rfmcdonald | Entries tagged with cyclists

Nothing to see here but a child's well-used blue-and-green tricycle left carelessly on the sidewalk back in July.

blogTO's Derek Flack opens up a poll.

I've recently run across a few reports that New York cops are cracking down on cyclists for not obeying traffic signs and other rules of the road. Particularly interesting — or controversial, if you like — is the fact that tickets are being given out for those who run stop signs at empty intersections. Always something of a grey area when it comes to traffic laws, many people will tell you that it doesn't make any sense for cyclists to be held to the same rules as cars in all situations — particularly given that they generally don't occupy a full lane of traffic and are more likely than not to come out on the losing end of a collision with a vehicle.

And yet, strictly speaking, according to the Highway Traffic Act, cyclists "have the same rights and responsibilities to obey all traffic laws as other road users." Still, it's rare to see cyclists written up for illegal turns, running stops signs, and riding the wrong way on one-way streets. There's probably a dissertation out there on the strange legality of offences that are systematically ignored, but I'm curious what people think. Should a 20-30 lbs human-powered vehicle really be held to the same set of laws as a 3000 lbs car?

Surprisingly enough, almost everyone in the comments--including the self-identified cyclists--say that, yes, cyclists should follow the same or very similar rules.

Jake Tobin Garrett's essay at Spacing Toronto says what urgently needed to be said.

Here in Toronto we've witnessed Rob Ford proclaim that streets are for cars, trucks, and buses, while Don Cherry gleefully gave the verbal middle-finger to all those bike riding pinkos. In Vancouver, the construction of the Hornby Street separated bike lane in October 2010 prompted a flurry of media that opined the beleaguered driver, which continues even as the City releases information stating that traffic remains unchanged along Hornby except for a one-minute delay during rush hour. In New York, the bike lane debate has even concerned the courts.

The rhetoric around the bike has reached untenable heights. Not only is it completely unproductive, but it works to make both motorists and bicyclists unsafe by stoking anger and fear. By positioning it as a war between two clear sides, we reduce our ability to compromise, to work together. Spittle flies from both sides of the debate, as cyclists rush to label car drivers as gas-guzzling, suburban, earth-pigs and motorists respond by calling cyclists pretentious, militant, holier-than-thous (albeit with great calf muscles). Just reading the comments on blog posts and newspaper articles on the subject is enough to turn my hair white.

[. . .]

First, let's ditch the war metaphors. Between Cassidy’s bike lane “battles” and the omnipresent “war on the car”, I feel like we might have lost some important perspective. A recent letter sent by Councillor Adam Vaughan to BIAs and resident associations in his ward, used the word “barricaded” in place of “curbed” to describe Denzil Minnan-Wong’s separated bike lane proposal, going on to say a bike path would “carve” through Grange Park. While respecting Councillor Vaughan’s work to increase bicycle infrastructure in the city, it’s this kind of unnecessarily value-laden language that contributes to an antagonistic atmosphere through positioning the cyclist as the urban warrior vs. the rest of the city. We would hardly refer to the curb on the sidewalk as a barricade for pedestrians.

And let’s also remember that if we insist on calling this a war, then most of us are constantly switching sides. An interesting thing happens when we walk, bike, or drive around the city. We seem to forget that we ever use any other form of transportation other than the one we are currently using. I've been in cars with people who impatiently drum their fingers at pedestrians taking too long to cross the street, while witnessing those same people deplore the lack of patience drivers have while they are crossing the street themselves. Drivers are bikers are pedestrians are transit users. We do not exist in easily separated categories, pitted against each other in travel statistics. Most of us use at least more than one way to get around, even if it’s just walking from the car to the restaurant. Splitting the debate into an Us vs. Them dichotomy is too coarse, a point which Dave Meslin picks up on in his recent Toronto Star editorial where he argues that Rob Ford may not be the be the harbinger of the bicyclepocalypse as originally thought.

Cyclists, let’s tone down the environmental angle. Arguments about the environmental and economic benefits of cycling are all well and good, but by over-focusing on these elements we run the risk of alienating a lot of people while missing out on the greater point. Increased bicycle infrastructure should ultimately be about safety and allowing everyone to feel comfortable riding their bike, including the timid. This is, after all, mostly who bike lanes are for. There are plenty of us out there now, with the bicycle network as pitiful as it is, pedaling away everyday. While I would love to ride in a bike lane along Spadina, the absence of one is not enough to keep me off the street. As do many others in this city, I feel confident enough to — as Rob Ford says — swim with the sharks. The important point, however, is that you shouldn’t have to possess nerves of steel just to get to work. Cassidy writes about how in the 1980s when he biked around New York he would frequently arrive shaking with fear — if that’s not a good argument for increased bicycle infrastructure, I’m not sure what is.

Let’s stop demonizing everyone based on the actions of a few. There are certainly bad cyclists out there, and I’ve almost been hit on the sidewalk several times by a few of them. But I’ve also almost been hit crossing the street by terrible drivers talking on cell phones and running stop signs. This doesn’t mean that every motorist is a negligent jerk, just as every cyclist isn’t a law-breaking hooligan. Taking every opportunity to point an indignant finger and proclaim “Aha! See?” gets us nowhere fast.

Go, read. And enjoy the sane-seeming comments, too!

The Globe and Mail's Les Perreaux wonders if Bixi--the bicycle-sharing service that has taken off in Montréal, among other world cities--will work. Certainly it has potential.

In a place like Toronto, which was a tough city for cyclists even before new mayor Rob Ford expressed his disdain for the mode of transportation, changing the tone is vital, enthusiasts say.

“It’s not going to change things overnight, but it's a lot harder for a motorist to become angry at someone on a Bixi bicycle than a bicycle courier or a racer. And I think that's important in bridging the gap between these two road users,” said James Schwartz, a Torontonian who blogs about cycling issues at The Urban Country.

The evidence is anecdotal, but several urban affairs and cycling experts who have examined bicycle sharing around the world report bikes such as the heavy Bixi, which carries riders in an old-fashioned upright stance, most often without a helmet and at speeds drastically slower than your average road rider, has a calming effect both on motorists and more aggressive cyclists.

[. . .]

Under the Bixi system, automated docking stations are scattered around cities. Users in Toronto will have the option of signing up for a year ($95), a month ($40) or a day ($5). Once a rider has signed up, usage is free for the first 30 minutes of any ride. The system is designed for short hauls, such as inner-city commutes or running an errand across downtown.

Critics of bike sharing say it’s a marketing exercise that does little to reduce road congestion. Fans say it gets casual riders back on bikes and in big, dense cities such as London it’s by far the cheapest and easiest way to get around the centre of town.

Toronto's mandatory helmet laws, it seems, might doom the system.

One of the awkward truths of shared bicycle systems around the world is that the shorn inconveniences often include helmets. Few Bixi riders wear them.

Helmets are a source of much controversy in the cycling world. While governments and public health officials encourage their use, pointing to statistics that show the severity of head injuries is reduced by helmets, many cycling organizations argue they discourage casual riders by sending the message the sport is dangerous. Fewer riders means fewer public health benefits from the exercise. A lower critical mass of riders raises risk for the remaining riders, they say.

Authorities are left in the awkward position of promoting both helmet use and a bicycle system that unintentionally and indirectly discourages it.

Melbourne, Australia is one of the only cities with both a shared bicycle system and a mandatory helmet law. Bixi usage there has languished badly compared with other cities. Bixi’s parent company, Public Bike System, and the city have searched for solutions, such as introducing helmet rentals and vending machines.

Michael Rubbo, an Australian-Canadian cycling enthusiast and film maker who is now based near Sydney, has closely examined bicycle sharing in Montreal, Barcelona, Dublin and closer to home in Melbourne. He says the Melbourne system is at risk of failure unless the helmet law is softened.

But then, if one of the major complaints of Toronto cyclists--justifiably, to a non-trivial extent--is that it isn't as safe for bikers as one might like, does it really make sense to rescind entirely defensible safety regulations? Letting more people get their heads cracked apart to help a bike-sharing system get off the ground doesn't seem very defensible. All IMHO, of course.

80 Beats lets us know that tractor beams of some sort may be possible.

Bag News Notes features the photography of Danny Ghitis, who catalogues quotidian life in the small Polish city of Oscwiecim.

At Border Thinking, Laura Agustin is skeptical that new high-tech passport and border controls in Nigeria will limit unsanctioned migration.

The Discoblog reports on a species that turns out to have seven sexes as opposed to our two.

Eastern Approaches reports on the Hungarian government's decision to let the Communist secret police archives be dispersed, making it next to impossible to maintain a single history.

At Extraordinary Observations, Rob Pitingolo makes the point that bike racks at airports aren't for passengers so much as they are for workers.

Geocurrent Events reports on distinctive cultures in the North Africa desert, with reports of the Ibadhi Muslim Berbers of southern Algeria's Mzab Oasis opposing the government and the Libya's relatively pro-Gaddafi Saharan Fezzan with its unviable irrigation-driven agriculture.

The Global Sociology Blog reports on Spanish sociology Manuel Castells' evaluation of Egypt's shutdown of Internet access during the protests: costly, incomplete, and ultimately not encompassing nearly enough media to be effective.

The Grumpy Sociologist positively reviews a film dealing with the integration and other issues in Rosengard, a heavily immigrant-populated neighbourhood of Sweden's southern city of Malmo. Competition over scarce resources--within the neighbourhood, in wider Sweden--is key to explain social issues.

Language Hat blogs about the complications of dubbing The Simpsons in Québec, where the efforts to produce a dubbed version saleable in Francophone Europe (doomed to fail because of French policies, thanks feorag) lead to the production of local versions lacking local characteristics.

Lawyers, Guns and Money's Charli Carpenter points out that a new United Nations study pointing to common sexual violence against men in conflict zones also lends itself to pointing out that many women inflict sexual violence themselves.

Progressive Download's John Farrell notes a prominent Southern Baptist leader's statement that opposing same-sex marriage is going to look as bad as opposing interracial marriage and points out that the leader's distaste for science that doesn't back him up isn't going to help.

At The Search, Douglas Todd introduces his readers to the interesting former Roman Catholic bishop of Victoria Remi de Roo, known for his theological iconoclasm.

Torontoist points out that the downtown Urban Affairs Library was closed down by the Toronto Public Library service only because it had to be.

Understanding Society's Daniel Little engages critically with the myth that mass education engenders social mobility, pointing out that it can as readily reproduce existing social networks as creating new ones.

Thanks to Facebook's John for linking to Sami Grover's Treehugger essay on the problems of being carless. I've not noticed it, having lived in compact communities and now in a Toronto with decent mass transit, with frequent biking; I'm thankful I'm not in the Phoenix that Andrew described some time back.

The first time I came to America I was 23 years old, and it always confused me why people were so shocked that I had never driven a car. Until I started to travel. Because as soon as you leave the major metropolitan areas, it can be amazing how un-pedestrian friendly most infrastructure is. The fact is that being carless in most of America is, without doubt, a major impediment to social inclusion and economic well-being. Without a car, you're basically a second class citizen.

[. . A] curious yet provocative piece over at The Guardian has gotten me thinking about what it really means to be carless in the Land of Opportunity. Linh Dinn—who himself grew up in suburban Virginia—writes a fascinating essay/rant about America's automobile mania and those who cannot, for whatever reason, participate. He begins with an account of a horrific incident in South Carolina where a woman deliberately drove into a group of teenagers who would not get out of the road because she "wanted to knock some sense into them". This is, says Dinn, a symptom of a wider malaise:

"At that intersection, there are no sidewalks. All over America, there are many roads without sidewalks. Many communities are built just for the car. Lawns, often vast, encroach right to the curbs. America's 307 million people own about 150m cars. Entire blocks are reserved for parking garages. Walking on a road shoulders, one can feel like a vagrant or a prowling criminal."

Dinn's essay goes off on some interesting tangents, exploring everything from the mono-cultural blandness of the suburban megamall, to the inevitable emotional attachment to the automobile that comes when it is ones ticket to freedom and, often, sexual awakening.

Living now in rural North Carolina, the hegemony of the motor car is ever more apparent to me. It's rare that I see people walking down the grass verge on the road into town as cars come rushing by. Given the unpleasant experience it must be, I can only assume that most that do are doing so because they have to, not because they want to.

Thoughts? And yes, I think cars have a perfectly legitimate place in the transportation mix.

Acts of Minor Treason's Andrew Barton wrestles with the maddening Phoenix light rail system.

blogTO was the first to report that the Green Room, a locally famous bar/club/restaurant in the Annex closed down for health reasons, is open again.

Daniel Drezner wonders why Middle Eastern dictators are so bad with presenting themselves in mass media.

Extraordinary Observations' Rob Pitingolo makes the observation that with cars or bikes, travelling an urban landscape becomes much more full with detail.

Far Outliers quotes a recent passage by the problematic V.S. Naipaul from his recent book on Africa, describing a Coloured woman's effort to develop a positive identity as something other than "Other."

James Nicoll wonders how you would cook triffids. Like greens, the consensus seems to be.

Language Log links to an analysis of Said Gadaffi's recent speech that looks at the (largely absent) claimed Libyan traits of his attempt folksy speech to the people.

Lawyers, Guns and Money's Scott Erik Kaufman reviews Alison Bechdel's classic Fun Home as a reverse of Maus, in that the understanding of the parent can be achieved through narrative.

Registan revisits the perennial problem of balancing human rights against national interests in American foreign policy, this time in Uzbekistan.

Steve Munro documents the confusion and despair operating in the Toronto area's transit coordinators.

At the Volokh Conspiracy, Ilya Somin suggests that the Internet has led libertarianism become a viable ideology for well-socialized young people.

The Yorkshire Ranter takes a look at the peculiar mechanics behind Egypt's recent Internet shutdown.

BagNewsNotes' Michael Shaw wonders whether the assassination attempt in Arizona on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, an attractive, kind, broadly centrist woman married to an astronaut, could shift people from the extremes.

blogTO's Derek Flack wonders when the necessary infrastructure for electric cars in Toronto will be installed.

Daniel Drezner wonders if the current standoff in Cöte d'Ivoire between illegal incumbent Gbagbo and, well, everyone else might be one of those rare cases where unilateral American military intervention might be justified.

The Discoblog notes that toilet-trained pigs in Taiwan have dramatically reduced the volume of waste in Taiwanese rivers.

Extraordinary Observation's Rob Pitingolo makes the point that the tendency to judge cyclists or drivers by the behaviour of the worst isn't good, and that cyclists need to be responsible, too. Hear hear.

Far Outliers traces the origins of the Indonesian national army--the one that drove out the Dutch--in the Japanese transfer of matériel to local nationalists after the Japanese surrender in 1945.

Jonathan Crowe, at the Map Room, links to a collection of maps showing Asian mass transit network routes, up to the year 2020.

Slap Upside the Head takes note that the immigration rules for international same-sex marriages in Canada are being tightened, to reduce the risk of fraud. Is the same being done--has the same been done--for opposite-sex marriages? I hope.

Torontoist's Steve Kupferman gets a tour of the surprisingly attractive R.C. Harris water treatment plant in east-end Toronto.

Andy Towle at Towleroad noted the creation of a GLBT museum in San Francisco.

Une heure de peine's Denis Colombi writes about the fundamental tensions in the positions of Banksy and other renegade artists, who pose themselves as countercultural while needing to participate in the web of established artistic networks.

Window on Eurasia suggests that Moscow is encouraging the growth of Ruthenian--Rusyn--nationalism in far western Ukraine.

Bed rest can suit me well. You too, apparently.

Bad Astronomy reports that it is unlikely that the information suggesting Betelguese will go supernova is incorrect, and that even if it did there wouldn't be any risk to us (but we knew that). I'm disapponited. Is it so wrong for me to want stars to go supernova for my amusement?

blogTO lets us know that bus shelters and garbage cans are going to be removed from the downtown during the G20 summit. So, no to shirtsleeves habitability, then?

Centauri Dreams has a remarkable article examining how astronomical data went from being closely-guarded to being available to anyone who wants it.

Extraordinary Observation's Rob Pitingolo is curious why the poor do not make use of bikes more often. I respond in the comments that it is because of rational concerns over time and effort, and the existential problems with cycling culture in North American cities.

Landscape+Urbanism announces a new collection studying the Untied States' "Third Coast," the Great Lakes Basin that incidentally includes nearly all of inhabited Ontario. Yay! to new geographic paradigms.

Lawyers, Guns and Money's argues that, based on military budgets alone, Iran is not a regional superpower in the Middle East, with defense budgeting half that of Israel's and a fifth of Saudi Arabia's.

Murdering Mouth links to some interesting articles suggesting that Apples proprietary approach to software is going to battle it out with Google's more open model. I'm rooting for Google.

Torontoist's Nancy Paiva is surprised that famously combative Torotno mayoral candidate George Smitherman did quite well during his appearance at comedy club Second City.

Wasatch Economics' Scott Peterson makes the reasonable argument that Mexicans immigrate heavily to relatively poor regions along the border because of the human connections that they have to labour-hungry economic sectors.

Yorkshire Ranter writes about the politics of aesthetics and their influence on--of all things--the efficiency of London buses.

Daniel Drezner wonders if, at a time when Europe is weakening, the United States can find partners and allies to take Europe's place in emerging countries like India and Brazil.

Extraordinary Observation's speculates that social engineering might change the ways American cities and city-dwellers operate, becoming more pro-bike for instance.

Geocurrents writes about Paraguay, suggesting that its apparent tolerance for corruption may have a lot to do with its participation in two deadly, very draining wars.

Global Sociology really doesn't like the IMF, particularly what it sees as economic strategies which disproportionately hurt the poor and the middle classes.

Law 21's Jordan Furlong warns that China may end up becoming hugely important as the outsourcing of legal work goes, with obvious implications for lawyers in North America and elsewhere.

Lawyers, Guns and Money's communication of the reality that the Israeli-South African alliance under apartheid was so close that Israel was apparently willing to sell South Africa nuclear weapons doesn't surprise me. The fact that Israel got away with such potentially catastrophic proliferation will threaten non-proliferation efforts, in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Noel Maurer is not impressed by German public opinion's hostility to IMF bailouts of southern European Euro-using countries, since Germany will benefit.

Slap Upside the Head reports on the sad news that Canada is about to deport an asylum seeker, hoping that Canada wwill save him from persecution on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

Spacing Toronto's Shawn Micallef mourns the recent death of Will Munro, a queer artist and community organizer who helped transform Toronto's artistic community.

Zero Geography maps Internet usage by country. Romania and Ukraine turn out to have surprisingly low rates of Internet usage.

The bizarre fatal car accident last 31 August that saw a cyclist, Darcy Allan Sheppard, get fatally struck by a car driver by one Michael Bryant, the former Attorney-General of Ontario, in the middle of the downtown on Bloor Street West has come to one sort of end with the decision of the Crown--using a prosecutor imported from out of province, so as to avoid conflicts of interest--not to prosecute Bryant on the grounds that a conviction would not have been possible.

Special prosecutor Richard Peck has explained the reasoning behind his decision in greater depth, highlighting the key pieces of evidence that convinced him a conviction in the case would not be possible.

Chief among these is Bryant's contention that it was a stalled engine that led his car to lurch forward and contact the cyclist from behind (as is seen in the video evidence) and the fact that Sheppard had no less than six other incidents with motorists in the days and weeks leading up to the fateful altercation with Bryant.

"The evidence establishes that Mr. Sheppard was the aggressor in the altercation with Mr. Bryant," Peck explained to the court earlier today. "He was agitated and angry, and without any provocation from Mr. Bryant or his wife. The defence position that Mr. Bryant was deeply frightened and panicked is supported by the available evidence, including Mr. Sheppard's history of aggressiveness towards motorists and others."

Allan Sheppard, the victim's father by adoption, offered an ambivalent response to today's news. Although he noted that he was "content with the result as it came," he also had this to say: "I don't know what justice is in this circumstance. I'm not happy with the result. I'm not sure what would have made me happy."

The National Post, Toronto Star, and the Globe and Mail all go into greater detail on the reasons for the Crown's dismissal of the case. The National Post article links to photos of Sheppard attacking another car and its driver in downtown Toronto some days earlier, if you're curious. The sum of the evidence is that Sheppard, who had already attacked other cars and drivers in previous weeks and who had been behaving violently with one encounter with the police after his girlfriend's complaints, posed a legitimate enough threat for Bryant to be justified in trying to leave. Sheppard certainly did not deserve to die, but Sheppard certainly did create the conditions for his death.

The whole affair has revealed a lot of unpleasant things about the organization Toronto cyclist community. The volume with which some self-appointed spokespeople, like the Toronto Cyclists Union head Yvonne Bambrick, claimed and continued to claim that the fault lay entirely with Bryant, making a decidedly unworthy Sheppard the martyr for their movement, sickens me. I am equally disturbed by the extent to which some cyclists have tried to claim the moral high ground all for themselves, Bambrick going so far as to specifically warn car drivers--not bike drivers, of course, they are the innocent in this and every other case-that they should stay calm on the roads. I am disgusted. If bikes are to be integrated into Toronto's transit system--as I certainly think they should be--then bicycles and cyclists should be expected to provide the same respect that everyone on the road is entitled to claim. Self-righteous special pleading becomes no one, and hinders much.

Extraordinary Observation's Rob Pitingolo blogged last Monday about how cuts to Cincinnati public transit have left him increasingly disenchanted with the idea.

It's now been almost a month since I've ridden public transportation. I've replaced almost all those trips by bicycling. I've found that biking around is ideal for short trips (less than two miles), usually the best option for medium-length trips (2 to 5 miles), and at least as (in)convenient as public transit for long trips (up to 10 miles).

I think what I liked, in principal, about public transit is that it's so cheap (compared to driving) and (in theory) gets me to the places I want to go. I don't have to worry about actually driving (a stressful activity, in my opinion) and I can read a book or a magazine as I'm ferried along to my destination.

Over the past month I realized that bicycling is cheap too - cheaper than riding public transit, in fact (assuming you aren't riding an expensive bike). And while I might not be able to read or write emails or sleep while I'm traveling from one place to another, I am exercising, and that's a form of multitasking about as good as any. I don't have to visit a gym. I don't have to schedule a workout into my day. I don't sit around at the end of the week feeling guilty because I've been "too busy" to exercise all week.

Me? The first couple of weeks this month, I'd experimented with combining cycling with the occasional token when needed, but I've reverted to the weekly pass with the cycling secondary. I'm lucky enough to live in neigubourhoods that are very TTC-accessible--the Dufferin bus runs every few minutes a couple minutes away from me, the subway line is a dozen minutes walk south, and every quarter-hour or so the eastbound Dupont bus stopped on the corner of the intersection opposite mine (the westbound stops a dozen metres from my alleyway). Biking, while fun, and a useful backup if need be, and something I might be able to integrate into my commuting--might; I can't take my bike onto the subways during peak commuting times, although the buses do mostly have racks--isn't as easy a ritual, as comfortable, as stepping onto the bus and showing the driver my Metropass.

But then, I'm lucky to have those two options, especially since I don't own or operate a motor vehicle. What would things be like for people in greater Toronto--or other cities--who don't have the options of good mass transit or cyclable commuting routes or their own vehicles?

John Spears' Toronto Star article "Nothing settled in bicycle wars" makes the point described in the article title. While better education for drivers is a must and better bike lanes is likewise very good where possible, I find myself increasingly annoyed with Yvonne Bambrick et al. for their opposition to the regulation of bicycles in Toronto: if bicycles are to become part of Toronto's official transportation strategies, shouldn't they (and their drivers) be regulated just as strictly as other vehicles and other drivers in Toronto?

In a city still stunned by the death of cyclist Darcy Allan Sheppard, resulting in charges against former attorney-general Michael Bryant, the city's works committee discussed two proposals yesterday: That all cyclists be required to wear helmets, and all cyclists be licensed.

Both proposals had been made by Councillor Michael Walker before Sheppard's death.

The committee resolved nothing: Cycling advocates opposed both proposals, which were referred to city staff for review. But the debate traced continuing tensions among cyclists, drivers and pedestrians.

Jiang showed raw emotion as he recalled the death of his sister Cheng-Li Jiang, 56, struck by a 15-year-old cyclist on a sidewalk on Kennedy Rd. near Sheppard Ave. E. on Aug. 9. She died the next day, without regaining consciousness.

The boy on the bike was not charged. "Nobody was responsible for an innocent woman's death," her brother said. "I cannot speak without anger: A person's life is nothing. A Chinese-Canadian's life is worthless," he said.

Toronto councillors haven't paid enough attention to safety, he said. "Cheng-Li's tragedy should never happen again if council takes action now." He supported mandatory helmets and licences for cyclists as well as speed limits for bikes.

[. . .]

[Toronto city councillor] De Baeremaeker, who regularly cycles to work, recalled a passenger opening a taxi door in front of him on Dundas St. "I flew onto the asphalt, hit my head, headfirst onto the asphalt, and slid under a taxi cab. That helmet, I'm sure, saved me from very serious harm."

And Carroll spoke of how her husband hit an unseen obstacle on a bike path at night a dozen years ago, falling and knocking a hole in his helmet. Were it not for the helmet, "that would have been his brain – there's no question in my mind."

But Yvonne Bambrick, of the 800-member Toronto Cyclists Union, vocally opposed both proposals, saying they miss the point.

Helmets protect cyclists after they fall, she said: The objective should be to prevent collisions in the first place. "(Removing) the things that are happening to them, which I think is the responsibility of municipal and provincial government ... that's the issue," she said, calling for more and better bike lanes and better education for drivers.

I've had problems with motorized vehicles on streets where I've been biking, true, but those vehicles have been exceptional. The very large majority of motor vehicles I've encountered on the streets have been driven by responsible people who've taken care to drive responsibly. The same certainly can't be said of cyclists, who by and large seem happy to persist in behaviours--running red lights, biking in the opposite direction of traffic, biking on pedestrian laneways so as to avoid red lights, veering across lanes, et cetera--which would fill Toronto's streets with flaming wreckage if these behaviours were ever adopted in similarly regular fashion by drivers of motorized vehicles. Contra Bambrick, cyclists and bicycles need to be strictly regulated, for the good of everyone.

I'd like to thank Jerry and Mike on Facebook for pointing me to this analysis of the Freakonomics post I linked to previously. To wit:

The chain of stupidity begins when cyclists see “Drive Out at Controlled Intersection” as the leading cause of injuries and incorrectly assume that this means the driver is at fault in all of these accidents.

But actually reading the report yields the exact opposite conclusion. A close reading of the report shows that the crash types are also associated with a table of “Possible Contributing Factors.” The most common contributing factor – “cyclist riding on sidewalk or crosswalk.” (Which also happens to be illegal for riders over 18 years of age.)

The blogger goes on to quote from the report:

A cyclist crossing a roadway from the sidewalk, even at a moderate speed, can enter the motorist’s field of view much more suddenly than a pedestrian would. Motorists scanning for pedestrians as they hastily negotiate an intersection may not expect to encounter cyclists in this part of the right-of-way.

Cyclists on the sidewalk may not be able to see approaching motorists until the last moment, or may mistakenly assume that motorists have noticed them.

In almost thirty percent of all collisions, the cyclists were riding on the sidewalk immediately prior to the collision.

The most frequent type of crash involved a motorist approaching or proceeding into a controlled intersection and colliding with a cyclist who was crossing the intersection in a perpendicular direction. Roughly half of the cyclists in this category were riding on the sidewalk and collided with the motor-vehicle within the crosswalk area.

Finally:

For the most serious category of crashes (Type 1), all of the crash types in Dr. Cavacuiti’s chart are associated with cyclist contributing factors more often than motorist factors with the exception of “Motorist Overtaking.” In that category, drivers are executing unsafe or improper lane changes in 16% of the crashes. However, cyclists are still at fault for some of these accidents too.

Overall, reckless driving only appears to be minimally responsible. For example, the highest percentage of motorists disobeying traffic signals for all crash types is 7.4% (under Drive Out at controlled Intersection – and disobeying traffic signals only appears in association with one other crash type – 2% for Motorist Left Turn Facing Bicyclist). To put that in perspective, for this same crash type, the biggest contributing factor was “cyclist riding on sidewalk/crosswalk” with 51.1% followed by darkness (18.3%), rainy weather (10.9%) and wet road surface (13.6%). In other words, contrary to Anon’s assumption, motorists aren’t running red lights, cyclists are riding illegally or unsafely.

In fact, of the top ten accident types on Dr. Cavacuiti’s chart, six don’t list any motorist contributing factors at all, and all but one of them have cyclists as the largest contributing factors to the accidents.

FYI.

I'd like to thank

mindstalk for pointing out to me (and doing a good job of reminding me about) this link to a Freakonomics blog posting analyzing the causes of cyclist mortality in Toronto.

When it comes to sharing the road with cars, many people seem to assume that such accidents are usually the cyclist’s fault — a result of reckless or aggressive riding. But an analysis of police reports on 2,752 bike-car accidents in Toronto found that clumsy or inattentive driving by motorists was the cause of 90 percent of these crashes. Among the leading causes: running a stop sign or traffic light, turning into a cyclist’s path, or opening a door on a biker.

This may be a plausible explanation for cyclists' casualties, but it doesn't touch on other factors, like the attentiveness of cyclists to the rules of the road. If the majority of cyclists I see just don't pay attention to road rules, or even basic politeness, how can that not contribute to accidents?

I like this note, taken from a comment at the blog.

We need to have an epochal shift in culture of both driving and cycling. Drivers need to realize that cyclists were on the roads first, that they are vehicles, and that two seconds of waiting behind cyclists until it is safe to pass are better than the consequences of ending the cyclist’s life. Of course, we need penalties for ending cyclists’ lives that actually ARE worse than waiting two seconds. We need to enforce the rules about passing safely, and about not assaulting the drivers of other vehicles (hitting your incredibly loud aftermarket horn as you pass me counts). We need to train cyclists on how to survive on the roads that are here in the first place, even before the attitude shift, because if bicycles don’t become commonplace they will never be looked for by cars.

At Acts of Minor Treason, Andrew Barton photographs Montréal's tunnlled Ville-Marie expressway and wonders why we can't do the same with the Gardiner, as well as noting that Toronto's skyscrapers keep growing..

Daniel Drezner wonders if some regions produce more entertaining summits than others, and observes that Bush would have loved to have intercepted a North Korean ship carrying arms for Iran.

Hunting Monsters considers the dark past, present, and likely future of the poor community of Hebron.

Joe. My. God reports that the Indian government supports the decriminalization of homosexuality and reports that gay men in Guangzhou fought police when the latter tried to push them out of a park where they socialize.

Open the Future's Jamais Cascio considers whether the "Social Transtion Stress Disorder" her created for a RPG system set in 2100, relating to an inability to tolerate rapid change, might exist now.

Slap Upside the Head reports that the Alberta government has delayed the introduction of new school regulations notifying parents ahead of time whether gay themes appear in school so they can take them out.

Spacing Toronto celebrates Pages Books, a now-defunct bookstore active for thirty years on Queen Street West until rising rents killed it.
Strange Maps hosts a map showing FDR's vacation route.

The Dragon's Tales Will Baird lets us know that new thinking suggests that the first farmers in western and central Europe weren't hunter-gatherers who picked up thee technology on their own, but rather that very unpopular migrants from southeastern Europe did. As well, there are international talks regarding the possibility of recruiting China as a participant in a project to build a massive new telescope.

Torontoist's David Topping tackles the question of how to deal with bikes and concludes that more funding for bike lanes is essential, while Kevin Plummer reports on the Depression-era construction of the old Toronto Stock Exchange building.

Writing in the Toronto Star, Peter Gorrie advances a great idea.

I've cycled throughout the city, including daily commutes, for 25 years, with only two accidents: On one occasion I was doored by the driver of a parked car; on the other, my front wheel got caught in the streetcar tracks where King St. angles into Queen. I avoided becoming road kill only because no traffic was coming up close behind.

So I'm all for making things easier, and safer, for cyclists. I take heart whenever I encounter bike traffic jams here. I'd love it if Toronto's streets were like Beijing's rivers of two-wheelers 20 years ago.

Still, cyclists increasingly piss me off. I'm getting, pardon the pun, cranky about those who weave in and out of traffic, ignore signs and, worst of all, zip along sidewalks.

It was bad enough recently that some advocates insisted cyclists be allowed to ignore stop signs. Their arguments centred on the terrible hardship of losing momentum.

[. . .]

I've come to the view that once you hit your teens, cycling on any public thoroughfare is, just like operating a motor vehicle, a privilege, not a right. I realize this is anathema to a free-spirited breed, but cyclists should be tested and licensed, and expected to obey the rules of the road, just like any driver. Past age 12 they should not be on sidewalks – period.

This would offer cyclists a few benefits, including acceptance they're entitled to be on the road; permitted, for example, to take enough space to avoid being hit by drivers who pull out or open their door without looking.

Obviously, responsible riding would make cyclists safer, since weaving through traffic, barging across lanes, running stop signs, crossing laneway and driveway exits on sidewalks, and running into people are all dangerous. Licensing might improve the tracing of stolen bikes.

The cyclists in the comments don't exactly disprove Gorrie's case.

Right now, as Spacing Toronto notes, "City Council is debating whether to approve bike lanes on Jarvis Street. Spacing has been covering it with contributor Jake Schabas in council chambers while our editors watch it via Rogers Cable web streaming (you can also watch it on Rogers Cable on TV). You can see updates on our Twitter account (much easier than live blogging), and you can follow what a variety of people think about the debate on Twitter by following the hashtag #TOCouncil. If you want to see contrasting views on the debate, check out Mayor Miller’s Tweets and that of self-appointed opposition leader councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong." These are the changes that I blogged about at the beginning of the month, which would see--among other things--one of Jarvis' five traffic lanes closed down and replaced with two bikers' lanes.

The Jarvis Street bike lanes proposal passed just now--Adam Giambrone said so on Facebook. The idea of bike lines doesn't sound bad at all, but I also have to agree with the sentiments expressed by many of the interviewed in Tess Kalinowski's recent Sunday Star front-page article "Can cyclists and motorists get along?" about cyclists` frequently evangelical tone.

They move faster than cars in downtown traffic. They can be seen sprinting ahead at intersections, sometimes weaving their way through lines of automobiles, occasionally thumping the cars that drive too close.

They don't pay for gas or licence fees, and their fight for a bigger share of the road is gaining momentum at City Hall, where some motorists say cyclists are frontline soldiers in a city-waged war against cars.

"Any day these guys are nuts. It's the Birkenstock babes gone wild," said one suburbanite of the cycling lobby, who didn't want his name used. "They have committees, they have sub-committees, they have full-time bike ambassadors."

They are also the minority – by a mile. The city's plans call for a $70 million investment in cycling infrastructure over 10 years even though only about 2 per cent of commuters travel by bike, raising questions about whether cyclists should pay to use the road through licensing fees.

[. . .]

"They're trapped and frustrated," says Yvonne Bambrick, executive director of the Toronto Cyclists Union. "Cars are not freedom. They're like a ball and chain around your ankle. A bike is real freedom. You're on your own schedule and it costs hardly anything."

Bambrick doesn't wear a helmet. In Ontario helmets are mandatory only until age 18. She might wear one if she were a long-distance commuter. But she mostly bikes in the core where she feels safe.

"There are millions of people who cycle safely every day around the world, including Torontonians, without helmets. Our streets need to better accommodate this active form of transport. Cyclists deserve dedicated space on our roads. It is up to drivers and cyclists to share the space," she said.

Bambrick is among those who say discussing bikes against cars is passé. Sure, there is carelessness and occasionally brazen lawlessness among cyclists and drivers. But it's time to get on with figuring out how all users can share the road.

Most bikers aren't like that, I don't hesitate to add. I count myself among their number, well, not recently, but still in theory. There's still a loud minority that I worry about, like David Balzer, who came up with some interesting ideas in his recent eye weekly article "Road Rules".

Temporary sidewalk detours save lives and should not be read as intrusive or reckless. (In European cities, many bike lanes are on sidewalks, not streets.) If a cyclist is riding slowly, dragging his feet on the ground and making room for you before he moves back onto the street, you have no cause to give him a dirty look. Cyclists, respect pedestrians, move at their pace, thank them and return to the street as soon as you can.

Riding slowly on a peopled sidewalk, instead of--say--dismounting and walking the bike?

I support biking and agree with many cyclists who say that drivers of cars and other motorized vehicles are frequently careless. I also think that a lot of biking advocates just don't want to get the point that there are a lot of bad cyclists out there, people who don't wear helmets, who don't know how to signal, who cut across lines and bike on sidewalks ... If drivers of motorized vehicles behaved that way, Toronto's streets would be post-apocalyptic. Maybe, just maybe, despite the protests of some bike advocates, some sort of mandatory government licensing of cyclists would be a very good idea indeed.

blogTO's Brady Yauch blogs about the latest trends in bike commuting.

The never-ending bike debate in Toronto and the GTA took another twist this week, with the statistics from Stats Canada's 2001-2006 census report saying commuter bike riding increased by 32% during the five-year period. Adding fuel to the bike-riding fire, Metrolinx said in the coming years it wants to drastically increase the number of commuters who ride bikes to GO stations.

As might be expected, people living downtown were far more likely to take a bike to work than their suburban counterparts. The city provides a map breaking down each area of the city and the percentage of residents who prefer biking to work. For bragging rights--west-enders reign king as bike commuters.

I think that I'm a west-ender.

The comments end up being taken over by the predictable debate between cyclists who are outraged at the temerity of drivers to drive and drivers who are likewise upset with the existence of cyclists. All I'll say, as I've said before, is that while the bicycle-related infrastructure of Toronto needs to improve very significantly and car drivers should pay more attention, there are far too many dangerously incompetent cyclists out there. Biking on the wrong side of the road, on the sidewalk, without helmet, and cutting off cars? Please.

Thus ends one stage of one of the strangest bike theft stories in Toronto's history.

Toronto residents looking for stolen bicycles have one more week to check a cache seized from bike shop owner Igor Kenk, police said.

Authorities seized about 3,000 bicycles from several properties owned by Kenk in July.

He was arrested and faces a long list of theft and drug-related charges.

If people don't come to the police warehouse to check for their bicycles, they may not have a chance to do so again, although it's not clear yet what police will do with the stolen bikes, said Detective-Const. Eric Andre on the weekend.

"Right now, as of this point, [Kenk] hasn't forfeited any of the property," he said. "But there could be something ahead of us shortly."

Toronto police say they're exhausting all avenues to get Kenk to forfeit the bikes, but wouldn't elaborate.

People can look for their stolen bikes until Sept. 7.

Profile

rfmcdonald

My Website

Navigation

February 2021

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28

Syndicate

Page Summary

[PHOTO] A trike in the Annex
[URBAN NOTE] "Should cyclists have to play by the same rules as cars?"
[URBAN NOTE] "The Myth of the Cyclist as Urban Warrior"
[URBAN NOTE] "Is the Bixi the middle ground between motorists and couriers?"
[BLOG] Some Monday links
[LINK] "Being Carless in America is Like Second-Class Citizenship"
[BLOG] Some Monday links
[BLOG] Some Tuesday links
[BLOG] Some Wednesday links
[BLOG] Some Thursday links
[URBAN NOTE] On the end of the Bryant-Sheppard affair and biking in Toronto
[URBAN NOTE] Mass transit and cycling and transit, again
[BRIEF NOTE] On Toronto's bicycle problem
[LINK] "The Anatomy of Misinformation"
[LINK] "Who Causes Cyclists’ Deaths?"
[LINK] Some Friday links
[LINK] "The case for testing and licensing cyclists"
[URBAN NOTE] Toronto and Jarvis and Cyclists, again
[LINK] "Out of the Car and onto the Bike: Bike Commuting on the Rise"
[TOR] "Last week to check Toronto stolen bike cache"

Style Credit

Base style: Librarian's Dream by branchandroot
Theme: Pigeon Blue by dancing_serpent

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Page generated Jul. 12th, 2025 03:00 pm

A Bit More Detail

Assorted Personal Notations, Essays, and Other Jottings

Entries tagged with cyclists

[PHOTO] A trike in the Annex

[URBAN NOTE] "Should cyclists have to play by the same rules as cars?"

[URBAN NOTE] "The Myth of the Cyclist as Urban Warrior"

[URBAN NOTE] "Is the Bixi the middle ground between motorists and couriers?"

[BLOG] Some Monday links

[LINK] "Being Carless in America is Like Second-Class Citizenship"

[BLOG] Some Monday links

[BLOG] Some Tuesday links

[BLOG] Some Wednesday links

[BLOG] Some Thursday links

[URBAN NOTE] On the end of the Bryant-Sheppard affair and biking in Toronto

[URBAN NOTE] Mass transit and cycling and transit, again

[BRIEF NOTE] On Toronto's bicycle problem

[LINK] "The Anatomy of Misinformation"

[LINK] "Who Causes Cyclists’ Deaths?"

[LINK] Some Friday links

[LINK] "The case for testing and licensing cyclists"

[URBAN NOTE] Toronto and Jarvis and Cyclists, again

[LINK] "Out of the Car and onto the Bike: Bike Commuting on the Rise"

[TOR] "Last week to check Toronto stolen bike cache"