If it's not a "crosswalk", so the rule about cyclists dismounting to cross shouldn't apply: depends on how it's painted, I guess. The "elephant's feet" crossing you see in places (Davenport, and along the Spur Line Trail) permit cyclists to ride across.
There's also the signalized, delineated crossride that's in place on Erb near Willow.
But, we're going to run into some potential cycling/walking coexistence problems with the upcoming level 2 pedestrian crossovers. On the plus side, we could start to see rollout of crossings where the motorist needs to allow pedestrians to cross, placed at roundabouts and likely at key crossing points. But, so far as I know (and based on my recollection of a discussion with regional staff) they're pure crosswalks and people on bikes will be obliged to dismount, and they can't be combined with crossrides.
So what do you do? Permit what people are going to do anyway (ride across), or provide a higher degree of pedestrian safety but criminalize behaviour that could have otherwise been permitted?
I don't like those choices.
There's also the signalized, delineated crossride that's in place on Erb near Willow.
But, we're going to run into some potential cycling/walking coexistence problems with the upcoming level 2 pedestrian crossovers. On the plus side, we could start to see rollout of crossings where the motorist needs to allow pedestrians to cross, placed at roundabouts and likely at key crossing points. But, so far as I know (and based on my recollection of a discussion with regional staff) they're pure crosswalks and people on bikes will be obliged to dismount, and they can't be combined with crossrides.
So what do you do? Permit what people are going to do anyway (ride across), or provide a higher degree of pedestrian safety but criminalize behaviour that could have otherwise been permitted?
I don't like those choices.