I thought the article did an admirable job of presenting all sides of the issue. Very well written. In terms of the recommendations, there were a couple that jumped out at me.
Treat more hazardous sections of the trail like roads. Put in warning signs, slow the speed and paint a yellow line down the center, Eksten said. "If we had to narrow the trail or put in a sharper curve for any reason, we want people to know that before they get there," he said. "Just like roadways."
I think this is a good suggestion.
Bicycles should keep conditions in mind... The city expects cyclists to yield to pedestrians, keep speed in check and cycle to conditions. "We don't expect cyclists to be traveling at 40 miles per hour," he said. "'Use to conditions' means that if grandma and grandpa are out with their dog, be empathetic. It's not nice to zoom by them within inches."
It's not
SAFE to zoom by them within inches. I've never ridden in that area, but ultimately, if I were to assign blame, I would say that Hultman was riding too fast for conditions. We say this all the time when there are car-bike collisions- that if there are not adequate visibility and lines of site, the driver should have been going slower. I think that is the case here with the cyclist. You can point at the dog owner not controlling the dog, and the city for building a trail with a decline leading to a sharp turn, and not trimming bushes, but ultimately, given what I read, the cyclist had no business riding as fast was he was in that particular area. If you don't have an "out", you're riding too fast for conditions.
I say that not to condemn the man's memory, but rather to urge others to consider this when they are riding the trails. Always make sure you have an out- an alternate path, a departure from the trail onto the grass, or enough room to stop. If you don't have an out, slow down to give yourself one.