Editor: If Moses had to put the recently passed bylaw on tablets of stone he would have depleted a quarry. A full 19 pages of print as to how we are requested to use our roads. The challenge is where to start commenting.
Maybe here:
5. BICYCLES
5.1. No person over the age of 12 shall ride a bicycle on a sidewalk unless:
b) That person is accompanying a person 12 years of age or younger.
According to the bylaw you now will have to carry your birth certificate with you, don’t you?
But that’s not the point. My point is the following: can we agree that there are reckless motorists being a threat to cyclists? Can we agree that there are reckless cyclists being a threat to pedestrians? Can we agree that there are reckless pedestrians being a threat other pedestrians, texting and running into each other as happened to me some time ago?
The consequences in reverse order in case of a collision: a pedestrian to the other pedestrian if he or she had manners: “I am sorry.” A cyclist to a pedestrian, “I am sorry” and maybe some compensation for wrecked clothing and at worst some minor injuries. A motorist to a cyclist “I am sorry” if the cyclist is still in a position to listen. Serious injuries and even death cannot be ruled out.
So, who should share a road or walkway with whom to minimize the consequences of a collision? Your guess.
A number of years back the Town built a pedestrian bridge alongside the existing bridge across the Bow River. Instead of widening this newly constructed bridge by two metres or so to also accommodate a bicycle lane, the Town chose to condemn cyclists to the original existing narrow bridge with heavy vehicular traffic. The fact that this represents a danger is clearly demonstrated by a speed limit and “no passing of cyclists” signage. The lucrative side effect; plenty of speeding tickets sold in the 30 km/h speed zone even if there were no cyclists in sight.
How about making it discretionary for cyclists who feel insecure on the roads to use the sidewalks, such as 13 year olds, seniors, women and maybe tourists who are sightseeing as opposed to being in a rush. They are the least likely ones to cycle carelessly. But such would command creative thinking, something not in the Town’s toolbox. If any control is deemed necessary, impose a speed limit of speed at pace or five km/h.
The much more fundamental problem, however, is that the Town has failed miserably for the past quarter century, beginning from when the Town was projected to grow to 20,000 or more citizens, to come up with a meaningful transportation plan accommodating vehicular traffic, cyclists and pedestrians.
Unfortunately, the Town now tries to solve all problems with more traffic lights and other costly nonsense. If you have a hammer, you know how the saying goes, every problem looks like a nail. How about substituting the hammer with some common sense and creativity for a change?
Dieter Remppel,
Canmore
