.Ontario coroner to probe cycling deaths- Mtbr.com

# Thread: .Ontario coroner to probe cycling deaths

1. ## .Ontario coroner to probe cycling deaths

2. Doored to death, that one. Here in Toronto we know that comes with a mandatory \$90 fine, plus the victim surcharge, for a grand total of about \$110 and no demerit points. I suspect many in Ottawa were surprised to learn of this.

3. Gee... so I'm not delusional?

4. The last report was pretty thorough and dramatically under-implemented. They could save themselves some time and just change the date on the front page...

5. Originally Posted by garage monster
The last report was pretty thorough and dramatically under-implemented. They could save themselves some time and just change the date on the front page...
Since I'm lazy and to busy enjoying some Guinness at work you have a link? Googling would take to much work.

6. Originally Posted by garage monster
When I commute, I have a series of axioms running through my head. One of them is "trucks are death". I will never lane-share with, or filter next to, a truck that has open wheels. Now I remember how I came to that axiom:

Originally Posted by Coroner's Report
A different picture emerged when an analysis of vehicle type by licensed class was applied to the 38 cyclist fatalities. While Class G vehicles still accounted for the majority of fatal collisions, large vehicles were involved in 37 per cent of collisions resulting in cyclist fatalities (compared with only eight per cent of collisions resulting in cyclist injuries). This difference must be attributed to an increased likelihood of cyclist fatality in collisions with large vehicles. For example, there was one cyclist fatality for every 125 non-fatal collisions involving large vehicles (Class A, B, C, D and M) as opposed to one cyclist fatality for every 488 non-fatal collisions involving Class G motor vehicles. Thus, it appears that a cyclist's collision with a large vehicle is approximately four times more likely to result in cyclist fatality than a cyclist's collision with a Class G vehicle.
Other axioms include: Taxis are out to kill you; avoid any trucks with lettering on them (especially lettering that advertises a construction company); running a light is a good way to die; BMWs are aggressive; Volvos and Mercedes are not; never assume that someone will not cut you off.

These axioms may not be true 100% of the time, and they may not be for everyone, everywhere, but they get me home safe.

7. Originally Posted by Kay.
Doored to death, that one. Here in Toronto we know that comes with a mandatory \$90 fine, plus the victim surcharge, for a grand total of about \$110 and no demerit points. I suspect many in Ottawa were surprised to learn of this.
Yes, for crying out loud i can't believe all the doorings and near doorings i see in Toronto. People need to stop flinging the door open blindly just because the lane marker is a few feet away and traffic won't rip your door off!

There was another study done by the coroner probably a decade about, with numerous recommendations... however as i understand none of these findings will be binding in anyway - at least it seems that way since most of the last probe's findings were left in the floor.

8. In not unrelated news, my favourite show, Canada's Worst Driver, starts up again for a new season tonight at 10PM on Discovery.

9. Originally Posted by garage monster
In not unrelated news, my favourite show, Canada's Worst Driver, starts up again for a new season tonight at 10PM on Discovery.
Why watch it when I live it every commute to work?

10. Originally Posted by garage monster
In not unrelated news, my favourite show, Canada's Worst Driver, starts up again for a new season tonight at 10PM on Discovery.
That show is terrifying.

11. Originally Posted by rkj__
That show is terrifying.
As is Canada's Worst Handyman. If you ever wonder why hand tools have all those safety & warning labels on them, well, watch the show.

I'm actually rather surprised that no one's gotten Darwin'd yet on those shows.

As for doorings, one of the things I learned in my brief bike messenger stint is to look at the sideview mirror on all parked cars. If you see a face in the mirror, assume that the driver will attempt to door you or drive into you and ride accordingly.

12. Originally Posted by garage monster
The last report was pretty thorough and dramatically under-implemented. They could save themselves some time and just change the date on the front page...
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/e6uqfpA-MTk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

13. Originally Posted by rkj__
That show is terrifying.
It's a pretty sobering look into what's all around you on the road out there.

Among many, many memorable drivers, Donna from Season 4 was probably my favourite. Nominated by her son and suffering from angina, she tried to claim that she only drove drunk on her way to bingo...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Lmq5_2NUZVg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

14. Here is the spoiler, distracted driving is through the roof.. txt'n people crash into everything. From a safety and performance standpoint i heard it's like slamming 3 beers and buckling up.

15. Originally Posted by smarty
BMWs are aggressive
I swear if we removed beemers and white contracting vans from the road, 90% of my 'incidents' would disappear with them.

16. True to form, last night's episode of Canada's Worst Driver featured the usual panoply of malcontents, psychopaths and menaces that's made the show so dear to me. Honestly, every time I watch this show, I wonder how more people don't die on the roads every year!

17. ...BMWs are aggressive; Volvos and Mercedes are not....
I dunno.... BMW drivers might seem more aggressive than some, especially on the highway, but as a cyclist, I've had more close calls with inattentive soccer moms/dads in minivans/SUVs/station wagons in a rush -- to whom I appear invisible -- and blue collar redneck types in pickup trucks who actually DO see me and either don't give a crap or believe bikes don't belong on roads.

But I'm totally with you on axioms. Mine are: 1) Assume every driver making a turn at an intersection doesn't see you; 2) Every parked auto is a potential dooring and every auto approaching from behind nearing an intersection is a potential right-hook waiting to happen, so ride just far enough out from the curb to prevent either. Sure, it will upset some motorists wanting to pass, but I value my life and well being more than the convenience of saving them a few seconds on their drive to work.

18. Originally Posted by garage monster
True to form, last night's episode of Canada's Worst Driver featured the usual panoply of malcontents, psychopaths and menaces that's made the show so dear to me. Honestly, every time I watch this show, I wonder how more people don't die on the roads every year!

I refuse to believe the show is real. Please tell me its not real

19. Originally Posted by 14Stone
I refuse to believe the show is real. Please tell me its not real
Remember the guy a few seasons back who brake checked tractor trailers because they pissed him off? I've seen that happen on the 401, except it ended in a Darwin when the truck just ran him over. And back when I worked in a bike shop, we saw a guy cave in the entire side of a customer's car while attempting to pull out of a parking space. Having seen real life examples of the stupidity that goes down in the show I'm pretty sure it's real.

20. Originally Posted by 14Stone
I refuse to believe the show is real. Please tell me its not real
The cast of characters is a bit formulaic (the bimbo, the speed demon, the texter, the befuddled granny, the panicky lady, the angry mom, the ambiguous sexuality guy...) but it's always entertaining. It's hard to believe some of these people ever earned their licenses in the first place!

21. Originally Posted by garage monster
The cast of characters is a bit formulaic (the bimbo, the speed demon, the texter, the befuddled granny, the panicky lady, the angry mom, the ambiguous sexuality guy...) but it's always entertaining. It's hard to believe some of these people ever earned their licenses in the first place!
I'm just waiting for the host to get run-over...

BTW, volvo is statistically the most likely luxury brand car to be involved in an accident. It makes sense since people buy them because they're safe - i.e. crashing into something is first and foremost on their mind, perhaps they even plan on it. I think the same thing sorta goes for soccer moms in SUV - daddy thinks baby needs something big because mommy is a scary ass driver. Or something... It's not like you ever get to see these drivers coming, only afterwards does it make more sense. Maybe i'm bitter about large cars because on multiple occasions i've almost been turned into a smear of "lipstick" on the road by fabulous women in gigantic luxury SUVs who are seriously putting that makeup allover their face instead of watching where their mirrors are or they're just txt'n away or digging through that gigantic ass handbag. If you ask me they should be painting bozo the clown on their faces instead!

22. Cycling safety issues.

Apparently a group of "experts" the Canadian safety council, think using a cell phone, listening to music and not wearing a helmet are the significant factors for cyclists being run-over. Not right-hooks and doorings... as the hospital admissions note.

23. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
I swear if we removed beemers and white contracting vans from the road, 90% of my 'incidents' would disappear with them.
lol how true... though the blinged out luxury pick-up with the useless rigid tonneau cover is a close third in my neck of the woods.

24. The Canadian safety council? Never heard of it.

Sidewalks and unpaved off-road trails have the highest risks.
That hasn't been my experience at all. I've never been hit by a car on the sidewalk or off-road. Golly, I sure hope we aren't paying for this blatantly disingenuous safety advice with our taxpayer dollars.

25. We use your tax dollars with zero loss, and 100% efficiency.

Move along citizen.

26. Originally Posted by Kay.
I've never been hit by a car on the sidewalk
I've been hit three or four times on the sidewalk.

Of course, none of those incidents involved a bicycle.

27. Originally Posted by electrik
volvo is statistically the most likely luxury brand car to be involved in an accident.
Yep. A BMW suv backed into ours less than a month after we bought it new.

Now that it's old and banged-up people have (oddly) stopped hitting it.

28. Originally Posted by 14Stone
I refuse to believe the show is real. Please tell me its not real
Oh yes it's real and the drivers on it are frequently worse than you can imagine.
Watching it is a weird blend of laughter, frustration, anger and fear. Sometimes though the people on it get their comeuppance, a few years ago there was a kid who drove with no regard for safety, his or others, and was applying to be a police officer (a fact he used whenever he was pulled over to get out of the ticket). He was pretty much unrepentant.
Of the panel of judges on the show one is an officer and he made some calls...

29. Originally Posted by smarty
Other axioms include: Taxis are out to kill you; avoid any trucks with lettering on them (especially lettering that advertises a construction company); running a light is a good way to die; BMWs are aggressive; Volvos and Mercedes are not; never assume that someone will not cut you off.

These axioms may not be true 100% of the time, and they may not be for everyone, everywhere, but they get me home safe.
Much simpler view.. learned this from the old man when I was about 10.

Treat everyone operating a vehicle like they are nuts and out to kill you.

More times then I can count that view has saved my life.

30. Originally Posted by Enduramil
Much simpler view.. learned this from the old man when I was about 10.

Treat everyone operating a vehicle like they are nuts and out to kill you.
Yup, I learned that one from my dad at an early age. It's saved me from a lot of accidents back when I needed to commute to work on the 401. Saved me a bunch of time too when I used to bike to work.

31. Originally Posted by Surestick Malone
Oh yes it's real and the drivers on it are frequently worse than you can imagine.
Watching it is a weird blend of laughter, frustration, anger and fear. Sometimes though the people on it get their comeuppance, a few years ago there was a kid who drove with no regard for safety, his or others, and was applying to be a police officer (a fact he used whenever he was pulled over to get out of the ticket). He was pretty much unrepentant.
Of the panel of judges on the show one is an officer and he made some calls...
When Angelina was one of the drivers and they made a big deal of her being from Sudbury, I told my Mom to keep an eye out for her on the road. She was mental!

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ExhgPmgA1T0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

32. What should scare you all is the fact all these types who lose their licences or get banned for life... go out and by those E Scooters.. oops I meant E Bikes.

33. Not really. What scares me is that these people are still out there driving around in their cars, their friends' cars, or some stolen cars even though their licenses have been suspended for a few years or taken away for life.

34. Originally Posted by aerius
Not really. What scares me is that these people are still out there driving around in their cars, their friends' cars, or some stolen cars even though their licenses have been suspended for a few years or taken away for life.

i would say the current auto insurance rates scare me... and weak sauce licensing...

35. Originally Posted by singlesprocket
i would say the current auto insurance rates scare me... and weak sauce licensing...
Man, don't even get me started on our piss-poor licensing standards, that's something that I've been known to rant about for hours. Let's put it this way, I should've failed my driving test; I pulled into the parking space at the end of the test without signalling, that should've been an automatic failure but I only lost 6 points out of 100 for doing that and came out of the test with a 94. Which is ridiculous because there was no way I was perfect up to that point. And that was when graduated licensing was first introduced and they were being complete hardasses and failing a lot more drivers than usual to prove that it worked.

As for insurance rates, I have a perfect record and drive an older family sedan. There's a fair number of wheelsets that cost more than my insurance.

36. Female cyclist killed after being hit by truck in west-end - The Globe and Mail

Sounds like the classic right-hook and getting dragged down under the rear wheel Worth noting that side-guards for large vehicles was one of the recommendations in the 1998 report.

37. Originally Posted by spsoon
Female cyclist killed after being hit by truck in west-end - The Globe and Mail

Sounds like the classic right-hook and getting dragged down under the rear wheel Worth noting that side-guards for large vehicles was one of the recommendations in the 1998 report.
Yeah, I saw this... slow, painful and just awful way to go out. May she rest in peace.

Even though it's not unlawful to pedal up the right side if there is space, just stay back. Driver might turn on you without signalling and you'll be in big trouble. If a large truck is coming up behind you at an intersection to turn right, move over left so they clearly can't get by.

Remember, right side - suicide. Just take to left and watch out for doors on either side!

38. [QUOTE=electrik;8608697]Yeah, I saw this... slow, painful and just awful way to go out. May she rest in peace.
Rob Ford stated that if a cyclist is killed on the roads of Toronto "It's their own fault, the roads were built for cars and trucks, not bikes"

39. I challenged Dr. Cass to get the latest at-fault percentages out into the public domain asap.

40. The 2003 report had plenty of at-fault percentages, and they showed broad-daylight hit-from-behinds as the leading fatality source.

Motorists, police, and the vehicular cycling community put their hands over their ears and yelled la-la-la and went back to blaming headphones, lack of helmets, lack of bells, riding too far right in the lane, and whatever the hell else would remove the need for them to personally do anything different.

Of course, the solution being proposed is even more insane, that being to chant that "sidewalk cycling is dangerous" (which it often is) and then declare the need to build physically separated little bike paths along the sides of the road and tell us to use them.

41. Originally Posted by spsoon
Worth noting that side-guards for large vehicles was one of the recommendations in the 1998 report.
Also worth noting is that side-guards have been required equipment for all trucks operating in mainland China for at least 10 years.

42. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Also worth noting is that side-guards have been required equipment for all trucks operating in mainland China for at least 10 years.

Yeah.. well u know.. there are cyclists in China.

Everybody here prolly knows this, but a blog post is currently floating around.

43. Originally Posted by electrik
Yeah.. well u know.. there are cyclists in China.
Swarms of them. More than the cars on the road in many places. They seem to get along with the cars just fine, though I did get t-boned in Qian-an once when riding back to my hotel with a 2-4 on the back rack.

44. For anyone who's actually interested in making a submission to the review (as opposed to chit-chatting about it on the internetz, ), here's the low down:

Originally Posted by Ontario NEWSROOM
October 24, 2011

Dr. Andrew McCallum, Chief Coroner for Ontario is announcing that the Office of the Chief Coroner will be conducting a review of cycling deaths across the province. This review is being undertaken as a result of public concern surrounding the issue of cycling safety.

The review will be led by Dr. Dan Cass, Regional Supervising Coroner - Toronto West Region, and will include deaths from 2006 to 2010. The purpose of the review is to identify common factors that may have played a role in the deaths, and where possible, to make recommendations to prevent similar deaths. The review is expected to be completed in spring 2012. A report will be issued at its conclusion.

A coalition of groups including cyclists and seniors represented by lawyers Patrick Brown and Albert Koehl commended the Coroner's Office.

Members of the public are invited to offer comments or recommendations to the review panel before November 30, 2011, by writing to:

Dr. Dan Cass - Regional Supervising Coroner - Toronto West Region
Office of the Chief Coroner
26 Grenville Street
Toronto ON M7A 2G7
[email protected]
We (the Hamilton Cycling Committee) will be making a submission but at our last meeting most of just agreed that they should just save the money an implement the last report...

45. Originally Posted by electrik
Everybody here prolly knows this, but a blog post is currently floating around.
Indeed

Originally Posted by Blogger
Yes, ticked-off drivers will lay on their horn and, yes, they will scream rudies and gesticulate at you in fury, but in the end, this is harmless.
His advice is good, very good even... but I have a hard time believing he was a courier in Toronto for all those years and never had someone deliberately fender him for daring to take a lane.

Having a motorist "teach you a lesson" with their fender is not harmless, IMO, although I've never been hit hard enough myself to go down.

46. Originally Posted by Const. Hugh Smith
Anything you attach to a bicycle is going to hinder your movement as far as the length of the turn, the amount of work it takes — the gear that you're in — for you to get through the turn, Most times we say a bike is designed for one person, unless it's a tandem.".
Two things here:

1. He is suggesting the length of the bike-trailer set-up on the turn might have been a factor, when the other vehicle involved was a TRACTOR TRAILER?

2. Is he saying the bike trailer slowed her down? Should she have been going around the corner FASTER to be safe? A corner that had, among other things, a STOP SIGN?

47. Sergeant John Winter, with traffic services, said awareness and visibility are paramount for the safety of cyclists.

“How many times have you seen cyclists going outside the bike lanes to pass other cyclists at a high rate of speed, and cutting others off and disobeying the traffic lights and stop signs, so it works both ways,” he said.
I think the Sergeant must be the ranking NCO here. His opinion on the matter is more significant than that of the well-meaning but somewhat misguided Constable Smith.

48. Originally Posted by Some other Cop
"How many times have you seen cyclists going outside the bike lanes to pass other cyclists at a high rate of speed"
Is he suggesting that there is a HTA infraction in this maneuver?

Or only if I cut others off and run a stop sign (at the same time)?

Why the bleep are the police offering road safety sound bites phrased as rhetorical questions?

God help us.

49. ...double post

50. The sergeant's vernacular is not familiar to me but I trust in his authority to pronounce upon the HTA having no doubt 20 or so years of experience under his belt. Now that Murdoch's Mysteries has regrettably been dropped (my wife's favourite show), I'd like to see a new series from Shaftesbury that revolves around a detective assigned to the bike unit with TPS, who investigates scofflaw cyclists that ride recklessly outside the bicycle lanes and do other bad stuff too like go on the sidewalk. For a broader prime time audience, there would have to be the odd murder to solve, so maybe the scofflaw cyclists could end up killing some people here and there.

51. Originally Posted by nickboers
Swarms of them. More than the cars on the road in many places. They seem to get along with the cars just fine, though I did get t-boned in Qian-an once when riding back to my hotel with a 2-4 on the back rack.
Hmm, well i've heard is fairly dangerous. Apparently the only thing more dangerous are the e-bikes which are become extremely popular.

Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
...
His advice is good, very good even... but I have a hard time believing he was a courier in Toronto for all those years and never had someone deliberately fender him for daring to take a lane.

Having a motorist "teach you a lesson" with their fender is not harmless, IMO, although I've never been hit hard enough myself to go down.
Her advice, which may explain it because mostly men are the ones who try to get tough with cyclists. Though even the male motorists aren't above beating down female cyclists.

Van man strikes again.

52. Not enough education is done with regards to driving and how bicycle riders play into it. Often when riding on in pretty well the gutter I will be verbally assualted by drivers telling me to "get on the sidewalk", or honks, or worse when they seem to veer towards me or other riders (however this last point can be psychological to driver as I have heard people tend to veer towards things they are paying attention to, such as pulled over poilce vehicles).
But people dont understand that bikes have just as much right to be on the street as a car and should be treated as such,

53. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
...
God help us.
Way ahead of you there. War is peace, i'm sure a TV program like Kay described where cyclists are the brunt of many jokes and receive a nasty comeuppance would be wildly popular.

54. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
The 2003 report had plenty of at-fault percentages, and they showed broad-daylight hit-from-behinds as the leading fatality source.

Motorists, police, and the vehicular cycling community put their hands over their ears and yelled la-la-la and went back to blaming headphones, lack of helmets, lack of bells, riding too far right in the lane, and whatever the hell else would remove the need for them to personally do anything different.

Of course, the solution being proposed is even more insane, that being to chant that "sidewalk cycling is dangerous" (which it often is) and then declare the need to build physically separated little bike paths along the sides of the road and tell us to use them.
According to the bike lane dogma types this wouldn't have happened with a bike lane.

Gimme a farking break. Bike lanes do sweet nothing to protect a cyclist from a dump truck if it decides to be in the same space. There is a little child with no mother now and all the idjits yap about is the endless myth that bike lanes will save lives.

And I anxiously await the neg rep for this view.

55. Originally Posted by Enduramil
And I anxiously await the neg rep for this view.
From who? The legions of mandatory-gutter-riding fanboys?

If a road is wide, it doesn't need bike lanes.

If a road is narrow, bike lanes are no help.

I can think of a few localized exceptions to this mantra, but I'm sticking with it.

Originally Posted by electrik
Her advice, which may explain it
Indeed.

56. Originally Posted by Enduramil
According to the bike lane dogma types this wouldn't have happened with a bike lane.

Gimme a farking break. Bike lanes do sweet nothing to protect a cyclist from a dump truck if it decides to be in the same space. There is a little child with no mother now and all the idjits yap about is the endless myth that bike lanes will save lives.

And I anxiously await the neg rep for this view.
Every time I have been hit by a car in Toronto (3x in last 5 years), I was in the bike lane, obeying traffic laws...

Of course, bike lanes ARE a small improvement over the 'sharrows' that seem to be more and more popular around here.

57. Originally Posted by EvilScience
Every time I have been hit by a car in Toronto (3x in last 5 years), I was in the bike lane, obeying traffic laws...

Of course, bike lanes ARE a small improvement over the 'sharrows' that seem to be more and more popular around here.
Every time i see somebody get doored they are in the bike-lane! Ok... not all the time, but on those off times if their was a bikelane they would have been in it being doored.

58. Sterling Road & Dundas is one of the scarier areas I've biked through. It's a sharp turn onto an uphill with streetcars & trucks going by. Sterling is also an older street so it's not that wide, a larger truck often won't have the room to make a wide right turn to avoid running its back wheels over the curb. Oddly enough, they made the northbound side of Sterling wider so that trucks have an easier time making a right turn onto it from Dundas.

That entire area used to be an industrial zone with a bunch of factories by the railways, but pretty much all of it is abandoned or being demolished now except for the big Nestle factory. I've been there a few times to get to a rail trail and take photos of industrial decay, it's not a fun place to be on a bike.

59. Originally Posted by garage monster

I vowed never to ride in Toronto. I tried to avoid it as much as possible till last night. The TTC wouldn't let me take my bike onboard so I was forced to ride downtown, no helmet, no bell, no options to just store my bike.

Holy hell I used to think you guys were just exaggerating but I experienced the yelling, the swerving, and the anger all in a 10K ride. It was incredible.

60. I am really sorry for this family. The report will do nothing but earn some consultant some money. Cycling and Cyclists are still seen as a fringe group made of exercise nuts, left wing granola types and crazy couriers. If you are on a bike, you have some kind of agenda or are off in some way as you should be done with bikes when you are a kid.

61. Originally Posted by EvilScience
Every time I have been hit by a car in Toronto (3x in last 5 years), I was in the bike lane, obeying traffic laws...

Of course, bike lanes ARE a small improvement over the 'sharrows' that seem to be more and more popular around here.
And according to how the bike lane advocates go on.. you would think they had a mystical protective force field that protected riders from large vehicles.

62. I don't think I've seen anything about whether police have released a version of the events, but the Toronto Star seems to believe the the cyclist had fully completed her turn onto Dundas before being knocked down. That would imply she had successfully gained the "safety" of the bike lane...? While it's highly likely that the Star reporter(s) is/are merely guilty of loose language and poor fact checking, perhaps it's also possible that the bike lane dogmatists have some explaining to do?

63. This is the intersection in question courtesy of Google street view.

As you can see there's chunks taken out of the curb and scrub marks on the curb from truck tires going almost all the way to the paired telephone poles just right of the diamond marker. Cyclists aren't "safe" until they're passed the diamond marker, up until then they can get squeezed out against the curb. The turn is also sharper than it looks in the photo so the cab of a semi-truck is going to be angled sharply against the trailer, the cyclist is going to be in the blind spot. There's a good chance that the driver never saw her, and wouldn't have seen her even if he was looking.

It's just a bad, bad corner, lots of big trucks since there's a Nestle factory there and the way the roads are built & intersect is just unsafe, it's kinda like an uphill switchback when turning onto Dundas.

64. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Is he suggesting that there is a HTA infraction in this maneuver?

Or only if I cut others off and run a stop sign (at the same time)?

Why the bleep are the police offering road safety sound bites phrased as rhetorical questions?

God help us.
Last time it was Navigator yapping like experts. Now it's the cops putting their spin on it.

Sure is fracking easy when the woman is dead. So now everyone can spin the outcome and what happened however they want with no comment from the victim.

Guranteed the trucker will get nothing for this.

65. Originally Posted by aerius
This is the intersection in question courtesy of Google street view.

As you can see there's chunks taken out of the curb and scrub marks on the curb from truck tires going almost all the way to the paired telephone poles just right of the diamond marker. Cyclists aren't "safe" until they're passed the diamond marker, up until then they can get squeezed out against the curb. The turn is also sharper than it looks in the photo so the cab of a semi-truck is going to be angled sharply against the trailer, the cyclist is going to be in the blind spot. There's a good chance that the driver never saw her, and wouldn't have seen her even if he was looking.

It's just a bad, bad corner, lots of big trucks since there's a Nestle factory there and the way the roads are built & intersect is just unsafe, it's kinda like an uphill switchback when turning onto Dundass.
Not to mention the rail-trail from Annette exits RIGHT there... this is what i mean about these stupid trails dumping you into the ****. You get to the curb and then have to turn left across 4 lanes of dundas st traffic. If no traffic is already waiting there. How you get there from the westbound dundas is anybody's guess. Take the bikelane and hop the curb or turn right then u-turn and end up dead under a nestle truck that is turning? Going eastbound everybody goes over and presses the cross-walk button. Nobody is going to walk there either since this is reality.

You have cyclists pouring in and out in front and behind right turning cars with no thought about how to manage it. Horrible designed intersection.

66. Side skirts anyone?

Ottawa rejects need for safety legislation in wake of cyclist's death

Now, I'm not one to rush to legislate all sorts of new gadgets based on one accident but with ALL those cyclists in China, you'd think there'd be at least *some* data to verify the efficacy of side skirts on trucks, no?

In other news, looks like Hamilton City Council couldn't quite swallow our proposal to advocate for Idaho stops in Ontario...

Originally Posted by The Hamilton Spectator
Cyclists don’t want to obey stop signs

Andrew Dreschel

November 8, 2011

City Hall’s cycling subcommittee thinks it’s high time the province permitted cyclists to treat stop signs like yield signs.

In other words, they think cyclists should be legally allowed to pedal through stop signs without always coming to a complete stop.

Most of us call that a rolling stop.

But, to the cycling world, it’s apparently known as an “Idaho stop.”

The name originates with a law passed by the Idaho state legislature in 1982 that allows bicyclists to wheel through stop signs without coming to a full halt unless there are other vehicles at the intersection, in which case they’re supposed to yield the right of way.

That’s one of the changes the subcommittee wants to see the Ontario Ministry of Transportation adapt in order clarify the responsibilities of all road users and to encourage more people to cycle.

But, this Monday, councillors on the city’s public works committee applied the brakes to the idea, preventing the recommendation from being included in a list of suggestions to the ministry such as more lighting requirements for cyclists.

In defending the proposal, Brian McHattie, council’s rep on the cycling subcommittee, explained the Idaho stop makes sense because cyclists have better visibility than motorists and coming to a full stop impedes their momentum.

McHattie’s position dovetails with literature that suggests obeying stop signs puts a physical burden on cyclists and — in a bizarrely circular form of reasoning — removing the legal obligation would help diminish perceptions they’re always breaking traffic rules.

That didn’t ring any bells for other councillors.

Tom Jackson and Lloyd Ferguson both spoke against it, with Ferguson arguing cyclists shouldn’t be treated any differently than motorists.

Terry Whitehead worried it would open a “Pandora’s box.”

“I have some challenges and a lot of complaints with cyclists on arterial roads and how they don’t yield, quite frankly, when they need to, which is causing some consternation,” Whitehead said.

Amen to that.

Let’s face it, with or without an Idaho stop-style law, blowing through stop signs with nothing more than a quick precautionary glance is already standard behaviour for most cyclists.

But this nonchalant flouting of traffic laws doesn’t just infuriate motorists, particularly those whose cheeks seldom warm a bike saddle. It also seriously undermines arguments from cyclists that motorists don’t give them the respect they deserve.

After all, it’s difficult to logically sustain the argument you’re treated like a second-class citizen on the open road when you only follow the rules that don’t inconvenience you.

Frequent stop signs in residential neighbourhoods are clearly irritants for bike riders.

But the great mass of them haven’t demonstrated they deserve to be given preferential treatment.

In the end, the Idaho stop wasn’t just booted back to the subcommittee for additional discussion; Whitehead also put a flea in their ear.

Expressing surprise there was nothing in their recommendations about licensing cyclists, the west Mountain councillor asked the group to consider plating cyclists, at least for pedalling on main roads.

Licensing and/or registering bicycles are thorny subjects in their own right. Some cities do it, many don’t.

The main intent is often theft prevention. But it’s also seen as a way of targeting traffic law infractions. In other words, it’s a form of retribution.

The truth is, rolling stops may make perfect sense in residential neighbourhoods.

But, as long as cyclists continue to ride on sidewalks, fail to signal turns or sail through red lights, they’re going to have a hard time convincing others they deserve any more slack than they already cut themselves.

67. Punitive licensing. Wow, those councillors are really playing hardball.

First ride for me, in the November rain after the light has gone down for the season, yesterday. I had options for colliding with not one but 3 jaywalking peds, two in the Gerrard bike lane, and declined them all. One lazy motorist with T-rated tires came 80% over the line to brush me back rather than make a proper turn. I'll need to double up on my existing lighting and get serious about being invisible.

68. Originally Posted by garage monster
Side skirts anyone?

Ottawa rejects need for safety legislation in wake of cyclist's death

Now, I'm not one to rush to legislate all sorts of new gadgets based on one accident but with ALL those cyclists in China, you'd think there'd be at least *some* data to verify the efficacy of side skirts on trucks, no?

In other news, looks like Hamilton City Council couldn't quite swallow our proposal to advocate for Idaho stops in Ontario...
Haha, I find it hilarious people are convinced that motorists do much better at stop signs. You can sit and count in a neighbourhood, 99% never make a full and complete stop behind the white line... usually it's rolling over the white line at 5km/h until it's clear nobody is coming then they're back off doing 50km/h + down a street with kids playing on it! Most police i talk to feel stop signs are only speed control devices, nothing todo with actually stopping.

You'd think people would realize side skirts are also more "aero" and will save on fuel costs.

69. Originally Posted by Kay.
Punitive licensing. Wow, those councillors are really playing hardball.

First ride for me, in the November rain after the light has gone down for the season, yesterday. I had options for colliding with not one but 3 jaywalking peds, two in the Gerrard bike lane, and declined them all. One lazy motorist with T-rated tires came 80% over the line to brush me back rather than make a proper turn. I'll need to double up on my existing lighting and get serious about being invisible.

See, not alone!

70. Originally Posted by Kay.
Punitive licensing. Wow, those councillors are really playing hardball.
No surprise. The one's who are so venhemently against or for laws are just as much of scofflaws as those they rail against.

I find it hilarious that if I don't follow traffic laws bad things happen. Yet the evidence provided from my own experience is the opposite. Every time I play by the traffic laws I get hit, doored, and mirrored by drivers. Everytime I break the laws left right and centre.. bike courier style I have less off that.

So I have learned following traffic laws to the letter will get me killed.

71. [QUOTE=trufflepig;8608750]
Originally Posted by electrik
Yeah, I saw this... slow, painful and just awful way to go out. May she rest in peace.
Rob Ford stated that if a cyclist is killed on the roads of Toronto "It's their own fault, the roads were built for cars and trucks, not bikes"
That's terrible, he really said that?

Originally Posted by garage monster
Yay.

Toronto cyclist killed by truck was mother, yoga instructor and pregnant

72. Originally Posted by OntarioMTBMama

That's terrible, he really said that?

Rob Ford on Cyclists - YouTube

73. So now Olivia Chow is going to introduce a private members bill looking to mandate side guards on trucks:Cyclists call for truck side guards in wake of Toronto cyclist’s death.

Call me a cynic but at a cost of \$600-\$2,600 per truck, I don't think this idea is going to get a lot of traction.

In other Globe stuff about bikes: In the aftermath of tragedy, once more unto the breach

74. Originally Posted by garage monster
That's one reason I rarely wear a helmet any more, which is bound to be the second thing newscasters will mention in the event that my legs are crushed under the wheels of a 12-tonne truck. When the Toronto Sun begins referring to cyclists as “helmet heads,” de-personalizing individuals to make them easier to hate, the uniform becomes uncomfortable.
What a bag of feminine hygiene product. You know i often feel when meeting mountain bikers that they have been depersonalized and are just a caricature of a stereotype. Only until they remove the helmet(and clipless shoes) can I actually tell they're people just like me!

Man, if only I was as powerful as the Toronto Sun I could get all those sausage suits to properly cover their shame and wear baggies. That would be making the world a better place.

75. Originally Posted by garage monster
The best cycling article I have read in a long, long time.

76. Originally Posted by garage monster
True to form, last night's episode of Canada's Worst Driver featured the usual panoply of malcontents, psychopaths and menaces that's made the show so dear to me. Honestly, every time I watch this show, I wonder how more people don't die on the roads every year!
With the stuff I see on the road driving and cycling, I am amazed there isn't a total holocaust on the roads daily.

Examples:

People flossing while driving
Someone reading a book on I-495 (going faster than I was - so like 70mph)
Someone with their laptop in front of them on I-495 (also going faster than I was)

This doesn't include all of the people looking at their phones while behind the wheel or those talking on their phones while driving around teeming parking lots.

77. Originally Posted by spsoon
He is the idiot who said that there was a 'war on the car.'

Sadly enough, his fellow idiots believed him.

78. Originally Posted by spsoon
I'm glad we don't have such morons in the U.S.

....And then I slapped myself in the face and woke up.

79. More hand-wringing in the Globe: Cyclists and motorists must learn to get along.

I can't remember a time (not counting the Bryant affair) when there were so many pro-cycling articles in the Globe in such a short time span. Editorial shift?

80. No charges to be laid against truck driver.

No charges for truck driver in cyclist's death - Toronto - CBC News

Lesson is that cyclists should refrain from sneaking and lying under truck's wheels and whatnot(cars too)... case u needed to know that!

81. Have the police released any statement at all as to what happened? I saw none. Saying "the 55-year-old driver did not break the law" is not an explanation of what caused this fatality.

If she turned inside the truck, come out and say it, it's not disrespectful to her memory, it's explaining a mistake she made that thousands of people make every year.

It might save someones life. Instead, they are releasing these cryptic statements.

However in the CBC comments section, plenty of motorists are willing to tell me exactly what happened.

82. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Have the police released any statement at all as to what happened? I saw none. Saying "the 55-year-old driver did not break the law" is not an explanation of what caused this fatality.

If she turned inside the truck, come out and say it, it's not disrespectful to her memory, it's explaining a mistake she made that thousands of people make every year.

It might save someones life. Instead, they are releasing these cryptic statements.

However in the CBC comments section, plenty of motorists are willing to tell me exactly what happened.
Who cares about another dead cyclist? We are supposed to care more about a bunch of Occupy types facing no real threats.

83. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Have the police released any statement at all as to what happened? I saw none. Saying "the 55-year-old driver did not break the law" is not an explanation of what caused this fatality.

If she turned inside the truck, come out and say it, it's not disrespectful to her memory, it's explaining a mistake she made that thousands of people make every year.

It might save someones life. Instead, they are releasing these cryptic statements.

However in the CBC comments section, plenty of motorists are willing to tell me exactly what happened.
Did the truck driver signal? How many hours had he been working(the truck driver who killed all those cyclist in quebec last year admitted to being asleep at the wheel)? Were his mirrors adjusted properly? Did he cut the corner so hard he went over the curb and started driving in the bike lane? If he overtook her, how close was she to the stop sign when that happened(was she cut off)? Is the city to blame due to improper intersection layout? Why isn't the driver charged with an "Unsafe turning motion"?

I think it comes down to is no good witnesses except the person who ran her over so we're left trusting the one person who can lie to save their own skin. That stinks. I am surprised there are no charges, even if somebody ends up in your blind spot it shouldn't excuse failure to check said blindspot.

84. Couldn't believe the Barber article made it to press. If it is an editorial change, it's driven only by the recent events at this rant published just two months ago shows:

Cyclists should know their place - The Globe and Mail

I haven't seen anything but that one sentence statement either. What gives? In lieu of any actual information, I'm going to assume the worst and continue to ride accordingly.

85. Originally Posted by The Globe
Cars that fly through red lights or stop signs would be quickly reported and, if caught, severely prosecuted.
Reiterated for comedic value.

I had to re-read it three times to be sure they weren't being sarcastic.

86. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Reiterated for comedic value.

I had to re-read it three times to be sure they weren't being sarcastic.
+1 Agreed. Cars blow through red lights and jump their green lights all the time around here. Very rarely are they ever caught. It really would require a cop to witness the incident, and even then it is not a sure thing that the cop will care enough to do anything.

Although I must say that when I was in Philadelphia, there were a lot of morons on bicycles. Guys on Fixies riding at night with no lights or bright clothing with multi-lane traffic and completely blowing through intersections to turn the wrong way onto a one way street. Morons are universal, I suppose.

87. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Reiterated for comedic value.

I had to re-read it three times to be sure they weren't being sarcastic.
Cars that fly through red lights or stop signs would be quickly reported and, if caught, severely prosecuted. Not so bikes, which are a lesser threat, but a threat just the same.

lol'n over here. almost spit out my lunch!

88. Okay.. I have a pretty simple proposition for all the motorists. When you all stop trying to clip, hit, and kill those not in cars I'll stop breaking traffic laws and riding on sidewalks.

89. So cyclists can't ride on the sidewalk and shouldn't be on the roads, where are we supposed to go then?

I wish they would tell us if the truck over took the yoga teacher or if she snuck up beside the truck. It would help it to all make sense.

90. Alright, this was a first for me:

Tonight's commute, which for the first time in a month involved a short section on Bayview Avenue.

It wasn't that odd that the VERY FIRST MOTORIST to catch up with me on Bayview came unglued.
It wasn't that odd that he was a middle-aged white male driving an oversized pick-up truck.
It wasn't that odd that he took exception to my use of the right side of the right lane.
It wasn't that odd that he demanded to pass me although I was waiting in traffic at a red light.
It wasn't that odd that rolled down the window and uttered profanity-laden threats of bodily harm.

What was odd was that he rolled down the driver's side window to utter them. Because since another car wedged between use at the light, he could not pull alongside to threaten on the left. So he passed the car behind me on the sidewalk, stopped on the sidewalk, and screamed at me from there.

To be clear, there were no driveways or curb cuts there. He was just driving on the sidewalk. After he was done, he drove further ahead into a right-turn lane and made a right into Sunnybrook.

So... Ford Nation does use the sidewalk every now and then. Who knew?

91. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Alright, this was a first for me:

Tonight's commute, which for the first time in a month involved a short section on Bayview Avenue.

It wasn't that odd that the VERY FIRST MOTORIST to catch up with me on Bayview came unglued.
It wasn't that odd that he was a middle-aged white male driving an oversized pick-up truck.
It wasn't that odd that he took exception to my use of the right side of the right lane.
It wasn't that odd that he demanded to pass me although I was waiting in traffic at a red light.
It wasn't that odd that rolled down the window and uttered profanity-laden threats of bodily harm.

What was odd was that he rolled down the driver's side window to utter them. Because since another car wedged between use at the light, he could not pull alongside to threaten on the left. So he passed the car behind me on the sidewalk, stopped on the sidewalk, and screamed at me from there.

To be clear, there were no driveways or curb cuts there. He was just driving on the sidewalk. After he was done, he drove further ahead into a right-turn lane and made a right into Sunnybrook.

So... Ford Nation does use the sidewalk every now and then. Who knew?
I know it's not funny, but it's so predictable that it is almost funny.

What was the colour, make and model of the oversize pickup? There aren't that many around town. At least he didn't get to smoke you.

92. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Alright, this was a first for me:

Tonight's commute, which for the first time in a month involved a short section on Bayview Avenue.

It wasn't that odd that the VERY FIRST MOTORIST to catch up with me on Bayview came unglued.
It wasn't that odd that he was a middle-aged white male driving an oversized pick-up truck.
It wasn't that odd that he took exception to my use of the right side of the right lane.
It wasn't that odd that he demanded to pass me although I was waiting in traffic at a red light.
It wasn't that odd that rolled down the window and uttered profanity-laden threats of bodily harm.

What was odd was that he rolled down the driver's side window to utter them. Because since another car wedged between use at the light, he could not pull alongside to threaten on the left. So he passed the car behind me on the sidewalk, stopped on the sidewalk, and screamed at me from there.

To be clear, there were no driveways or curb cuts there. He was just driving on the sidewalk. After he was done, he drove further ahead into a right-turn lane and made a right into Sunnybrook.

So... Ford Nation does use the sidewalk every now and then. Who knew?
Nothing new there. Been going on long before what is now called the Ford Nation.

Haven't told this one yet. December 2002 3 weeks after moving to Toronto.. clipped by guy in Van. Came up to him at stop light.. he yells at me half in English half in I think Cantonese. Pin head is so busy yelling that on the green he swerves right and smacks the side of his van off my bar.. nice loud thunk. Screeches to a stop and comes out swinging claiming I hit his Van. Grabbed in head lock and stopped that nonsense when I informed him keep going and I'm driving you face first into the frozen street.

Yep... welcome to Toronto. Or was it called the Millerite Nation?

93. I personally challenged Ford Bros. to paint bike lanes on suburban sidewalks where few dare to walk:

Walkability Research &mdash; Jane's Walk

but my suggestion was ignored. However, if they knew more about how it could improve traffic flow for all the autotards out there, I'm sure the Bros. would reconsider! Stay safe...

94. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
So he passed the car behind me on the sidewalk, stopped on the sidewalk, and screamed at me from there.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: WTF is wrong with people?!?

95. Getting back to the point of the thread, I have about one incident of this type per 50km of rush-hour arterial road ridden this year That's pretty damn often.

Now, other than posting about it here for cheap laughs it doesn't alter my commuting behavior. And there are guys who ride the full length of Don Mills twice a day in rush hour. They must have this sort of incident multiple times per week. Clearly they don't care either.

But how the hell can anyone ask with a straight face why people are riding on the sidewalk when that many drivers think a cyclist on a major road is asking for a confrontation?

96. ## the report is released

97. Looks like some good material here. Having read only the executive summary so far, I see that at-fault percentages in the 129 incidents studied appear to be close to 50/50. This differs from my expectation, and is very good news as it says that an individual cyclist can exercise significant control over their own destiny and stay out of (serious) trouble by riding smart and not making any mistakes.

I expect that some folks may be discussing whether or not 50/50 is acceptable, but I think I can live with it.

98. I haven't read the entire report, but what I have read looks good so far....

As usual, the media focuses on the recommendations they know will be controversial with some: mandatory helmet law and side guards.

The first four recommendations are 1) "complete streets" approach to design 2) development of an Ontario Cycling Plan 3) public awareness & education 4) legislative changes to clarify interactions between cyclists & other road users. All reasonable.

99. If anyone believes that any of this will actually be implemented is highly delusional

100. Originally Posted by Enduramil
If anyone believes that any of this will actually be implemented is highly delusional
I'm perfectly willing to believe that the mandatory helmet law might pass.

"Bolting a safety bar on my truck is too expensive, so put this block of styrofoam on yer head."

Originally Posted by Office of the Chief Coroner
In 62% of cases involving a vehicle, a contributory action on the part of the driver was identified; this may be an under-representation.
I'm glad this was spelled out so clearly, although don't expect any soul searching in the "Wheels" section of the Star".

Originally Posted by Office of the Chief Coroner
a significant number – the majority, in fact – of cycling deaths in our Review that involved a motor vehicle occurred when the driver was attempting to pass the cyclist from behind.
And I certainly don't expect the VC crowd to revisit the "less than 1%" figure about hit-from-behinds they've been arguing since the 70s.

101. What percentage were using clipless pedals vs. flats?

102. This pattern suggested that the majority of collisions took place when the driver was attempting to pass the cyclist......The most common point of impact with the vehicle was some combination of the bumper, hood and windshield; thus, occurring when the driver attempted to pass the cyclist.
Strange omission here of how the cumulative evidence provided by forensic accident reconstruction tallied with statements given by the vehicle operators. Uhoh. The data in table 7 don't match up with the above conclusion at all. To wit: cyclist error is partly or wholly to blame in 71% of the 129 incidents. Whereas, 'the majority' of the incidents took place while the driver was attempting to pass. And yet, table 7 indicates that not one cyclist was guilty of failing to pull out to the right as required by law, which is really the only way a cyclist could be at fault while being overtaken.

The investigative powers granted under the Coroners Act are limited to the deceased person and do not extend to other, living persons who may have been involved in a death. As such, it was not possible for the OCCO to seek out information about the results of testing of drivers for impairment by alcohol or drugs.
So the coroner went ahead and reported that 23% of the dead cyclists were under the influence. Golly, I don't like the optics on this one.

While there may be differences of opinion with respect to the value of mandatory helmet legislation, the key message to all Ontarians is simple:
Helmet use by all cyclists in Ontario should be encouraged and supported.
Notwithstanding the varied perspectives on helmet legislation, the Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario takes the position that helmet use by all cyclists can and will decrease fatal head injuries.]
Problem here. The chief coroner states that all of the 129 deaths in this study were 'preventable'. Since the data showed that wearing a helmet did not guarantee to prevent death, therefore helmet use is not one of the reasons why all 129 deaths were said to be preventable. Mandatory helmet legislation can only be a logical conclusion if it is also concluded that some cycling deaths are not preventable, and never will be, thus making a helmet and a prayer the best counsel for cyclists.

To the Ministry of Transportation:
A comprehensive review and revision of the Highway Traffic Act should be conducted to ensure that it is consistent and understandable with respect to cycling and cyclists and therefore easier to promote and enforce.
My understanding was that just such a review had already been initiated prior to this coroner's inquiry. Last fall, I asked Dr. Cass to update us on the status of this existing review process. I guess it just went /dev/null.

103. Originally Posted by Kay.
To wit: cyclist error is partly or wholly to blame in 71% of the 129 incidents. Whereas, 'the majority' of the incidents were due to drivers overtaking. And yet, table 7 indicates that not one cyclist was guilty of failing to pull out to the right as required by law.
Was this derived from the long list of (legal) cyclist actions that they were considering *contributing factors* in the collision, or in everything but name, "contributory negligence"?

Things that made this list... riding with headphones (without knowing if they were loud enough to impair hearing, or even if they were on), riding with a shopping bag on the handlebar, riding with a backpack, eating or drinking while riding, etc.

Sure, these are all things that *could* contribute to some types of accidents, but they state outright that they aren't sure in the cases they examined, then seem to throw them into the blame matrix anyways, as I read it.

104. There's a lot to digest in there. Am I the only who's genuinely surprised that nearly a quarter of the deaths occurred with riders under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs? Seems really high - maybe higher than you might expect for fatal traffic accidents in general?

105. Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Was this derived from the long list of (legal) cyclist actions that they were considering *contributing factors* in the collision, or in everything but name, "contributory negligence"?

It's far easier to blame cyclist's for everything then actually look at the bigger problem. That problem being the attitude of 90% of Ontario drivers. Who seem to be mental midgets with massive self righteousness issues while operating a machine that can do far more harm and does more harm then a firearm.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•