Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-07-06, 08:42 AM   #1
N_C
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
N_C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bannation, forever.
Bikes:
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Links to the stories about the cyclist hit on the Great Western Trail.

http://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/...sp?NewsID=1534

http://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/...sp?NewsID=1531

I know the area where the rider that was struck while riding on the Great Western Trail. I have ridden that trail many times & crossed the dirt/gravel road many times where the cyclist was hit. The trail intersects with the roadway at an angle, it is not easy to see motorists or for motorists to see what is approaching the intersection from the trail. Trail users have to slow down & stop at this particular intersection as they should at all of them.

I remember when the Great Western Trail was built. It used to be crushed limestone, with only parts of paved with asphalt, now the entire thing is asphalt or concrete. While an asphalt or concrete surface trail allows more users to enjoy it a crushed limestone trail does slow down the bicycle traffic. Because of the resistance from either a wider tire or the limestone. One of the reasons it was paved is because it starts/ends in Water Works Park, where the Bill Riley & another trail converge in the park, I forget the name of the new trail, it goes around Gray's Lake & past Sec Taylor Stadium. I think it is the Meredeth Trail. Even so, maybe it wasn't such a great idea to pave this one. Or maybe something needs to be figured out how to make the intersection safer so roadway & trail traffic can see each other better. This may not cause cyclists to slow down but it is the only option & could give motorists a better view of the trail & maybe better reaction time if a fast moving cyclist is coming through.
N_C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 09:18 AM   #2
nova
hill hater
 
nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: norton ohio 5.5 miles from center road tow path trail head
Bikes: cannondale t400 1987 model and a raleigh gran prix from 1973
Posts: 2,127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I never understood why they dont add stoplights on trail heads that are acuated by bikes or pedestrans.

In general theres few road crossings on these trails so expense wouldnt be all that high. Nor would the lights delay cyclists and peds all that much on their trip. simply have the roads light stay green when theres no trafic and 30 secounds to 1 minute after a person breaks the beem or trips what ever sensor or button device is used the light cycles green. Realy a hose sensor system would work well for bikes with a button for peds .
nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 09:44 AM   #3
N_C
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
N_C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bannation, forever.
Bikes:
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nova
I never understood why they dont add stoplights on trail heads that are acuated by bikes or pedestrans.

In general theres few road crossings on these trails so expense wouldnt be all that high. Nor would the lights delay cyclists and peds all that much on their trip. simply have the roads light stay green when theres no trafic and 30 secounds to 1 minute after a person breaks the beem or trips what ever sensor or button device is used the light cycles green. Realy a hose sensor system would work well for bikes with a button for peds .
First, at this intersection there is no trail head & the only thing that intersects with the roadway is the trail, no other roadway. Second this intersection probably does not have a high enough of a roadway traffic volume to warrant a traffic light. Finally, don't know for sure but I do not think MUP traffic is taken into consideration when determining whether or not a traffic light is needed. It probably should be if it isn't.

Not trying to make excuses, just presenting the facts as they are.
N_C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 11:01 AM   #4
C-R700
Senior Member
 
C-R700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central Iowa
Bikes: Cannondale R-700
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Everytime I ride that trial I think that they need to be trimming those corners where the trail meets the roads for both cyclist adn cagers can have more sight.
C-R700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 11:13 AM   #5
nova
hill hater
 
nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: norton ohio 5.5 miles from center road tow path trail head
Bikes: cannondale t400 1987 model and a raleigh gran prix from 1973
Posts: 2,127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by N_C
First, at this intersection there is no trail head & the only thing that intersects with the roadway is the trail, no other roadway. Second this intersection probably does not have a high enough of a roadway traffic volume to warrant a traffic light. Finally, don't know for sure but I do not think MUP traffic is taken into consideration when determining whether or not a traffic light is needed. It probably should be if it isn't.

Not trying to make excuses, just presenting the facts as they are.

well i consider any trail to road intersection a trail head.

And i doubt they take mup trafic in to consideration. But regardess my idea is still valid and they should put lights on these. Not every intersection needs to have high trafic to need a light. Danger level also dictates the need.
nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 11:47 AM   #6
cudak888 
www.theheadbadge.com
 
cudak888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Bikes: http://www.theheadbadge.com
Posts: 22,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have you folks forgotten about the inexpensive and efficient stop sign?

-Kurt
__________________
cudak888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-06, 08:42 PM   #7
savage24
Senior Member
 
savage24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Bikes: Performance mountain bike, Giant Cypress LX hybrid, Surly Long Haul Trucker
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nova
well i consider any trail to road intersection a trail head.

And i doubt they take mup trafic in to consideration. But regardess my idea is still valid and they should put lights on these. Not every intersection needs to have high trafic to need a light. Danger level also dictates the need.
Hey, that sounds great. Where's your checkbook??
I think you have a fine idea if it was dangerous to cross the road even after coming to a stop and looking for traffic due to a sharp curve or hill, but those situations are very rare. The collision on the bike trail above was the result of the cyclist not following the rules of the trail, specifically, to stop and look for traffic at road crossings. The cyclist should be ticketed for failure to yield.
When an irresponsable cager hurts or kills a cyclist, we scream for justice. When an irresponsable cyclist hurts or kills themselves we want stop lights for the cagers - give me a break!
savage24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:40 AM.