Admiral Beez
Superstar
It's everyone's fault. The minute a driver gets out of his/her car he/she/shim is a pedestrian, and vice versa. Most of us will ride a bicycle sometime in our lives on a roadway, so again we'll all part of the three.
|
|
|
Cyclists? Pedestrians? Drivers? Who is to Blame for Urban Tension?
- Thread starter M II A II R II K
- Start date
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Damn bicyclists, said the Red Hartebee.
[video=youtube;S2oymHHyV1M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2oymHHyV1M[/video]
[video=youtube;S2oymHHyV1M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2oymHHyV1M[/video]
Admiral Beez
Superstar
WTB... What The Buck?!
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Very sad news about this cyclist killed by a large commercial vehicle http://www.thestar.com/news/article...a-morrison-was-a-yoga-teacher-dancer-mom?bn=1
Like they teach you in motorcycle training, you must always assume that the vehicle driver doesn't see you, and can quickly kill you with a flick of the wheel. It's not fair, or right, but you'll be dead nonetheless. Be careful out there folks.
Like they teach you in motorcycle training, you must always assume that the vehicle driver doesn't see you, and can quickly kill you with a flick of the wheel. It's not fair, or right, but you'll be dead nonetheless. Be careful out there folks.
pman
Senior Member
Toronto drivers need to check their blind spot on the right when making right turns from the right-hand lane. Hard to do when you're checking left for oncoming traffic on the street you're trying to turn onto, and for pedestrians crossing with the light (and against it). But since a lot of cyclists pass right-turning cars on the right, it's absolutely necessary to check before turning. Driving schools should teach this and it should be tested on the exam.
nfitz
Superstar
Sigh, need to check right, left, front, back ... and do it all over again while your turning. Sigh ...
Part of me simply wants to ban bicycles and especially these child trailers from city streets, to save lives. No, I don't mean that seriously, but at the same time, I don't want to see my loved ones run over by a truck. (not that the child trailer seems to have been a factor in this accident ... if anything I'd have thought it would have made the bicycle more visible).
This one cuts close to home, for while I haven't cycled in years (I just have no desire to play in traffic), my wife frequently sets out on a bike with one of those infernal trailers and my 3-year old. It terrifies me ... I'm much happier to keep a pile of child TTC tickets in my wallet or walk myself.
Part of me simply wants to ban bicycles and especially these child trailers from city streets, to save lives. No, I don't mean that seriously, but at the same time, I don't want to see my loved ones run over by a truck. (not that the child trailer seems to have been a factor in this accident ... if anything I'd have thought it would have made the bicycle more visible).
This one cuts close to home, for while I haven't cycled in years (I just have no desire to play in traffic), my wife frequently sets out on a bike with one of those infernal trailers and my 3-year old. It terrifies me ... I'm much happier to keep a pile of child TTC tickets in my wallet or walk myself.
howl
Active Member
The blame game is a red herring, which is intended to distract people from the real issue at hand. The issue isn’t who is at fault or who is most at fault, it’s who has the right to the space.
Historically a public right-of-way (e.g. a street) was how people got from one property to another. There was no rules about how you got from one place to the next, you could walk, ride your horse, ride in a chariot. The street was just a public space. Out of convenience the practice of keeping horse and horse-drawn vehicles in the middle and pedestrians on the side of the street came into being. When cars came along they replaced the horses in the centre of the street, but cars are generally much faster and more dangerous than horses so the centre of the street became a much more hostile place for pedestrians and for people riding those new-fangled bicycle thingies. Eventually cars pushed pedestrians and bikes right to the very sides of the street, or even off the street entirely, and laws were passed to exclude people not in cars. This was predicated on the 1950’s belief that eventually the whole world would become an automotive paradise were no one even needed to walk.
The current conflicts between cyclists, pedestrians and drivers is about pedestrian and cyclists reclaiming their right to a larger portion of the right-of-way and reducing the car’s domination of the majority of the space within the street. The 1950’s assumption that everyone should be driving a car has been played out and is clearly not a sustainable notion. The laws and practices that were put in place to support that notion need to be revisited and rewritten to allow for a most sustainable right-of-way.
Historically a public right-of-way (e.g. a street) was how people got from one property to another. There was no rules about how you got from one place to the next, you could walk, ride your horse, ride in a chariot. The street was just a public space. Out of convenience the practice of keeping horse and horse-drawn vehicles in the middle and pedestrians on the side of the street came into being. When cars came along they replaced the horses in the centre of the street, but cars are generally much faster and more dangerous than horses so the centre of the street became a much more hostile place for pedestrians and for people riding those new-fangled bicycle thingies. Eventually cars pushed pedestrians and bikes right to the very sides of the street, or even off the street entirely, and laws were passed to exclude people not in cars. This was predicated on the 1950’s belief that eventually the whole world would become an automotive paradise were no one even needed to walk.
The current conflicts between cyclists, pedestrians and drivers is about pedestrian and cyclists reclaiming their right to a larger portion of the right-of-way and reducing the car’s domination of the majority of the space within the street. The 1950’s assumption that everyone should be driving a car has been played out and is clearly not a sustainable notion. The laws and practices that were put in place to support that notion need to be revisited and rewritten to allow for a most sustainable right-of-way.
Minks77
New Member
I'm a cyclist because I love it and how it makes me feel (great, whereas driving I find stressful). I am extremely conscious of the fact I'll be dead in most confrontations (think I'm going to survive hitting an oblivious pedestrian when I'm flying, legally, down broadview?) and I 99% of the time obey the laws of the road. Only times I don't are when those said laws are dangerous (left turn in traffic at broadview and danforth? No thanks) or would put me in danger (usually due to construction). I have had some close encounters with peds never with other riders (I ride everyday) but when it comes to cars I've had many. Most were due to drivers being ignorant (door prizing, not checking blind spots, passing too closely etc) and can be chalked up to mistakes. Very scary, very dangerous mistakes. However, in the past year alone I have had 3 close calls with Malicious drivers. People intending to mess with me by driving me off the road, bumping me from behind and playing stop n go in front of me.
What we need, because cyclists are only going to increase in number, are separated bike lanes (those painted strips are a joke, cars park in them and use them as a soft shoulder to get around other traffic without looking all the time) on safe to ride streets. It's great we have a lane on sherbourne but the road is so busted, especially on the edge where the lane is that it is NOT a safe place to ride. We also need greater awareness, better training (for everyone) and regular law enforcement.
We also need to get past the finger pointing. I saw a cyclist today on st Claire who'd been hit by a car. There was a lot of blood and damage but I thought the driver looked like they were about to pass out from shock as well. This cities roads were built with the 50s suburbia model in mind but that is no longer the case. Every year there are more cyclists, joggers, scooters, ebikes and other non car modes of transport sharing our very limited space and we as a collective need better solutions from our elected fat cats than fantasy "war on cars" and shortsighted TTC decisions. Cars aren't going away but we have the capacity for a finite amount on our city streets each day and as the population of the core booms that number is coming up fast.
In the immortal words of Rodney King: can't we all just get along?
Ps adult cyclists on the sidewalk fill me with rage. I often confront them on my bike, but always say my piece when I'm on foot.
What we need, because cyclists are only going to increase in number, are separated bike lanes (those painted strips are a joke, cars park in them and use them as a soft shoulder to get around other traffic without looking all the time) on safe to ride streets. It's great we have a lane on sherbourne but the road is so busted, especially on the edge where the lane is that it is NOT a safe place to ride. We also need greater awareness, better training (for everyone) and regular law enforcement.
We also need to get past the finger pointing. I saw a cyclist today on st Claire who'd been hit by a car. There was a lot of blood and damage but I thought the driver looked like they were about to pass out from shock as well. This cities roads were built with the 50s suburbia model in mind but that is no longer the case. Every year there are more cyclists, joggers, scooters, ebikes and other non car modes of transport sharing our very limited space and we as a collective need better solutions from our elected fat cats than fantasy "war on cars" and shortsighted TTC decisions. Cars aren't going away but we have the capacity for a finite amount on our city streets each day and as the population of the core booms that number is coming up fast.
In the immortal words of Rodney King: can't we all just get along?
Ps adult cyclists on the sidewalk fill me with rage. I often confront them on my bike, but always say my piece when I'm on foot.
Dan416
Senior Member
I think the separated bike lanes in Montreal are perfect for here.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
No thanks. I think bike lanes from montreal create too many conflicts at intersections to be used on two-way streets (one ways are fine because they are simpler).
Personally I think the separated bike lanes in Amsterdam are perfect for here. If we're doing the separated bike lane thing, we might as well do it right.
Fred.S
Active Member
I agree that Dutch standards are the best in the world. Unfortunately space constraints in many places downtown would preclude them, but there are many places where they could be implemented. It irks me when a new road is built, or existing one rebuilt, and they just throw in the same on-street bike lanes. The recent Dufferin St rebuild in York region particularly bugs me, so much room for off-street bike lanes, which could have been built at probably the same cost of the rebuild. Same with the Eglinton LRT plan (before it became underground) which had on-street paths when there was plenty of room for off-street lanes.
Interestingly though, I noticed the other day they rebuilt the northbound on-ramp from Eglinton to the Allen, which included about 20 meters of grade-seperated bike lane to the right of dual right-turning signalized lanes. IMO, that was done very well, and prevents cyclists from crossing two lanes of traffic to go straight, and keeps them out of conflict of turning vehicles. Kudos to the engineer that came up with that, there's so many intersections in Toronto with bike lanes that are designed badly (such as Lansdowne/Dupunt, before and after the bike lanes got shifted).
Here's a blog I frequent that gives great info and lots of photos and video on cycling infrastructure in the Netherlands: http://hembrow.blogspot.com/
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Here are some interesting posts from a blog I frequent, which provide visuals of how much space is needed for Dutch cycle paths.
At first it seems that Dutch cycle paths take up much more space than they actually do. In reality, the main difference is that their paths tend to be 2-2.5m wide, while ours tend to be 1.5-2m wide. The space taken up by the separating island does not count, since that's a feature that is already present on our streets: that's where all the lightposts and traffic signs are. It just needs to be relocated from the right side of the bike lane to the left side.
These are both examples which really bother me. I live on that section of Dufferin Street and the part that really gets me is that roughly half of all cyclists still ride on the sidewalk, even though the bike lanes are 1.9m wide and are statistically safer than the sidewalk. But you can't say they didn't build any separated bike lanes. To cross under the CN railway, the bike lanes leave the roadway and move adjacent to the sidewalk (but with a really poor transition from the on-street lanes). Those sections are also terribly paved and have been lumpy since day one.
I would have liked to see the entire street built in the manner of the southbound bike lane just south of the CN bridge. The bike lane is located on the same vertical level as the sidewalk, but separated from it by a row of trees.
You can catch a glimpse of it at 0:20 in this video I made a while ago.
[video=youtube;RQkB4iZGXtE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQkB4iZGXtE&feature=channel_video_title[/video]
If they had built the entire length of the street like that (but with better transitions and paving), all the people who ride on the sidewalk would probably be riding in the bike lane. Additionally, northbound cyclists would not have to stop at the traffic light at Glen Shields south, and cyclists would not be affected by the buses making stops.
And yeah, Eglinton avenue, especially near Black Creek, Jane and Leslie, has obscene amounts of space.
Last edited:
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
This is about people, not rights, not road configurations, not technologies, not safety standards. People. The sad truth is you can't change people.
Fred.S
Active Member
I disagree. The Netherlands was much like here 30 years ago. Similar infrastructure, people and a car society. They decided to change, because cars were killing people, as they do here (the most common cause of non-disease death). They invested heavily in infrastructure and programs to get people out of cars (trains, transit, bikes) and learning to ride a bike there is the norm and expected of every child. Along with that, a generation has grown up cycling, and thus respecting cyclists, whether they are one, or in a car driving around bikes. Throwing around blame of who's right and wrong doesn't happen in the Netherlands (at least not to any extent comparable to North American cities).
In Toronto, we can create a much larger bike culture by investing in separate bike infrastructure. This is a win on all levels (financially, environmentally, health, mobility etc) except to those that cling on the concept that a car is the only way. As the cycling percentage goes up, and safety increases for everyone, the tension will gradually lower.
nfitz
Superstar
I'm going to call BS on this one. 30 years ago, in 1981?
I remember in the 1970s being completely awed by photographs of all the cyclists in The Netherlands.
And similar infrastructure and car society to here? What did they do since then, remove all their sprawling undense suburbs?
That isn't to say that there hasn't been a trend in Holland away from cars, and towards bikes. But I wouldn't say it was similar to here now.