I can’t for the life of me figure out the logic the City uses in deciding to pave this trail?

Posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 @ 1:06 PM by johnnyb45 with a score of 0

I can’t for the life of me figure out the logic the City uses in deciding to pave this trail?

——-

There is no logic. The few cyclists this city has happened to have the loudest voices and they got their way.

Every day driving around this City I am on the look out for cyclists. Rarely on any given day do I see more than 5.

I agree Pal, and most of the ones you do see are riding on the sidewalk and not wearing a helmet.

“The trail is popular with dog walkers on their way to the off-leash park at Ginter’s Field.” That is the third reference in the article in regards to pedestrian traffic. Personally I’m against paving this path but nothing pleases you posters. You whine about bike lanes, now your whining about trails that cyclists use. Palopu, I drive the city streets as you do & I see far more than a handful of cyclists daily. Maybe your not paying attention, when asked why they collided with bicycles & motorcycles, car & truck drivers most common response is ” I did not see them”.

Johnnyb45 …logic seems to be a totally alien concept for our city council.

I guess the drug dealers in the area needed a better trail?

People.. what do you want from council?

Number one complaint is the shape of our roads.. so our councils reaction.. lets pave bike paths.. OMG

guessing as number 2 complaint is snow removal.. guess the bike lanes will be cleaned down to pavement for the non-existant bikers. Merrick really is doing what she promised for bikers.. drivers be damned..there are bikers to pander to..

So you 10-20 bikers enjoy your day in the sun. One day the majority of tax payers will be listened to… havent been in over a decade..but one day we will… I hope.

I’m sort of confused, where in this article does it mention; a) bike lanes on streets; b) that paving of this path was at the behest of cyclists? The article does mention pedestrians & in particular, those who walk their dogs. Perhaps it was those tax payers that requested the path in question be paved. As for “non-existant” cyclists? Are you referring to those cyclists that use paths & trails? I just got back from Otway where the parking lot was full, I would guess I saw at least 50 -100 people, most of those with bikes. Hmmmm..that was just one of several areas in PG where cyclists ride, & there were the dozen or so I passed on my way home out for their road ride. Yeah, maybe it was post ride hallucinations because according to the self styled experts on this site there are next to none or non-existant cyclists in PG.

Sure the money could have been spent somewhere else. I’ve lived here my whole life and had never been along that trail until this year. I was shocked at the amount of people that use it. Bikers, pedestrians, dog walkers, and yes even scooters and wheelchairs. So in that respect I can see the point of paving it. People are actualy using this trail to commute. Get out and go for a stroll, i imagine it is beautiful there this time of year. Or stay home and bitch, your call. Also id like to add that i have not noticed any positive feedback from you complainers about the paving that HAS occured. Is there anything that will put a smile on your face, or at least wipe the grimace off? *shields up*

I think this is a great investment. The city needs more investments like this that are available to everyone in the community no matter their income level we can all get out and enjoy a good walk… if we have the infrastructure.

Mackenzie still has more paved trails than PG with less then a twentieth of the population. Paved trails are great in the wet seasons.

The paths in questions are key paths linking many trails in the West of the city along the Crandbrook Hill corridor.