Comment 120713

By kevinlove (registered) | Posted February 07, 2017 at 14:19:30

A big "thank you" to Thomas for being a caring and engaged citizen. This design must have taken a lot of work! I am reluctant to criticize it, and must start by saying that I really truly appreciate Thomas' effort, concern and caring for the city in which we live. My concerns are technical engineering concerns only.

Having said that, I do have two technical engineering concerns. These concerns are about two ways in which the proposed design is dangerous because it has violated the CROW Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic.

The first concern is that it puts a bi-directional cycle track in an area with level crossing intersections used by motor vehicles. Bi-directional cycle tracks are only appropriate when there are no level crossing intersections used by motor vehicles. Examples include being up against a natural obstacle such as a lake, harbour or the Niagara Escarpment. Or being in a protected environment from which motor vehicles are excluded, such as the Escarpment Rail-Trail. Here is a good explanation of the problems that can be caused by an inappropriate bi-directional cycle track.

The other issue is the inappropriate use of Advanced Start Lines, or so-called "bike boxes." This infrastructure is obsolete, as there are much better and safer ways of reducing intersection conflicts, as set out in the CROW manual. David Hembrow has a good explanation of the problems that can be caused by this obsolete infrastructure design.

Most unfortunately, the CROW manual is not available on-line, and purchasing a hard copy will set you back an eye-popping 129 Euros. It is a tool for professional engineers, and priced accordingly.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds