaky (Chabot, Pootmans, and Keating) so people were more worried about what they would do mostly because Colley-Urquhart and Jones hadn't given any real indication they would be flipping without any changes to the track. It's an environment where support for a $5B provincially funded road and the hundreds of millions it will cost the city to connect to it gets unwavering support, but a $25M provincially funded pedestrian bridge with a $7M cycle track is a giant waste of money and the reason our taxes are going up. You have papers and their readers trying to ram home this sentiment whenever they could.

That is why they didn't see it as a done deal.


What pisses me off is most of the people I talk to that think it's a great idea aren't even serious commuters. They commute 15-20minutes by bike.

So? That's still their commute. You could be a 15-20 minute walk from where you need to go, doesn't mean you don't want decent sidewalks. 20 minute driving commutes haven't stopped us from building roads everywhere.

20 minutes on a bike covers a lot of population in this city, and that is without good cycling infrastructure in most of it. Build better bike infrastructure all over the inner city and that 20 minute radius grows. But the cycle tracks aren't just about commuting either. It is about lifestyle options. The Beltline is full of people who don't just want to bike to work, but they want to bike as part of their daily activities. To the grocery store, to the bar, to wherever they want. It's all apart of the goal of making palces that people work and live, not just work or live. The businesses that all supported the track are the ones you see with full bike racks outside throughout the summer, in the fall and spring, and a lot of other times.



They can't understand why the rest of Calgary doesn't bike. Well most people (myself included) can't afford to live close enough to make biking an intelligent choice of transportation.

There are plenty of cheap options in the inner city if that's the lifestyle you want to live. Sure buying a house isn't cheap, but the city isn't made up of homebuyers, or people who want to buy houses (or condos) yet, or ever. Biking doesn't have to be for everybody, but any good city provides real choice in transportation options for people, biking is one of them.

The only way to make Calgary's growth and operation more sustainable is to increase inner city density, and the way to make that cheaper is to not focus transportation infrastructure around the car. The infill communities become more and more attractive and affordable if you actually have the choice to realistically go without a car and the costs associated with it.


I don't believe it's an intelligent way to commute around our city and the only reason I'm doing it is to get in shape. Until inner city becomes cheaper to live trying to make the city bike friendly is silly.

One look at Deerfoot during morning rush hour and people could say the same thing about driving. But the key thing to remember is that by promoting cheaper forms of transportation, it will make the inner city cheaper to live.

[rx7_turbo2]

^ What did I say?

3 pages worth of fishing till someone "bit" :rofl:
I bet it felt good to get out Kert, it's been sitting in there for awhile ;)

[J-hop]

lol, his responses are long but don't make much sense unless you have a very unique situation and a very unique outlook on the world.

No, there aren't cheap options in inner city that would support more than a single person looking to rent (very small portion of the population).

No cheaper transportation will not make inner city cheaper to buy that doesn't make sense.

No sunk costs actually do matter, especially if you care about where your tax dollars go and aren't a goldfish who's already forgotten.

No someone who had a 20 minute ride that is now 15 minutes because of the bike lanes is not an intelligent reason to spend 6 million.

We live in a city, we should be funding projects that make sense for the average person. Not the single guy renting who works in an office downtown and lives close enough he doesn't even have to break a sweat on his bike to get there.

[rage2]

Originally posted by J-hop
No someone who had a 20 minute ride that is now 15 minutes because of the bike lanes is not an intelligent reason to spend 6 million.
Cycle tracks do not speed up a bike commute. In fact, for the majority of riders, if they detoured their fastest routes and used the cycle track, it would be slower, and longer distance.

The point of the cycle tracks is to promote safe spaces for weak minded cyclists. :rofl:

[ercchry]

Cycle tracks are for drunk hipsters to use for pub crawls... or drunk people to be moved around by a hipster with a carriage attached to his bike... and of course this is only for 4-6 months of the year

[J-hop]

Originally posted by rage2

Cycle tracks do not speed up a bike commute. In fact, for the majority of riders, if they detoured their fastest routes and used the cycle track, it would be slower, and longer distance.

The point of the cycle tracks is to promote safe spaces for weak minded cyclists. :rofl:

Haha no doubt. But from my experience both as a driver on 12th occasionally and a cyclist the bike lanes have made it so cyclists can just fly through the intersections without looking because they have that little bike light that apparently makes them invincible to 3000+ pound moving metal objects.

Thankfully they are barely used during rush hour or I think'd we'd see a lot more bike/car "interactions"

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by J-hop

No, there aren't cheap options in inner city that would support more than a single person looking to rent (very small portion of the population).

Over 30% of the city describe themselves as 'living alone' or are couples without kids. That's not a very small number. That's Saskatoon.


No cheaper transportation will not make inner city cheaper to buy that doesn't make sense.

Greater transportation options allow for zoning requirements to change such as parking minimums. When the ability to change transportation options allows for demand for buildings without parking, the price of units goes down. The amount of density that can be achieved goes up, the living options increase, etc. It can also provide the realistic option to not own a car, which makes things significantly more expensive if it something you don't want to have.


No sunk costs actually do matter, especially if you care about where your tax dollars go and aren't a goldfish who's already forgotten.

Well yes. Sunk costs CAN matter. Since they seemed to in this case just shows how out to lunch some people are with how much the project costs compared to how much we spend on transportation.

If the political will is there you can scrap anything, regardless of the costs. If drivers felt not spending another $6M to get rid of their overwhelming source of pain and despair on their commute was too much, then that's what the political will is. Really it just shows how little it really mattered and the reports were right: car commute times weren't all that affected.


No someone who had a 20 minute ride that is now 15 minutes because of the bike lanes is not an intelligent reason to spend 6 million.

But that isn't the point, spending 0.5% of the transportation budget on a mode of transportation that 1.7% of the population uses IS an intelligent reason to spend $6M, especially when it increases that usage number.


We live in a city, we should be funding projects that make sense for the average person. Not the single guy renting who works in an office downtown and lives close enough he doesn't even have to break a sweat on his bike to get there.

Well the average person going downtown is doing so on a train or a bus. These are important to fund as well since they move the most people but the multi-billion dollar Green Line, or the 4th St BRT, or the SW BRT aren't going to pass or fail because $6M was diverted to bicycles. It is also important to give options to the non-average people because that makes the average trips better.

Imagine if all the cyclists decided they should just drive or take transit. That's almost 2000 more cars heading downtown (think what that would do for parking demand and cost, never mind commute times). 2.5 full trains ($30M), or 20 full buses ($8M). How does that make the average commute better for anybody and how is that better for the taxpayer? The city has already spent $8.5M to improve pedestrian infrastructure for the underpasses of the CPR tracks to help with the demand created from the ever growing Beltline and the people walking instead. It costs less to move a pedestrian and a cyclist than it does somebody on transit, so any time you can convert somebody from a transit user to a cyclist you're benefiting the average person, just like converting a driver to a transit user is a benefit to the average person.

Money does get spent on the average person. But you'd have to be a complete moron to think that's the only place money should be spent on.

[J-hop]

So 1.7% of the population get to decide the future of main arteries into downtown?

Ridership on public transit is WAY down and will be down for a few more years. A good portion of that 1.7% probably would bike regardless of there being a bike lane so I don't see a huge stress being put on transit or road like you say. With ridership being down on transit so are monthly pass revenues. Silly way to look at it but each cyclist who would otherwise purchase a monthly pass for the bus now is decreasing direct funding for transit which IMO is a much better place to be directing our funds as it at least brings some cash flow in where as bike lanes are nothing more than a drain on city resources.

The numbers simply aren't adding up from what I can see.

In economic times like this spreading or funds to projects that don't bring income to the city only do the average person more harm.


Edit: the nice thing about transit is although everyone pays for it with their taxes the people that use it are impacted more than those that don't as they have to help fund it with their monthly pass purchases. With bike lanes the people that don't use it have to pay as much as the people that do, how is that fair?? (for a non-essential service)

[SCHIDER23]

https://media.giphy.com/media/I1W5bIFPfVijm/giphy.gif
Originally posted by kertejud2




One look at Deerfoot during morning rush hour and people could say the same thing about driving. But the key thing to remember is that by promoting cheaper forms of transportation, it will make the inner city cheaper to live.

[Type_S1]

Stop feeding the troll. This loser bike guy has a financial incentive to keep pushing his agenda and does not listen to common sense or logic. Its like trying to converse with a tickle me elmo.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by J-hop
So 1.7% of the population get to decide the future of main arteries into downtown?

Apparently $6M in sunk cost gets to decide the future of main arteries into downtown.

Though to be pedantic 5th St only goes into downtown if you're on a bicycle



Ridership on public transit is WAY down and will be down for a few more years. A good portion of that 1.7% probably would bike regardless of there being a bike lane so I don't see a huge stress being put on transit or road like you say. With ridership being down on transit so are monthly pass revenues. Silly way to look at it but each cyclist who would otherwise purchase a monthly pass for the bus now is decreasing direct funding for transit which IMO is a much better place to be directing our funds as it at least brings some cash flow in where as bike lanes are nothing more than a drain on city resources.

You do realize that transit doesn't actually make money. It's a subsidized service. just like how gas taxes don't actually cover the cost of funding the roads. Over a hundred million dollars still goes to the operation of transit despite the user fees associated with it, and thankfully nobody is expected to have their user fees cover the capital costs of it all.





In economic times like this spreading or funds to projects that don't bring income to the city only do the average person more harm.

What you're saying is that you only want our tax dollars to go to user-fee based projects, thus hitting them again, when they are in hard economic times. How does this make sense?




Edit: the nice thing about transit is although everyone pays for it with their taxes the people that use it are impacted more than those that don't as they have to help fund it with their monthly pass purchases. With bike lanes the people that don't use it have to pay as much as the people that do, how is that fair?? (for a non-essential service)

Because it costs a whole lot less to support a cycle user than it does the other modes that the cost doesn't need to be further subsidized to justify operation. If the cost to support each user ever becomes the same, charging bike tolls, congestion fees and whatever else to make things 'fair' might have some merit.

[J-hop]

Guys are out in full force today clearing snow on the bike lanes. I wonder what the city spends each year on snow removal for these lanes?

Edit: looking at Saskatoon as a reference they estimate 10k/block per year. I don't know how long a block in Calgary compared to sask but I'll assume they are both about 100meters. I think we have 27kms of bike lanes in downtown? So 2.7 million a year for snow removal? The gift that keeps on givinng


Double edit: don't know where I got 27, now I'm finding only 6.5? Still, 650k/year

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Because it costs a whole lot less to support a cycle user than it does the other modes that the cost doesn't need to be further subsidized to justify operation. If the cost to support each user ever becomes the same, charging bike tolls, congestion fees and whatever else to make things 'fair' might have some merit.

:facepalm: Only if you're doing crooked accounting. Guess those roads and bridge oh so conveniently taken over by the bike lane over don't get calculated into the cost. No of course not because there's no point being honest and having proper numbers when one is trying to push a misguided agenda.

Guess we should also start taking away the sidewalks to force people into biking because it's "cheaper". :facepalm:

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by kertejud2


But that isn't the point, spending 0.5% of the transportation budget on a mode of transportation that 1.7% of the population uses IS an intelligent reason to spend $6M, especially when it increases that usage number.

Is that in reference to people riding bikes? Because there is NO WAY IN FUCKING HELL 2% of Calgarians bike on a somewhat DAILY basis.

That number probably includes people who biked for one week of the year and realized how stupid it was :nut:

[J-hop]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Is that in reference to people riding bikes? Because there is NO WAY IN FUCKING HELL 2% of Calgarians bike on a somewhat DAILY basis.

That number probably includes people who biked for one week of the year and realized how stupid it was :nut:

Yea I wondered how they got those numbers. Also did they apply a factor for people returning home after work on work days. If they didn't take that into consideration they are inflating numbers by almost twice....

They appear to be accounting for direction in some areas but are they reporting one direction numbers in their usage or total count? Single direction will be much closer to the accurate number.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


:facepalm: Only if you're doing crooked accounting. Guess those roads and bridge oh so conveniently taken over by the bike lane over don't get calculated into the cost. No of course not because there's no point being honest and having proper numbers when one is trying to push a misguided agenda.

Guess we should also start taking away the sidewalks to force people into biking because it's "cheaper". :facepalm:

Pedestrian infrastructure is better bang for the buck than cycling as weall. And all those transit users need to walk from their stops to their destinations so it's a lot of people that it supports.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by J-hop


Yea I wondered how they got those numbers. Also did they apply a factor for people returning home after work on work days. If they didn't take that into consideration they are inflating numbers by almost twice....

They appear to be accounting for direction in some areas but are they reporting one direction numbers in their usage or total count? Single direction will be much closer to the accurate number.

It's just the census data. Mode of transportation to work just asks people how they commute to work. Trips and cordon counts are something else entirely. Commuter share into downtown for work is also something different. If you want commuter share you take direction and time of day into account, if you want to know pure usage you take total counts, etc.

[RY213]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2


It's your standard operating procedure. You play "all around the mulberry bush" answering people's questions with questions until you get to the point you feel you have them in a position where the topic benefits your expertise and not theirs :rolleyes:

You're on my ignore list, I figured with the latest news on this topic you might have some insight from the other side of the issue so I read your posts. It quickly turned out to be the same merry-go-round as always. If you have something earth shattering to drop on us that will completely own me just do it already.

This is the funniest thing ive read on here all week. You must be a sensitive lame dude in real life. Kertejud brings up great pro biking arguments that you cant dispute so you get all butt hurt. You probably had teary eyes when you wrote that...

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by RY213
This is the funniest thing ive read on here all week. You must be a sensitive lame dude in real life. Kertejud brings up great pro biking arguments that you cant dispute so you get all butt hurt. You probably had teary eyes when you wrote that...
Sensitive lame dude. I'll take that :thumbsup: