General cycling issues (Is Toronto bike friendly?)

[W. K. Lis]

January 1st came and went, and some new laws or rules came in effect that I didn't hear about till now.

From the Ontario Ministry of Transportation website, at this link:

New Cycling Changes

Q1: What new changes do cyclists need to know about?

Beginning January 1, 2017:

• New bicycle traffic signals can be used to direct bicycle traffic at intersections
• Cyclists must obey bicycle traffic signals where they are installed
• Cyclists who do not obey bicycle traffic signals can face a set fine of $85; and, $120 in community safety zones
• Where both a regular traffic signal and a bicycle traffic signal apply to the same lane, cyclists must obey the bicycle signal
• If no bicycle traffic signals are present, cyclists must obey standard traffic signals

Q2: Why did the province pass legislation for bicycle signals?

Bicycle traffic signals are expected to improve safety at intersections and help reduce collisions with pedestrians and drivers.

New One-Metre Passing Law

Q1: What is the penalty to drivers for not leaving a minimum of one-metre distance when passing a cyclist?

The penalty for not leaving a minimum one-metre passing distance is a set fine of $85.00 plus a $5 court fee plus a $20 victim surcharge fine for a total payable of $110.00.

Drivers who contest their ticket by going to court may face a fine of up to $500 if found guilty (fine range is $60 to $500). Upon conviction, two demerit points will also be assigned against the individual’s driver record.

Q2: Will cyclists also be required to leave a minimum one-metre distance when passing a vehicle?

Cyclists are not required to leave a specific one-metre space; however, they are required to obey all the rules of the road. Cyclists who are being overtaken should turn out to the right to allow the vehicle to pass.

Q3: What if there isn’t enough room to allow for a one-metre passing distance? Can a vehicle cross the centre median line to pass the cyclist?

A motorist may, if done safely, and in compliance with the rules of the road, cross the centre line of a roadway in order to pass a cyclist. If this cannot be done, he or she must wait behind the cyclist until it is safe to pass.

Dooring

Q1. What are the new increased penalties for “dooring” offenses?

The new penalties for improper opening of a vehicle door (for driver or passenger) are a set fine of $300.00 upon conviction and 3 demerit points. The total payable fine is $365.00 ($set fine plus $60 victim fine surcharge and $5 court costs).

The current HTA set fine for “dooring” offence is $85.00 upon conviction and the total payable fine is $110 ($set fine plus $20 victim fine surcharge and $5 court fees). Additionally a conviction results in 2 demerit points being added to the individual’s driver record.

Q2. Does the “dooring” law only apply to cyclists?

Although cyclists may be the most commonly perceived road user affected by this behaviour, the “dooring” law applies to all road users and is not specific to cyclists.

The government is committed to helping ensure the safety of not only cyclists but all road users.

Increasing the Fine for Cyclists for Non-Compliance with Light, Reflector and Reflective Material Requirements

Q1. Why is the government increasing the fines for cyclists with improper light, reflector and reflective tape?

Currently, the fine for non-compliance with bicycle light, reflector and reflective requirements, carries a maximum fine of $20 which is less than the majority of set fines for motorists and cyclists.

Increasing this fine will put this violation in line with all other cycling violations.

Allowing Cyclists to use Intermittent Flashing Red Lights

Q1. Why is the government allowing cyclists to use a red flashing light? Won’t this be distracting to other road users?

Red flashing lights were previously not allowed under the Highway Traffic Act even though the majority of cyclists were already using rear lamps that produce intermittent flashes of red light to make themselves more visible to others.

Considering the safety benefits from the use of these lights, and to prevent cyclists from potentially being charged, the Highway Traffic Act was amended to allow bicycles to use lamps that produce intermittent flashes of red lights.

A motorist may, if done safely, and in compliance with the rules of the road, cross the centre line of a roadway in order to pass a cyclist. If this cannot be done, he or she must wait behind the cyclist until it is safe to pass.

Cycling guides
Learn more about safe cycling:

• Cycling Skills: Ontario's Guide to Safe Cycling (PDF - 3.39 MB) : a detailed handbook of rules and safety standards for any rider
• Young Cyclist's Guide (PDF - 2.83 MB) : a kid-friendly handbook book of cycling safety tips and rules for young riders

 

[steveintoronto]

Q2. Does the “dooring” law only apply to cyclists?

Although cyclists may be the most commonly perceived road user affected by this behaviour, the “dooring” law applies to all road users and is not specific to cyclists.

The government is committed to helping ensure the safety of not only cyclists but all road users.

This may be surprising to some, but applying this universally is actually good for cyclists too, since it engenders (one would hope) a higher awareness on the part of drivers *and* their passengers. What I must look-up is whether impact is required for this to be a case of dooring. We've all had really close calls where the door starts to open, your reflexes kick in in a microsecond, you scream, and they stop just in time, and then look at you and say "I saw you". GRRRRRRR! You know damn well they didn't, and if they did, all the more reason for them to face a charge of some sort. Perhaps "threatening assault" might be a better characteristic of what they did? "Reckless Endangerment"? (There are a number of possible charges under the HTA) Whatever, since that fine is going up multiples, hopefully the deterrent factor increases too.

Endangerment. Endangerment is a type of crime involving conduct that is wrongful and reckless or wanton, and likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm to another person. ... “Reckless” conduct is conduct that exhibits a culpable disregard of foreseeable consequences to others from the act or omission involved.
Reckless endangerment - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangerment

 

[ADRM]

Just in case you thought for a moment that your city council cares at all about Vision Zero commitments or that cycling will become any safer in the next decade in this city, this:

 

[salsa]

@steveintoronto will like this. As part of the Bloor Bike lane evaluation, U of T researchers will be analyzing video footage of “near misses” before and after the bike lane installation.

The project looks at whether bike lanes have improved the safety of the street as well as if they have created any unintended danger zones. There’s data on potentially dangerous situations — ranging from cars passing too closely to bikes to pedestrians jumping out in front of cyclists — from different locations all through the bike lanes, he added, making for a “much better statistical sample” than just looking at accidents.

http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...-bloor-bike-lanes-looks-at-near-misses--.html

 

[steveintoronto]

@steveintoronto will like this. As part of the Bloor Bike lane evaluation, U of T researchers will be analyzing video footage of “near misses” before and after the bike lane installation.


http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...-bloor-bike-lanes-looks-at-near-misses--.html

Excellent heads-up on that!

[...]
When you assess safety based on accidents alone, you’re not getting the full picture, said Matthew Roorda, a professor in civil engineering at the university’s Transportation Research Institute.

“There’s just not that many of them to help pinpoint problem areas," he said.[...]

Absolutely! Finally we're getting some objective analysis.

This is the terrifying part though:
[Graduate student Nancy Hui said results will be shared with the city to contribute to the discussion on how to move forward with the pilot.] Which presumes the City is and/or will listen(ing).

To all my inquires to City Hall and Council months back, I have received one reply: "We'll get back to you". I suspect those both pro and con the Bloor Lanes will try to influence this independent study. Make no mistake, I'm very pro cycle lane *if done properly*. It's good to know this study is going to look at the 'unintended consequences' of the present poor example.

 

[steveintoronto]

Here's the UoT's Engineering website page on the story Salsa linked:

Posted January 12th, 2017 by Romi Levine
Bike lanes on Bloor Street: U of T Engineering partners with Miovision, City of Toronto to help evaluate pilot and track traffic safety

• 
  
  
  A U of T Engineering research team led by Professor Matthew Roorda (CivE) are assessing the safety impact of Bloor Street bike lanes. (Photo by Dylan Passmore via Flickr)
  

After just five months of bike lanes on Bloor Street, a new partnership between U of T Engineering researchers, a Kitchener-based traffic analytics company and the City of Toronto will evaluate the success of the project and how it has improved safety on one of Toronto’s busiest traffic corridors.

Miovision is the traffic analytics company which, along with city, is providing video data to a group of researchers from the University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute at the Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering. The researchers will be comparing road safety on Bloor Street from before and after bike lanes were installed.

“We were interested in Miovision’s expertise because they are working on a technique for looking at video data and finding out the trajectories of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists, and how they’re moving through space,” says Matthew Roorda, a professor in the Department of Civil Engineering and Canada Research Chair in Freight Transportation and Logistics.

“We look for instances where a car has to slow down because a bicycle veered in front of it, a pedestrian crosses into the path of a bicyclist, or one bicyclist or car passes by another at very close spacing. We’re trying to identify in an automated way all of these dangerous situations that don’t necessarily result in an accident but are indications of possible safety problems.”

Roorda’s team will be focusing on “conflicts,” or near-collisions.

The Bloor Street bike lanes project is a pilot. City staff will be reporting on the results of the evaluation in fall 2017.

“The research being conducted through these partnerships represent important steps toward smart cities,” Miovision CEO Kurtis McBride said in a statement. “They combine new data sources and new analytical techniques that will eventually become core pieces of city operations and planning.”

Nancy Hui (CivE MASc candidate) is taking the lead on the safety analysis. She says the real-world application of the work she’s doing is invaluable.

“I know the Bloor Street cycling project is very controversial even among the people who live on Bloor Street, and it’s added motivation for me to know that I’m looking at real people on the street, real cyclists who find themselves in dangerous situations many times a day,” she says.

She will soon begin looking at the before and after data but hopes the new Bloor Street bike lanes have had a real impact on safety.

Both Roorda and Hui see a wider application for the kind of conflict analysis taking place for Bloor Street.

“I hope this technology will one day be available for more people so that it will be easier for them to collect information about the safety impact different projects have on the streets,” says Hui.

Roorda says conflict analysis will help cities evaluate the impact to safety of any changes to a streetscape.

“We’re trying to really put the science behind these changes and do a rigorous evaluation,” he says.

http://news.engineering.utoronto.ca...nto-help-evaluate-pilot-track-traffic-safety/

 

[W. K. Lis]

Montreal: Riding the Frigid, “Snow Moon by Bike” Ride

 

[W. K. Lis]

Meanwhile, in California, from this link:

California bicyclists would be allowed to roll past stop signs under proposed law

Cyclists would be allowed to pedal past stop signs — without stopping — under legislation proposed by two lawmakers who say it would make the roads safer.

The two-tiered approach to the rules of the road — one for cyclists and one for cars — is unlikely to ease growing tensions over sharing California’s roadways.

Bike advocates have won such victories in the Statehouse as requiring drivers to yield a three-foot radius of maneuvering room to cyclists or face fines. Motorists meanwhile have expressed frustration that they see certain cyclists pick and choose which laws to follow.

Assemblymen Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia) and Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) introduced their measure on Friday that would allow bicyclists to treat stop signs as merely yield signs — proceeding with caution if conditions are safe.

In effect, it would legalize the so-called California roll, although just for bicyclists.

“It’s pretty compelling that the data supports this kind of change in the law,” said Obernolte, an avid bicyclist. “Their loss of momentum causes them to spend a substantially longer amount of time in the intersection.”

The longer it takes for a bicyclist to pass through an intersection, the greater likelihood that they’ll get hit by an oncoming vehicle, he said.

Research of a similar policy in Idaho, the only state in which bicyclists are currently allowed such freedom, found a decline in bike-related injuries after the law was enacted.

Under the proposed law, bicyclists would still have to stop at red lights, which Obernolte said might motivate them to take less-traveled side roads rather than main roads with traffic signals. That could lessen congestion and boost safety, he said.

Obernolte emphasized that bicyclists would only be allowed to go through a stop sign if it was safe, something they would have to assess as they approach the intersection.

“It’s intentionally vague because it’s left up to the discretion of the bicyclist” he said.

In Southern California, a spokesman for the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department said he couldn’t say whether the law would increase safety or work in the reverse.

“It’s similar to any traffic violation. It’s dependent to the area if there are serious safety concerns,” spokesman Ryan Keim said. “But our No. 1 priority is safety for bicyclists and motorists.”

While it’s technically illegal for a bicyclist to blow through a stop sign in 49 states, it’s a law that’s not always enforced. Obernolte said his legislation would mean that there’s no longer any sort of gray area about whether police would enforce the regulation.

“There’s nothing more frustrating to the average citizen than a law that’s selectively enforced,” he said.

Of the 1,625 tickets given to bicyclists in San Diego between Jan. 1, 2015, and May 31, 2016, some 526 citations were related to stopping and yielding, more than any other category. Another 79 were cited for not obeying a traffic device or sign, but it’s unclear whether those tickets involved a stop sign or red light.

The legislation would break the “same road, same rights, same rules” philosophy endorsed by many bicyclists, which requires people on two wheels to follow the same traffic laws as people driving on four.

This exception might be warranted, said Andy Henshaw, executive director of the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition.

“It’s hard to argue against good data like that. And sometimes in this case, it doesn’t always work to have the same roads, same rules, to apply to both cars and bikes,” he said.

There might be a temporary period of increased risk as people on bikes and motorists get used to a new rule, but it might eventually help alleviate traffic tie-ups, said bicycle courier Chris Venkus.

“I think that a lot of traffic gets held up because bicyclists are trying to follow the same laws that cars are going through,” he said. “The numbers are increasing; there are more and more bicyclists out there. It would be very wise to start looking at different bicycle laws.”

Others who make their living on bicycles think otherwise. Mo Karimi, owner of San Diego Bike Shop, said he thinks the bill is a bad idea because it will create uncertainty between motorists and bicyclists, particularly in more developed areas.

“It’s a bad idea, a safety hazard,” he said. “In city areas, that’s going to be a problem. Everybody already knows the rules.”

It would be better if police officers enforced the current law in situations in which bicyclists ride dangerously rather than amending the current statute, he said.

Joel West, an Oceanside resident who has worked in his community on transportation issues, said the bill is a bad idea that will encourage bad habits.

If enacted, he predicts that instead of cautiously riding through stop signs, bicyclists will completely ignore them because the law gives them the discretion to determine what’s safe.

“Before, I was slowing down enough so it kind of looked like I was taking it seriously,” he said. “But if I get to decide what is a reasonable speed, I am going to go through faster than ever before.”

Youngsters on bikes will be particularly at risk, he said. They haven’t developed the physical skill or the personal judgment to determine how much of a risk oncoming or opposing traffic poses, he said.

Obernolte and Ting’s bill is based on the law Idaho passed in 1982. Jason Meggs, a researcher at UC Berkeley, compared Boise, Idaho, against Sacramento and Bakersfield and found that cycling was significantly more dangerous in the two California cities.

 

[ADRM]

Meanwhile, in California, from this link:

California bicyclists would be allowed to roll past stop signs under proposed law

...especially jarring in a week where PWIC shelved simple safer streets guidelines and offered some retrograde anti-safety dog whistling for good measure.

 

[steveintoronto]

Meanwhile, in California, from this link:

California bicyclists would be allowed to roll past stop signs under proposed law

I've got to disagree on the wisdom of this *on shared roadways!* On bicycle paths crossing bike paths, yes. But that's outside of the HTA.

I'm very alarmed as it is as to the *rampant* disregard of cyclists to not only sensible protocol in many cases on the roads and paths, but also the law.

Quoted article states:
"The longer it takes for a bicyclist to pass through an intersection, the greater likelihood that they’ll get hit by an oncoming vehicle, he said." Whoa...according to what research? His observations? The article is full of conclusions based on subjective impressions. Depending on how you cross an intersection, slower can also mean safer. I find myself hesitating more as I grow older not to take my right of way, but to not get hit doing it. California already extends great latitude to cyclists, not least the policy to twin any new multi-lane highways with bike paths.

And now someone wants to allow cyclists an exception to universal protocol in intersections? No! This will end in grief. Either install underpasses, overpasses, or phased signals such that cyclists get priority on a timed cycle, or leave the law as it is.

Not a popular thing to write in a cycling forum, but so be it. There's also the inevitable question of fault when cyclists get hit doing this.

I think I'll stick with espousing Free Love...and call it a day.

 

[steveintoronto]

New route between Sweden and Denmark announced
Good news for anyone in the Öresund region this summer: a new route between Sweden and Denmark is set to open, as a ferry designed to carry cyclists between the two bike-mad nations is trialled during the warmer months.
The ferry will run across the Öresund strait between Dragør near Copenhagen to Limhamn, west of Malmö city centre.

Dragør's municipal council last week gave the green light to allow a shipping company to run the pilot project, which will ferry cyclists across the strait in the historic M/S Elephanten, a converted shipping boat built in 1940. It will hold 36 passengers, with the journey taking about one hour to complete.

"It's very exciting for Dragør, if all the practicalities fall into place. Now we have the chance to present Dragør as a central cycling destination close to Copenhagen, and I'm sure we will see a greatly increased amount of new visitors," Dragør's mayor Eik Dahl Bidstrup said in a press release.


When the ferry starts operating this summer it will bring back memories of the days when car-carrying catamarans travelled between the two towns before they were rendered obsolete by the opening of the Öresund Bridge in 2000.

The idea of launching a new cycle ferry on the route was originally conceived for the summer of 2016, but a suitable vessel was not found on time. The new ferry will run for an initial trial period between June and August.


Bikes can also be taken on the passenger trains across the Öresund Bridge, though cyclists must pay the equivalent of a child's ticket for their bike.

http://www.thelocal.se/20170301/new-route-between-sweden-and-denmark-announced

 

[steveintoronto]

Just saw this on a website, thought I'd post it here to share the absurdity:

 

[UserNameToronto]

The city just got a little bit friendlier.

I took the Shuter bike lane this morning for the first time in months (usually I am in the Richmond/Adelaide cycle tracks). The bike lane used to stop short a block or two before Yonge, resulting in a squeeze. There are now clearly painted cycle lane markings up to Yonge, as well as a left turn lane. The setup seems to work better for bikes as well as cars going straight into the Eaton Centre parkade, or turning left to go south on Yonge.

This change may be small potatoes but it still made me happy to see it.

 

[salsa]

The number of dooring collisions reported to the police is up 58% in 2016 from 2014.

Streets with streetcar tracks and on street parking are overrepresented in the data, with particular emphasis on Queen St W and College St. This suggests that existing infrastructure does not adequately protect people travelling by bike in locations with on-street parking and streetcar tracks. Streets without streetcar tracks that posed a hazard to cyclists include Bloor St W and Yonge St. Particularly dangerous intersections include Yonge & Dundas and Yonge & Bloor. These destination-rich locations attract many people travelling by bicycle yet represent serious hazards because of the absence of cycling infrastructure and a high number of motor vehicles engaged in pick-up and drop-off activities.

More: https://www.cycleto.ca/news/dooring-collisions-rise-yet-not-addressed-city’s-road-safety-plan

 

[steveintoronto]

The number of dooring collisions reported to the police is up 58% in 2016 from 2014.

Yeah, I read that earlier and didn't know which forum would be most apt to post a link at.

Various theories as to why this increase is happening come to mind. The first one is perhaps too easy: Motorists are paying less attention than ever. Which is more than worrisome, because it won't get any better. I'd like to read what others think about that, it's pretty hard to be objective on this, I tense up just at the thought of getting doored.

Cyclist behaviour a factor? Possibly...but not to render this degree of increase in reports. Increased cycling numbers altogether? I don't know if these numbers have been weighted for that.

It's a very perturbing story...