|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists and pedestrians
Hi there.
This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...000859909.html Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. Cheers from Peter |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
On 5/29/2011 5:51 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
Hi there. Toronto is in Iowa: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=41.903638,-90.864329&num=1&sll=41.905021,-90.864035&sspn=0.01661,0.032015&hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=4 1.904369,-90.863296&spn=0.003833,0.010568&t=h&z=17. This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...000859909.html Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Build a ghetto, and it will be mandated. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists Of course not. or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic Natural selection in action. or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability Leave velomobilists out of it. I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. But motons™ do not evoke similar feelings? -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
On 5/29/2011 11:34 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Sir considered Sun, 29 May 2011 03:51:16 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write: Hi there. This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...000859909.html Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. Cheers from Peter The thing I notice most about that is that it makes no reference at all to cycling rates, only using "per 100,000 head of population" as a metric. On that basis, all they need to do is drive all vulnerable road users off the roads and they will be safe. How can traffic planners be that stupid? Toronto has 18 lane highways. They can be that stupid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Highway_401 As for cycling, Toronto is generally way behind Vancouver and Montreal as far as numbers of cyclists, both recreational and commuters. You can probably google that if you're interested for specifics. The province has recently asked for assistance from Velo-Quebec WRT cycling. Hopefully that will help. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists and pedestrians
On May 29, 9:42 am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 5/29/2011 11:34 AM, Phil W Lee wrote: Sir considered Sun, 29 May 2011 03:51:16 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write: Hi there. This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...ns-report-0008... Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. Cheers from Peter The thing I notice most about that is that it makes no reference at all to cycling rates, only using "per 100,000 head of population" as a metric. On that basis, all they need to do is drive all vulnerable road users off the roads and they will be safe. How can traffic planners be that stupid? Toronto has 18 lane highways. They can be that stupid.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Highway_401 As for cycling, Toronto is generally way behind Vancouver and Montreal as far as numbers of cyclists, both recreational and commuters. You can probably google that if you're interested for specifics. The province has recently asked for assistance from Velo-Quebec WRT cycling. Hopefully that will help. Fewer pedestrians, too, apparently. More cagers per capita? (I wonder what the comparative prosecutions for negligent driving might be.) I just like options, and when one of them is designated for bikes, it can be a nice option. Sidewalks and crosswalks, too (legal here for bikes). You have to watch out for yourself everywhere. Riding over, around and through a bit of everything is funnest. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
On 5/29/2011 1:06 PM, Dan O wrote:
On May 29, 9:42 am, Duane wrote: On 5/29/2011 11:34 AM, Phil W Lee wrote: Sir considered Sun, 29 May 2011 03:51:16 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write: Hi there. This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...ns-report-0008... Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. Cheers from Peter The thing I notice most about that is that it makes no reference at all to cycling rates, only using "per 100,000 head of population" as a metric. On that basis, all they need to do is drive all vulnerable road users off the roads and they will be safe. How can traffic planners be that stupid? Toronto has 18 lane highways. They can be that stupid.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Highway_401 As for cycling, Toronto is generally way behind Vancouver and Montreal as far as numbers of cyclists, both recreational and commuters. You can probably google that if you're interested for specifics. The province has recently asked for assistance from Velo-Quebec WRT cycling. Hopefully that will help. Fewer pedestrians, too, apparently. More cagers per capita? (I wonder what the comparative prosecutions for negligent driving might be.) Don't know. I try to avoid Toronto except when I have to go there for business. I made a comment once about riding a bike doing Yonge street at rush hour and got lambasted by the usual suspect. South of Toronto, around the Ontario wine country and toward Niagara is pretty scenic for cycling though. I just like options, and when one of them is designated for bikes, it can be a nice option. Sidewalks and crosswalks, too (legal here for bikes). You have to watch out for yourself everywhere. Riding over, around and through a bit of everything is funnest. Not sure what Toronto could do. There are just too many people and too many cars. Hopefully, someone with some expertise can help them. They seem to need that. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
Phil W Lee wrote:
Sir Ridesalot considered Sun, 29 May 2011 03:51:16 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write: Hi there. This article is interesting for what it doesn't say as well as for what it does say. Here is the link to the short article. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-hazard...000859909.html Once again the proposed fix is to physically separate bicyclists from other road users. I really wonder if this is such a great idea. I fear that one day it will be legal to *ONLY* ride in designated bicylce areas even if they are poorly designed or don't go where you want to. Many people wonder if physical separated bike lanes the answer for: 1. Experienced or rules of the road following bicyclists or 2. Casual riders or bicyclists who flaunt the rules of the road such as riding through red lights at major intersections with high traffic or 3. All bicyclists irregradless of their ability I see many riders who flagrantly violate many rules of the road with the result that they either could be or are involved in a bicycle vs car collision or bicycle vs pedestrian collision or they could or do cause an accident to happen to another bicyclist or car driver. When I see these violators I often think that it's no wonder that many people would like to see bicycles off the roads and/or licensed. Cheers from Peter The thing I notice most about that is that it makes no reference at all to cycling rates, only using "per 100,000 head of population" as a metric. On that basis, all they need to do is drive all vulnerable road users off the roads and they will be safe. How can traffic planners be that stupid? They are 'professionals'. Comes with the turf. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
AMuzi wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote: How can traffic planners be that stupid? They are 'professionals'. Comes with the turf. Professional experts. Even worse. -- JS. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists and pedestrians
On May 29, 1:32*pm, Duane Hebert wrote:
Not sure what Toronto could do. *There are just too many people and too many cars. *Hopefully, someone with some expertise can help them. *They seem to need that I commute every day in Toronto during rush hour to and from the financial district. It doesn't seem dangerous to me at all. I don't use any of the bike lanes that are available to me, I prefer to share the roads. It's bike to work day here today. I rode in early to get a spot on the bike rack outside my office. Hopefully some of the people who tried commuting today will become regulars. The more the merrier. Cam |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists andpedestrians
On 5/30/2011 9:11 AM, Cam wrote:
On May 29, 1:32 pm, Duane wrote: Not sure what Toronto could do. There are just too many people and too many cars. Hopefully, someone with some expertise can help them. They seem to need that I commute every day in Toronto during rush hour to and from the financial district. It doesn't seem dangerous to me at all. I don't use any of the bike lanes that are available to me, I prefer to share the roads. Haven't ridden there often but I found there to be a lot of traffic. Not dangerous, just a lot of traffic. On the other hand, driving a car on the 401 is something that I find to be dangerous. Probably because I never know which lane is forcing me to get off in the wrong place. I drove in Boston for 5 years, rotaries included and didn't find it as bad. It's bike to work day here today. I rode in early to get a spot on the bike rack outside my office. Hopefully some of the people who tried commuting today will become regulars. The more the merrier. Yes. I'm on my bike today as well. Here in Montreal it seems that the rain has finally stopped. Nice warm and sunny day. Lots of bikes out. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Wankel
On 5/30/2011 8:54 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...] On the other hand, driving a car on the 401 is something that I find to be dangerous. Probably because I never know which lane is forcing me to get off in the wrong place. I drove in Boston for 5 years, rotaries included and didn't find it as bad.[...] ^^^^^^^^ Mazda or NSU? -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pedestrians put cyclists at risk too. | Doug[_10_] | UK | 17 | August 30th 10 11:29 PM |
when will cyclists learn that pedestrian crossings are for .....pedestrians, not cyclists | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 7 | August 12th 10 07:08 AM |
OT cyclists do not hurt pedestrians | Marie | UK | 0 | May 23rd 10 08:25 PM |
pedestrians and cyclists | Tamyka Bell | Australia | 88 | November 29th 04 10:59 AM |
Priority to be given to pedestrians and cyclists over cars? | Richard Bates | UK | 23 | October 30th 03 11:11 PM |