Special Report: Cycling

Next Steps for Cannon Cycle Track

The two-way cycle track officially opened last Friday, but work continues on installing the finishing touches and monitoring potential issues.

By Ryan McGreal
Published September 17, 2014

The Cannon Street Cycle Track officially opened last Friday at noon, but work continues on installing the finishing touches for the three-kilometre protected two-way cycle track.

Councillor Jason Farr, Councillor Bob Morrow, Mayor Bob Bratina and Yes We Cannon organizer Justin Jones cutting the ribbon
Councillor Jason Farr, Councillor Bob Morrow, Mayor Bob Bratina and Yes We Cannon organizer Justin Jones cutting the ribbon

City staff worked hard to get the cycle track ready to open in time for last weekend's Supercrawl festival, but some work remains to install additional signs and markings.

Physical Protection

Running between Sherman Avenue and Hess Street, the Cannon Cycle Track is physically protected from automobile traffic by a combination of knockdown bollards, hard rubber curbing and planter boxes.

Hard rubber curbing on the Cannon Cycle Track west of Victoria
Hard rubber curbing on the Cannon Cycle Track west of Victoria

Planter boxes protecting the Cannon Cycle Track
Planter boxes protecting the Cannon Cycle Track

The 30 planter boxes that were installed are particularly nice as physical barriers. They're thick, solid, raised above the road and look attractive with greenery.

Unfortunately, the city does not currently plan to install any more planter boxes just now. However, this is a three-year pilot and staff will "continue to review whether more are needed," according to Public Works communications manager Kelly Anderson in an email response to RTH.

Cyclist riding past the Canon Cycle Track planter boxes (Image Credit: Jason Leach)
Cyclist riding past the Canon Cycle Track planter boxes (Image Credit: Jason Leach)

According to Anderson, "As this is a pilot project, we will be measuring and observing a number of factors including travel times (motorists, cyclists and transit to determine any impacts), parking, collisions, impacts to waste/recycling collection, impacts on road maintenance, winter control activities, damage to the buffers (planters, knock-down sticks and curbs) and a general survey (users'/residents' comments) of the bi-directional Cycle Track for Council's consideration."

Some areas might need additional knockdown bollards and rubber curbs to prevent automobiles from illegally parking in the cycle track. Yesterday, Beasley resident John Neary took a photo of a tow truck parked illegally on the cycle track near John Street.

Tow truck illegally parked in the Cannon cycle track (Image Credit: John Neary)
Tow truck illegally parked in the Cannon cycle track (Image Credit: John Neary/Twitter)

Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr confirmed that parking in the cycle track is not permitted and asked staff "to visit the location and see if enhancement [is] needed."

Intersection Conflict Zones

Another issue is the question of whether the cycle track pavement markings will extend through intersections, where the potential for left-turning cars crossing the path of cyclists creates a dangerous conflict area.

It is generally considered a best practice to continue cycle track markings across the intersection to raise the visibility of the cycle track and reduce the risk of collisions. According to the City, "We are reviewing the completed installation and operations to see if any additional pavement markings are to be added."

Painted conflict zone on a two-way cycle path in Winterthur, Switzerland (Image Credit: US Federal Highway Administration Office of International Programs)
Painted conflict zone on a two-way cycle path in Winterthur, Switzerland (Image Credit: US Federal Highway Administration Office of International Programs)

Anderson wrote, "We want to ensure that we provide the right amount of information to both motorists and cyclists. In short, something will happen at the intersections. What exactly this is will be determined shortly."

Cycling Volumes and Automobile Flow

The City plans to install "permanent cycling counters that will continuously record riders" as part of the pilot. Unfortunately, there were no bicycle traffic counts before the cycle track was installed to provide a baseline. Anderson wrote, "Based on past observations, much of the bicycle traffic on this segment of Cannon has been observed to be riding on the sidewalks."

This is not surprising, since automobile traffic moved at dangerous, frightening speeds on Cannon and Cannon was only one-way westbound before the cycle track was installed.

The cycle track already seems to have reduced dangerous speeding on Cannon. Anecdotally, several drivers have reported that Cannon feels safer to drive on because traffic moves at a more reasonable 40-50 km/h.

One issue I have observed is that cars moving below 50 km/h are getting stuck behind red lights, causing them to back up.

The traffic lights are sequenced to provide a "green wave" for cars, which worked great when cars were cruising along at 50-60 km/h. It is worth revisiting the timing to match the lower average speed of automobile traffic, but so far, that hasn't happened. As with other issues, this may be reviewed over the course of the three-year pilot.

I hope they also consider eliminating the 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM parking restrictions on the north curb lane west of Victoria.

Not only does the decision to keep the north curb as a rush hour lane eliminate all-day curbside parking for local use, but also it means automobile traffic is racing just inches away from pedestrians on the north sidewalk.

In addition, it means the space buffer between the cycle track and the adjacent automobile lane is too narrow for additional planter boxes.

The reason staff gave for maintaining rush-hour traffic on three lanes west of Victoria is that reducing it to two lanes would introduce an unacceptable delay for the Cannon bus. It's hard to imagine that there was nothing HSR staff could do to accommodate a couple of hours a day when traffic volumes are heavier than usual.

Ryan McGreal, the editor of Raise the Hammer, lives in Hamilton with his family and works as a programmer, writer and consultant. Ryan volunteers with Hamilton Light Rail, a citizen group dedicated to bringing light rail transit to Hamilton. Ryan writes a city affairs column in Hamilton Magazine, and several of his articles have been published in the Hamilton Spectator. He also maintains a personal website and has been known to post passing thoughts on Twitter @RyanMcGreal. Recently, he took the plunge and finally joined Facebook.

73 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By Jon (registered) - website | Posted September 17, 2014 at 13:23:37

There perhaps should also be signs installed on side streets advising motorists to "look left" (for approaching cyclists) when making left turns across the cycle track onto Cannon. I was riding eastbound in the cycle track this morning and was hit by a car turning left onto Cannon; driver was only looking right at oncoming vehicle traffic.

Permalink | Context

By fmurray (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 22:19:58 in reply to Comment 104548

Are you OK, Jon?

Permalink | Context

By Jon (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 08:58:09 in reply to Comment 104561

Yes thanks for asking - just some minor scratches and bruises and a mangled bike! The driver offered to pay for repairs though, so it looks like things will be alright. Note to everyone: if at all possible try and make eye contact with drivers who will be crossing the cycle track to ensure they've seen you.

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 18:57:35 in reply to Comment 104569

Already had 3 close calls riding eastbound n the cycle track and one instance where the tint on the car window didn't allow me to see the driver.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Captain Poultry (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 13:52:53

I am a motorist. I even choose to walk long distances rather than ride my bike. But I am fully in support of the cycle track. I want to see more traffic enforcement imposed on motorists who ignore the new rules of the cycle track.

I am a daily commuter on Cannon St (from Sanford to the 403). I regularly witness motorists turning left on the red light at Sanford onto Cannon (almost daily). The green bike boxes at intersections are usually blocked by cars that pull right up to the crosswalk. I have also seen motorcycles using the cycle track, especially to whip around slow moving traffic. And today I witnessed a driver turn left at John into the cycle track. A police/bylaw driven education campaign and/or ticketing blitz might get people used to the new rules.

I also support slower speeds on Cannon. I'm not sure if the "green wave" would actually help to lower those speeds or continue to encourage drivers to go faster and beat the light, as they already do on Main. Getting stopped by a red light or two is par for the course on almost every other street.

Permalink | Context

By Chris Angel (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 09:47:44 in reply to Comment 104550

I use Cannon on a daily basis as a motorist. I can confirm a major reduction in average speed along the portion of Cannon with the bike track. It is now a much more reasonable 40-50 kph down from the 60+ kph before the bike track. It is impossible to "beat the light" on Cannon now. Even those prepared to endanger public safety will find that white knuckle driving will get them nowhere fast. I can't quantify this significant average speed reduction but I am sure the city could. I have used this section of Cannon daily for more than 20 years and this is the most important change ever.

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 19:00:19 in reply to Comment 104550

Heck, yesterday the truck watering the planters was driving in the cycle track. Forced me out into oncoming lanes of Cannon. Should ticket them as well.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By thezenmonkey (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 14:21:57

I'm really staring to think the police could do more to ease driver/biker tension. Beyond ricketing drivers who violate the cycle track they should be ticketing bikers who run stop signs and lights. I think drivers would be less antoginistic if they saw bikers were treated with the same legal standard.

I've seen Toronto police regulary run ticketing blitzes of bikers running lights a "T" intersections.

Permalink | Context

By Chris Angel (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 09:59:23 in reply to Comment 104551

I have seen an adult cyclist on the new track whip out from between the planters to cut across two lanes of heavy traffic in order to turn right. Fortunately the cyclist was not killed. He was not even wearing a helmet, nor did he signal in any way. Just as the police target aggressive and unsafe motorists similar cyclists should also be targeted. Enforcing compliance is another matter though. With motorists unpaid traffic tickets will prevent license or plate renewal. This mechanism is not available with cyclists since they are not licensed.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 17, 2014 at 15:01:13 in reply to Comment 104551

Cyclists are treated with the same legal standard. Hamilton police regularly do bicycle blitzes where cyclists are ticketed for running stop signs, riding on the sidewalk, etc., just as they ticket drivers for speeding, changing lanes without signaling, running stop signs and so on.

Cyclists and motorists and pedestrians alike routinely break the law. For a variety of reasons, people just aren't very good at following strict rules consistently. We get emotionally heated, distracted and impatient, we feel entitled, we get lazy and careless and so on.

The big difference is that when a pedestrian or a cyclist breaks the law, the risk to others is negligible and the risk to the individual is minimal; but when a motorist breaks the law, the risk to others is very significant.

Because bikes are much slower and orders of magnitude lighter than cars, and a bike can stop over a very short distance. Bikes are also shorter front-to-back than cars and visibility is excellent in all directions. As a result, it's easier to avoid colliding with a vehicle, and when collisions do happen, the bicycle is causing minimal damage.

Remember that the kinetic energy of an object is an exponential function of its mass and speed. (The formula is: KE = 0.5 times mass times speed squared.) Here's a table comparing my kinetic energy while on a bike and in a car, at various speeds:

------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle    Mass (kg)    Speed (km/h)    Speed (m/s)    KE (Joules)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bicycle          100              25           6.94          2,411
Honda Civic    1,179              30           8.33         40,938
Honda Civic    1,179              60          16.67        163,750
------------------------------------------------------------------

I picked 25 km/h as a reasonable top speed on a bike, and I used 30 km/h and 60 km/h in a car - a small car at that - for comparison.

As you can see, the KE jumps dramatically as mass and speed go up. This is why, for example, only 5 percent of pedestrians struck by a car going 30 km/h die from the collision, while 85 percent of pedestrians struck by a car going 60 km/h die from the collision.

Please note that I'm not advocating lawbreaking by cyclists or motorists. I try to be law-abiding myself whatever mode I'm using on a given trip, and I agree that watching cyclists break the law is frustrating for motorists.

However, the challenge is that our police service is very expensive to operate and their scarce resources must be allocated mainly to the biggest areas of concern. If their goal is to minimize harm, they should spend most of their time and energy on mitigating the most dangerous elements on the street - i.e. people in automobiles.

Permalink | Context

By Standards (anonymous) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 04:47:22 in reply to Comment 104553

Please don't derail this. Just because a bike may cause less damage than a car doesn't mean it's OK for them not to follow posted street signs, vehicle standards, and so on. I don't recall ever seeing a bike blitz by police downtown, near a cycle path, etc., in years. Nor do you hear about it on the radio as part of a PR campaign.

Here's a thought. I've noticed volunteers at intersections at random times on the weekend at certain intersections - mostly on the mountain. A bit of digging found that they are making notes on cars that are going through red lights, using an electronic device while driving or speeding. They then go back to the central station and pull up the vehicle data and the owner of the car is sent a warning letter. There's usually a police car nearby in case things get out of hand. Why not do the same for cyclists? Education campaign from volunteers, cops to pull over those who feel they don't need to stop, signal, drive the right way on the road, illegally pass cars, etc.

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 09:53:39 in reply to Comment 104564

Gimme a break. Ryan's right. I drive, walk, cycle, and take transit. You can passable do three of the four without breaking rules if you choose ... and as Ryan notes the impact of motorists breaking rules is so far out of whack with the others it is silly and spiteful to compare them. Truthfully, a ride on the Cannon cycle-track is very revealing. It is a breath of fresh air to ride without the constant stress that normally comes with cycling any distance on city streets in Hamilton. A glimpse at what might be if the network was more comprehensive.

With so little cycling infrastructure, poorly designed streets, and some hostile drivers i find myself riding on sidewalks or going the "wrong" way on one-way back streets (not Main, King, Wellington, etc) in certain places. It is often the only practical and safe option. No amount of "education" will change what poor design and hostile motorists necessitate.

For example, just to get to the track from where i live in the North End I cross over the Mary Street foot bridge and go south on Mary until Robert, then go the block west to Catherine. From Barton to Robert, Mary is one-way northbound. I value my life too much to try riding even a block on Barton to get to Catherine (one-way northbound) in order to travel the rest of the way south to Cannon. Plus Mary has a traffic light, which makes crossing Barton safer during busy periods. That doesn't even cover the stupidity of having to travel blocks out of your way so frequently just to navigate a one-way street system designed for cars. The problem is amplified when you travel into areas you are less familiar with. The problem could be solved by converting most streets to two-way.

You will note that this "law-breaking" I describe is to avoid being hurt by motorists or to overcome obstacles created for the benefit of car traffic, not to irritate or endanger motorists.

Comment edited by RobF on 2014-09-18 10:00:13

Permalink | Context

By Crispy (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 14:40:43 in reply to Comment 104570

RobF you have many reasons to justify breaking the law. I'm sure all of those hostile motorists can give you plenty of reasons to justify their hostility.

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 23:26:22 in reply to Comment 104588

Self-preservation ... lock me up and throw away the key, I'm clearly a threat to peace, order, and good government.

There's something about getting behind the wheel that changes people into Mr. Wheeler

Comment edited by RobF on 2014-09-18 23:36:05

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 14:46:48 in reply to Comment 104588

There is no justification for hostility when you are operating a machine that has the power to maim and kill people. If road conditions make you too angry to drive in a safe and controlled manner, you need to stop driving until you calm down. It's really that simple.

Permalink | Context

By not always so (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 09:36:10 in reply to Comment 104589

Please see the following: nypost.com/2014/09/18/cyclist-slams-into-pedestrian-in-central-park/

Permalink | Context

By Crispy (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 15:18:02 in reply to Comment 104589

There is no justification for a "cyclist" that rides on the sidewalk, rides the wrong way down a one way street, jumps a red light, blows through stop signs, doesn't wear a helmet, doesn't have a bell, doesn't have proper reflection and lighting... As a cyclist myself it frustrates me to see these things because it gives us all a bad name and leads to those hostilities. As guy weighing 220, riding a 20 pound bike, doing 25-30 km/h, if I decide to ride the sidewalk and hit a pedestrian there is more than enough energy there to maim or kill. It's really that simple.

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 23:17:42 in reply to Comment 104590

Well. I don't as rule ride on the sidewalk or go the wrong way on a one-way street and never on major streets. I try to avoid these as much as possible anyways. You need to think about what i said and didn't say. I never said anything about being irresponsible, jumping red lights, blowing through stop signs, not having a bell, proper reflection and lighting.

More to the point, I certainly don't ride on sidewalks where there are pedestrians. I was thinking more of cases where it isn't practical or safe to follow the letter of the law. I don't wish to become a white (i.e. ghost) bicycle on the side of the road to please you. The number one issue is safety, both mine and that of other people. Incidentally, self-preservation is what pushes me to carefully observe the rules of the road when driving ... I want to get where i'm going alive and in one piece.

Comment edited by RobF on 2014-09-18 23:20:30

Permalink | Context

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 16:31:31 in reply to Comment 104590

1) Helmets are not legally required. They are encouraged, but not required. So all the justification one needs is "I didn't feel like it and that's my decision".

2) I freely admit I coast through all-way stops when there are no cars waiting. Everyone does it on the car too, we just don't notice because it looks like you're stopping when you go from 45 to 15 instead of 20 to 15.

3) While a bike is theoretically capable of killing a pedestrian, somehow it doesn't happen, like, ever. Whereas automobiles are one of the leading causes of death. So while hypothetically it's possible, I don't really blame the police for not spending much time solving the non-problem of cyclists killing pedestrians.

4) My car came will all the lighting it needs attached to it. Meanwhile, my bike came with none of the lighting it needs. I've never even seen red reflective tape (legally required) sold in any store ever. The province has completely failed to manage their so-called "requirements" and so as much as I encourage every cyclist to get lighting for their bikes because it is a critical life-saving protection for themselves, I don't blame cyclists in aggregate because the failure occurs far above them.

We do not ask drivers to take their car directly from the lot to the mechanic for after-market parts, we legislate the auto industry to sell safe cars. Bikes should be no different.

Obviously everything you mention are things that cyclists should do.

But folks should do lots of things. And most of the time, they don't. And some of the time, it's just not that freaking big of a deal.

Comment edited by Pxtl on 2014-09-18 16:32:11

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 18:18:24 in reply to Comment 104592

Has anyone ever been killed by being hit by a bicycle in Hamilton? I've never heard of such a thing.

Permalink | Context

By It has (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 09:42:52 in reply to Comment 104593

Killed and seriously injured. It has happened. Lots of car accidents caused by cyclists where the cyclist was killed as well. Happened in the Hamilton area twice this summer.

Since deaths by car are relatively rare, you can be assured that death by bikes are even far more rare. This may be a function of volume as well as physics. Bike riding in Hamilton as a percentage of people walking or driving is tiny. From a statistical perspective one would not expect to see many pedestrians injured by cyclists. Doesn't mean riding on a sidewalk is not dangerous.

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 19:12:11 in reply to Comment 104593

It has happened in Toronto.

Ottawa Street is bad for cyclists riding on the sidewalk. Today, I asked a cyclist with a helmet, including rear view mirror, if he was 8 years old.

That's who should be riding on sidewalks, not grown adults.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 19, 2014 at 06:28:49 in reply to Comment 104602

I agree that cyclists should not ride on sidewalks. The only way to achieve that is to establish and maintain safe, continuous space on the street for cycling.

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 15:06:20 in reply to Comment 104608

Or grow a pair and ride on the street. Ottawa Street is hardly a street of speeding traffic and I see little way to incorporate on-road space on Ottawa Street without taking away sidewalk space or curb-side parking which will never fly with the business owners or the BIA.

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 15:20:50 in reply to Comment 104630

I'll "grow a pair" when you have two halves of a brain to rub together. Think about the layout and use of Ottawa Street, not just the speed of traffic. Getting doored isn't fun.

Permalink | Context

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted September 19, 2014 at 15:15:57 in reply to Comment 104630

Actually, I've always found traffic on Ottawa surprisingly fast. Anyways, leaving proper cycling only to those that "grow a pair" is a good way to ensure there aren't many proper cyclists.

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 19:40:49 in reply to Comment 104632

Yes, every street needs to be safe for everyone from 8-80 years old.

Permalink | Context

By John Neary (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 10:51:28 in reply to Comment 104570

Hi RobF,

Could you please email Jason Farr and tell him that you support the proposal to redevelop Mary St as a complete street, either with full two-way reversion from King William to Barton or with two-way reversion from King William to Cannon and a contraflow southbound bike lane between Barton and Cannon?

A group of us in Beasley have been trying to improve the pointless, wasteful design of this street for several years and to fix this hole in our cycling network.

https://raisethehammer.org/article/2205/...

Thanks,

John

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 11:25:33 in reply to Comment 104573

Yes, I certainly will. Did something relating to two-way conversion of Mary St get passed in the Ward 2 PB vote a few months ago. I seem to remember voting for it ...

Permalink | Context

By John Neary (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 12:23:31 in reply to Comment 104576

It missed by four votes. With nearly half of the votes coming from Durand, it was hard for projects elsewhere in Ward 2 to get funded.

Permalink | Context

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 12:59:39 in reply to Comment 104581

That's maybe a little unfair.

It assumes that people only vote for projects in their own neighbourhood and forgets that in the 2013 PBW2 out of 21 projects funded, only one (the crosswalk on Hunter at MacNab) was entirely in Durand, and only two others (one of the three community gardens and the James S beautification) were partly in Durand. Maybe some voters thought it was Durand's turn this time.

Durand's population is very dense (most residents live in apartments), but at about 11,000, it is still only about 30% of ward 2's population of about 38,000. Like all democratic processes people do need to actually vote to have a say.

In 2014, three Durand projects out of 12 were funded, accounting for 46% of the total budget. Over the two years, Durand specific projects accounted for about 30% of the total budget, almost exactly proportional to population.

This doesn't seem completely out of line, and I imagine that other neighbourhoods will receive larger shares in the future.

When planning the PBW2 process, everyone agreed that not every neighbourhood would receive equal funding in each year. But the goal was to ensure fairness of process and fairness of results over the longer term of several annual cycles. This seems to be happening.

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2014-09-18 13:04:09

Permalink | Context

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 14:19:46 in reply to Comment 104582

I'd rather we not fall into rigid territorializing of PB projects in Ward 2 according to official neighbourhood boundaries used by the city. I live in the North End, but Beasley is just across the rail corridor from my street and Central is a few blocks to the southwest. I don't vote based on which neighbourhood a project is located in, because it makes little sense to do so. Still, I recognize that participatory processes can come to mirror underlying social and economic fault-lines. This can be reflected in the types of projects funded, rather than strictly where they are located. We'll have to see how things play out over several more rounds.

Comment edited by RobF on 2014-09-18 14:22:39

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 13:09:00 in reply to Comment 104582

There is still no crosswalk on Hunter at MacNab.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 13:36:43 in reply to Comment 104583

City staff have been installing it over the past month or so. The undergound work is done and the light standards are up, so it shouldn't be too much longer before the lines are painted and the system is activated.

Hunter and MacNab

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 18:21:01 in reply to Comment 104584

This photo inspired me to go take a look and yes, things are happening!

The crossing under the railway is still totally inaccessible to the disabled or cyclists, alas.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 19, 2014 at 06:31:48 in reply to Comment 104594

I recently argued that the City needs to install a pedestrian-activated crosswalk at Hunter and Park as well as Hunter and MacNab.

Permalink | Context

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted October 09, 2014 at 12:06:37 in reply to Comment 104610

This was the original request, along with the the light at MacNab, that Durand put forward in PBW2. We reduced it to one light in the interests of compromise for the "consensus" slate of the projects.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 08:13:13 in reply to Comment 104564

I'm not derailing anything and I'm not saying okay for cyclists to break the law - in fact I explicitly stated the opposite.

I'm pointing out that almost everyone routinely breaks the law and the police already target drivers, pedestrians and cyclists, but that it makes sense for the police to focus their scarce resources more on drivers since driving is vastly more dangerous. Cyclists rolling through stop signs are annoying but they're not a serious cause of harm.

Comment edited by administrator Ryan on 2014-09-18 08:13:33

Permalink | Context

By Chris Angel (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 10:12:30 in reply to Comment 104567

Your comment leaves the impression that cyclists breaking the law are simply not worth pursuing and that the high priced police are too expensive to do much except target drivers.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 23, 2014 at 13:32:00 in reply to Comment 104750

I think I've made it pretty clear that I think police resources should be deployed in a manner proportionate to the risks and dangers they are addressing. Since people in cars are orders of magnitude more dangerous than people on bikes or on foot, enforcement should primarily target dangerous driving.

More generally, I believe the streets themselves should be designed in such a way as to reduce the risk of dangerous driving. If we design streets for dangerous speeding and then try to rely on enforcement to stop people from doing dangerous things on the street, we're doing it wrong.

Comment edited by administrator Ryan on 2014-09-23 13:38:37

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 21:21:18 in reply to Comment 104766

Here is a before and after view of one such redesign

Note the lack of speeding cars in the "after" parts of the video.

I know which city I would like to live in. Hint: Not the car-clogged child-dangerous people-hostile hell of the "before" city.

They changed. We can too.

Permalink | Context

By jason (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 22:15:29 in reply to Comment 104781

Wow.. fantastic video. And I love that there is still room given for cars and parking in the city centre. But they aren't allowed to dominate like here. Hamilton being as small, compact and dense as we are could easily see this sort of set-up work here. No reason we can't have park and rides with bike parking at Limeridge Mall, University Plaza, Centre Mall and Eastgate.
To make it convenient and attractive, we need to dead-end King Street somewhere downtown to allow for LRT, bikes and people instead of short-cutting traffic. Add an 'Indy Cultural Trail' style bikeway along Main from Mac to the Delta where it could shift to King and continue to downtown Stoney Creek.

http://www.ratioblog.com/wp-content/uplo...

Now add a bike lift alongside a new set of stairs from Ferguson Ave to Sam Lawrence Park or up the Jolley Cut:

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/04/b...

Create bus-only lanes from Limeridge Mall along Upper Wentworth, Fennell, Upper Wellington, the Jolley Cut and John St to Augusta.

BRT along the Claremont Access and Upper James.

Two-way protected bike lanes also up the Claremont Access to Mohawk College: https://www.raisethehammer.org/article/2...

Finish Hunter St properly along with Cannon/York from Burlington to the Red Hill Trail

Cannon St east of Sherman should have bike lanes at sidewalk level all the way to Red Hill: http://streetsforeveryone.org/commercial...

Add other high quality cycling routes along Burlington St, Eastport Drive etc..... http://www.raisethehammer.org/article/21...

Limiting cars short-cutting through downtown and maintaining high quality LRT and bus vehicles with safe cycling routes city-wide will see a radical change of our quality of life, pedestrian-friendly streets downtown allowing business to thrive and new developments to survive without acres of parking everywhere.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By gregsmith (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 14:50:01

Does anyone know the timeline for pushing the track further West? All the construction signs maintain the lanes are to continue to Dundurn. These signs are posted for most of the route, including beyond the present terminus at Hess.

Permalink | Context

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 10:56:08 in reply to Comment 104552

Ward 1 PB voted for bike lanes continuing up York Boulevard from Queen to Dundurn. There will be substantial challenges, though. Hess will be tricky to figure - eastbound cyclists need bike-boxes or some other safe-left-turn infrastructure for York at Hess and a lane up Hess to Cannon (easy, there's already a box for that) and Westbound cylists need some kind of crossing-box to get to the other side of Cannon since the bike lane has moved from the south side to the north at Hess.

Also, there's the political challenge. Taking a lane off of each direction of York would be a hard sell. Likely the lane would be unprotected - I expect we'd see the Victoria-style "double-wide lane converted into single cycling lane" that means they don't need a special plowing plan, but it means cyclists are protected by a meter of dead space instead of a formal barrier of any kind.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By H1 (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 15:02:36

"a photo of a tow truck parked illegally on the cycle track near John Street" this was a no parking zone before the bike lanes. the city should enforce the law regardless of it being a bike lane or not.

Permalink | Context

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 10:40:58 in reply to Comment 104554

Farr stated during the debates that technically the leftmost lane of car traffic is a No Parking zone, not a No Stopping Zone. That means it is legal for drivers to pull over to the left lane outside of the bike lane for loading and unloading and dropoffs and what have you.

So if this truck had a good reason to be pulled over to the left and legitimately was there for only a short period of time, he actually simply had to stop in place in the left lane instead of pulling into the bike lane.

Sadly, there is no signage or information letting motorists know about this. The pizza guy can still stop on the left-hand driving lane to deliver to buildings on the South side of Cannon, but without realizing that he'll probably either pull over onto the right or try to stop in the bike lane.

A "no parking this lane" sign (similar to the bus lane signs) planted in the buffer between the bike lanes and the driving lanes might help, but staff seem averse to that kind of rigid structure in the buffer - I guess they're worried that a driver could destroy their vehicle if they lose control and start driving into the bike lane and hit a metal pole instead of squishy knockdown sticks and cyclists.

That and Cannon already seems to be an information overload of explanatory signage now.

Comment edited by Pxtl on 2014-09-18 10:42:21

Permalink | Context

By Agree (anonymous) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 04:51:34 in reply to Comment 104554

Agree fully. I loved this quote from the councillor:

"Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr confirmed that parking in the cycle track is not permitted and asked staff "to visit the location and see if enhancement [is] needed.""

What's the point? Will that tow truck be parked there again? Why not just have bylaw patrolling the area actively and put a ticket on the car, or call in heavy tow to pull it away? Failing that, call the HPS and have them wait for the driver to appear and deal with it then. Lots of talk, no action. Same old, same old from this guy.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 07:59:23 in reply to Comment 104565

By "enhancement" I believe he means more physical barriers to protect that part of the cycle track. Prevention is cheaper and more effective than enforcement.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattM (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 19:11:37

I noticed yesterday that the city installed "Single File" bicycle/motorist signs on Cannon, East of Sherman. I'm hoping to see some sharrows and a proper cycle track exit, at least as far as the Pan-Am stadium.

I was told in my last post about this that there is plans for bike lanes along Cannon, as far East as Kenilworth but we all know how long those plans can take until implementation. I fear that the momentum will die off post-Pan-Am.

There really should be a continuous route across the lower city from the East to the West. The cycle track on Cannon definitely closed the gap by a lot, but where I live at Woodward and Melvin, I have to do a lot of road switching and riding in mixed traffic to get to the cycle track. I usually take Brittania which ends at Ottawa, then switched to moderate mixed traffic on Cannon, the rest of the way to the cycle track. Would be nice if there was a more continuous, protected route though. Bike lanes on Melvin Avenue to hook up with the existing ones on Woodward would be a great step towards this, since it would also provide a seamless link to the Waterfront Trail.

Comment edited by MattM on 2014-09-17 19:12:06

Permalink | Context

By jason (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 21:40:21 in reply to Comment 104556

Yes, now that IBI is off the case so to speak, I'm worried that we'll go back to our usual implementation routine of leaving huge gaps for no reason, zero protection, minimum road markings etc..... we really need to ramp up the pressure on city hall to create a network of protected lanes city-wide.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Madison (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 22:15:16

I too wonder if signs will be installed on side streets advising motorists to "look left" when making left turns across the cycle track onto Cannon. I was biking eastbound yesterday with my 2 year old on the back, and was nearly hit by a car, had I not screamed at him. he slammed on his brakes, and I was able to go around him the last second. Then it happened again a few minutes later with a different driver. I kept having to slow down to make sure cars were aware I was biking in their direction. Would almost rather take Wilson east bound. Other than that I love the Cannon bike lanes and I intend to make much use of it!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By positive1@cogeco.ca (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 22:38:07

I have had mostly good experiences using the Cannon bike lanes. The hue and cry by 'Chicken Little' types about of traffic congestion turned out to be a rather large dud. Both at 8am and 5pm (the heart of 'rush hour') I saw automobile traffic, albeit heavy, moving quite smartly. To my surprise, several motorists made eye contact with me and allowed me to travel through the intersection (eastbound) at James and again at John before they turned southbound.
Regarding cars parked in the cycle track - it may result in a paltry fine of $ 26. I checked By Law enforcement and that is the fine for parking in a bike lane. I don't think that they have updated fines for a 'cycle track' . This seems a ridiculously low fine considering that illegal parkers are forcing cyclists either onto the sidewalk (another fine for cyclists) or worse, out into traffic (on-coming traffic if you happen to be travelling eastbound on Cannon). Life is cheap with this sort of deterrent (i.e. none). We need to ramp up the fines for this sort of lazy, inconsiderate behaviour.

Comment edited by positive1@cogeco.ca on 2014-09-17 22:38:52

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Selway (registered) | Posted September 17, 2014 at 23:41:45

I rode this yesterday from Queen to Sherman and back. A little dicey with cars and pedestrians. Heading east a car turning left off Cannon decided to beat me when the light turned green. He won because I braked. Pedestrians are looking one way only, two of them stepped right into the path in front of me. Stopped for them easily because I could see they weren't looking my way at all. All in all, a fast trip, but not comfortable, not yet.

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 19:16:49 in reply to Comment 104563

In 3 days of riding eastbound on Cannon I've had more close calls than in 6 years of riding in Hamilton. It better get better, and fast, or I'm going back to riding my old "safer" routes with car traffic.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By bikehounds (anonymous) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 08:43:31

I think the erratic behaviour will subside as people get used to the new layout. Many users have been interacting with one-way cannon for decades and habits won't die overnight. Hopefully we get through this initial period with minimal incidents.

I wish the intersections were painted...

Permalink | Context

By jason (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 10:49:09 in reply to Comment 104568

intersections were shown to have visible crossings in the Cannon functional drawings. Not sure why that one part of the drawings wasn't followed through on. The plan was for this:

http://tinlizzieridesagain.files.wordpre...

Most cities also use green paint at intersections, but let's not push our luck. We still have the worlds most hilariously embarrassing bike box at Aberdeen/Studholme, and zero paint on the various off-street cycle paths that have recently been built on Aberdeen, Longwood, Burlington St etc.... All they need is:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v0srwAUvkpo/TL...

The cycling staff needs to get over this idea that everyone is a spandex warrior who need no signage or paint markings because we're bike gladiators.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Sid E. Walker (anonymous) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 11:44:20

What drives me crazy is when people ride their bikes on the sidewalk DIRECTLY beside the Cycle Track!
Then swear at me when I point it out to them. Nice. Real nice.

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 18:57:32 in reply to Comment 104579

What drives me crazy is when car drivers drive onto the sidewalk and kill people.

There. Fixed it.

Permalink | Context

By Sid E. Walk (anonymous) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 21:23:39 in reply to Comment 104595

Defensive much? I'm saying that there are jerk cyclists and behaved cyclists, just as there are motorists.
I'm saying the law needs to be enforced, and that's tough when the bike cops don't follow or enforce the cycling laws themselves.
So when I ask a young lady to please dismount from her bike as she rides it on a dense sidewalk along James and Wilson, and she replies "F*CK YOU!!", it doesn't help your argument of cars driving on sidewalks all over the place causing mayhem and carnage.

Sometimes this site's commentators are those who are the biggest fear-mongerers LOL

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 19, 2014 at 06:30:58 in reply to Comment 104604

Might I respectfully suggest that being told off, while unpleasant, is not in the same category of abuse as being run over and crushed.

Permalink | Context

By you're funny. (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 22:25:32 in reply to Comment 104609

You're funny. Stop defending these ridiculous comments that Kevin Love makes. He's as full of hyperbole, fearmongering and spouting half truths and misinformation as jason is!

Drop the bias, more people will listen.

Permalink | Context

By mikeonthemountain (registered) | Posted September 20, 2014 at 06:39:24 in reply to Comment 104653

It's not hyperbole if it's true, friend. People ARE getting crushed to death under cars. On a very regular basis.

Satire can be a very useful tool, if used correctly. It allows us to say truths that are too horrible to just state bluntly. It is TRUE that cars and trucks launch lethal cancer attacks upon living creatures. It is TRUE that cars and trucks crush people to death. It just sounds like hyperbole when it's stated more bluntly than you're used to.

Permalink | Context

By KevinLove (registered) | Posted September 20, 2014 at 12:41:29 in reply to Comment 104657

According to Hamilton's Medical Officer of Health, motorists poison and kill 94 people in Hamilton every year.

Hamilton Police report that the 10-year average is 19.2 people crushed and killed by motorists every year.

Over 113 people killed by motorists in Hamilton every year!

Meanwhile, of course, the number of people killed by bicycles is remaining at a strong and steady zero.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 18, 2014 at 12:17:36 in reply to Comment 104579

Agreed, that's frustrating. That behaviour will change as riding in the cycle track becomes more normalized.

Permalink | Context

By StephenBarath (registered) | Posted September 18, 2014 at 15:42:48 in reply to Comment 104580

Probably not. I pointed out to someone just the other day (I think politely, but it’s hard to know how you come across when your interaction is only a few seconds long) that there is a bike lane for his use on Dundurn, and I was told to “go ** yourself.” So Sid E. Walker, there’s a pretty fair chance you’ll at least occasionally see people choosing to use the sidewalk. There’s a small segment of the population that seems to get to do whatever it wants, and that’s not just restricted to how they travel around.

Comment edited by StephenBarath on 2014-09-18 15:44:23

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Rolly (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 08:12:40

Thursday morning 8:15 am drove my car along Cannon Street the entire length of the Bike tracK.Total ridership 2 Bicycles and one e-bike. Obviously we hope it gets used more as more people are aware. I am for bike lanes and think sidewalks should be wider etc... However from a practical concern what happens when it snows and the plows are on cannon? Does the bike lane become a snow dumping lane, will there be damage to the barriers from plows, is there money in a budget for this?

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 15:09:22 in reply to Comment 104611

I've passed many more cyclists than that during the day, so I guess it will depend on time of day.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted September 19, 2014 at 08:34:51 in reply to Comment 104611

The plan is to plow the cycle track the same way the City plows the short cycle track that crosses Hwy 403 on King Street West. This is a pilot project so the plan is to figure out these issues as they come up.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mikeonthemountain (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 17:07:47

Another vehicle lies on its roof, this time in the middle of York and Bay. And Einsteins are already chiming in on the spec blaming two way York instead of, uh, unsafe driving. While a discussion takes place here about how cyclists are a safety problem. If it wasn't for the harm happening to people, this would be slapstick comedy gold. Go metal death chariots!

That said I would be so happy if sociopathic behaviour on the part of fellow cyclists declined too, bird flipping and so on. I dream of a normalized cycling culture where infrastructure is clearly defined and peer pressure exists to use it properly, and interactions between all users of public space are mostly positive.

But yes, it's the heavy metal vehicles that turn people into hamburger on a daily basis and even crash through the sides of houses and storefronts and cause orders of magnitude more chaos and damage.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 22:06:15

in case anyone noticed, bike arrows were installed across Sherman Ave overnight. Hope to see this treatment through all intersections.

Also, line painting has begun west of Hess. I can't figure out what the markings mean. Hopefully some protection, not just paint like Hunter.

Permalink | Context

By More bike lanes (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2014 at 22:26:29 in reply to Comment 104651

When can we see you petitioning for bike lanes on your street?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Connie (registered) | Posted September 23, 2014 at 07:51:55

The bike lanes are AWESOME!!!!!

Rode only from Tisdale to James so far but omigod it was wonderful!

As a retired person living downtown doing all my daily errands on my bike, slightly arthritic and a bit wobbly ... this is amazing!

Thanks to rth ywc and all who have worked to achieve this!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By hshields (registered) - website | Posted September 24, 2014 at 13:42:06

Great article and it raises a related point: Traffic lights and a comprehensive safety and traffic calming strategy.

As some of you know, our City has recently come into some serious cash with the installation of red light cameras. It is now at the point that the City's solicitor is asking to double her staff because she anticipates the workload will be too much but don't worry - the cash being generated by tickets will cover this expense with still millions left to go to general account.

I thought of this cash grab when you mentioned the green wave. Timed signal lights induce a particular speed and approach to driving. You drive to match the lights. If the lights are timed for an average 50-60km/h your vehicular speed will naturally be at that speed if not faster simply in anticipation of timed lights. However, if timed traffic signals were to be reduced to say 45-50km/h it would provide the motorist with the cues needed in anticipated roadway approaches and anticipated speeds.

Sadly, the City has failed to communicate how exactly it will be using red light cash grab money. I assume some of those millions will be used to install cycle tracks. I assume some of those millions will be used to paint zebra crossings and bump-outs and pollards. But, without a comprehensive safety and calming strategy that includes the restoration of complete streets as BOTH an economic inducer and safety measure, what we are left with are millions being collected, a bloating municipal bureaucracy and half hearted attempts to appease activist demands for safer and saner streets.

Show us slower speeds by modifying timed thoroughfares and show us where the cash grab money is going and I'll be a happy camper.

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds