Take The Lane

Some good thoughts on wearing bicycle helmets

This National Post video and Ottawa Citizen story make some good points about why one might want to wear a bicycle helmet.

 

She's done with bike helmets: what about you?

Lindsey-Ann Wallace, a Minneapolisian (Minneapplian, Minneapoloosan??) bicycle blogger who authors Biking in MPLS, wrote this detailed and persuasive (to her at least) argument opposing the use of bicycle helmets last month.

It has been the source of some cyberverse discussion, and probably will stir up some chatter among your cycling friends.

For me, I'm still wearing my helmet. I realize completely that if I put out my arms to break a fall, my arm or clavicle will take the hit, and my noggin will likely survive unscathed, whether it's helmeted or helmetless.

But I bounced my helmeted head off pavement once and was glad for the helmet. I figure that's a message. For me, at least.

The streets will be filled with white riders

If you have a bicycle, a bicycle helmet, a white shirt and the time Saturday to help raise awareness about bicycling in our community, please come out to the Together We Travel Ride for Angels event in Waterloo.

Details: Registration at 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, June 20 at the parking lot for the Centre of International Governance Innovation, on Father David Bauer Drive in Waterloo. It's a roughly three-kilometre ride around the Waterloo core: an urban ride with police assistance. Should be completed by 6 p.m.

Must-haves: helmet, white shirt or T-shirt, signed waiver (at the registration desk)

This event has grown out of last year's memorial bicycle ride for Barrie Conrod, killed last year in Waterloo Region as he was out for a sunny Sunday ride with his spouse and riding partner, Heather Caron.

Together We Travel could become an annual event, to bring attention to the hazards cyclists face while sharing the road with motor vehicles, and showing motorists that the cycling community is greater than many of them may believe.

There are a couple of information sites you can visit, here at Indiegogo, where organizers are raising funds to pay for some of the costs associated with the ride; and here on Facebook, where there are details of the event. And here's the Record story from earlier this week about the ride.

The weather should be perfect. Hope to see you there.

 

For all those who died on a ride

Last year's Memorial Ride for Barrie Conrod was one of the biggest grassroots cycling events in Waterloo Region's recent history.

Conrod, you may recall, was killed last year by an SUV driver who nodded off for a second while taking his family home on a beautiful clear Sunday morning, and fatally struck Conrod, who was out for a Sunday ride with his wife, Heather Caron. (My post on the resulting court case, here.)

Caron, has, with the help of cycling friends and members of the larger cycling community, put together a three-kilometre memorial ride for Conrod, and all those cyclists who have died on a ride. Titled, Together We Travel: Ride for Angels, the event will be held Saturday, July 20 in uptown Waterloo. (Facebook page is here.) Registration is 4:15 p.m. at the CIGI parking lot in Waterloo at Caroline and Erb; the ride begins at 5:30 p.m. There will be a police escort.

Riders are asked to wear a white shirt, wear a helmet and sign an insurance waiver. There will be a collection jar to help with the insurance costs.

The intention is for riders to take the lane, and demonstrate the diversity and commitment of the cycling community in this region.

Doing so might be a tough job, in the current climate. Statistics from the minimalist National Householder Survey (which only asked cyclists how long it took to ride to work), suggest that cycling in Waterloo Region is running below the national average. According to the 2011 survey, 1.1 per cent of commuters cycled to work in Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, compared to 1.3 per cent nationally. Since the regional numbers are an apparent drop from the 1.6 per cent recorded in 2006, this may be simply a variation due to small sample size, or it could be that commuters are giving up on bikes.

But I guess the small sample size is the point. According to the survey, some 88 per cent of regional residents drive to work. Five per cent take the buse; four per cent walk. Those of us who use transit, sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian islands, crossing signals or bike lanes: we're just a fraction of the population that uses the roadways, and a vocal segment of that motoring group seems to see sidewalks, crosswalks, and bike lanes as impedimentia.

Unless we want to become completely marginalized, we need to show ourselves. A white shirt and a bike ride would be one way to do that.

Caron writes in a letter to the public that:

"I hope you will join me in this short ride around downtown Waterloo. Our ride will serve as a reminder to motorists and cyclists to respect each other and remember those who have been affected. . . . The community has been so supportive to me. I can't begin to thank everyone. I hope we can continue to remember and honour until the time comes that we don’t need to promote safety on the roads. Safety for all."

 

Crap, I hate when a deadline sneaks up on me

When I posted back in December on the Ontario call for submissions on its proposed cycling draft policy, I thought I had a lot of time to respond.

Then there was Christmas (busy, busy), got sick (oh great), went on holidays (yeah, Mexico), got sick again (some flu shot that was) and just looked up to realize that TODAY (Tuesday, Jan. 29) is the deadline for filing.

Yes, between drinking tea and chewing on Vitamin C tabs and popping zinc pills, I am scribbling out some thoughts on bike lanes, Idaho stops and helmet laws. You still have time to respond, too, if you feel so inclined. To all of you who have already responded, thank you, and I feel rightly ashamed.

Ontario wants your input on its draft cycling strategy

If you want to say anything about the Ontario Ministry of Transportation draft cycling strategy, you've got 60 days to do so.

The Ministry is among several provincial agencies that has had something to say about cycling in Ontario. The office of the Chief Coroner this summer released a cycling death review that had a lot to say to various ministries and governments about cycling safety. The Ontario Medical Association weighed in last year with its Enhancing Cycling Safety in Ontario, and various agencies of public health have contributed their thoughts about active lifestyles.

But this is the big one. The Ministry of Transportation actually designates money that builds things: whether that's paved, segregated bicycle lanes or bicycle storage at public transit facilities. And the ministry sets the tone for every new driver who is licensed in Ontario. If you want Ontario drivers to be trained to share the road, you have to have the Ministry of Transportation on side.

So really, you should read the draft strategy and offer your comments. And don't delay. Sixty days have a way of running out. In fact, if you are reading this on Saturday: only 59 days left.

You've probably read something about the draft strategy elsewhere. To recap, the strategy is looking at: better cycling infrastructure through a provincial cycling network, and through provincial support (cash, advice, policy) of municipally authorized cycling networks; better cycling safety, through education for cyclists and drivers and updates to the (incredibly outdated) Highway Traffic Act; and better overwatch, through monitoring and co-ordination (which sounds like a bonanza for consultants, but really does have a bearing on how improvements are made).

It is interesting that two recommendations of the Chief Coroner's report, made specifically to the Ministry of Transportation, are not in any way addressed in the draft strategy:

First, no mention of mandatory bicycle helmet legislation -- which really stirred up the beehive when it was suggested back in June of this year.

Second, no mention of the one-metre/three-foot passing law, which has been the subject of one private member's bill and many lobbying attempts. It appears that it continues to go nowhere fast.

Neither does the draft cycling strategy address the question of e-bikes. There has been a lot of energy generated about e-bikes, whether police are enforcing the law, whether the law is clear enough, whether e-bike users should be required to be licensed. Other than defining what an e-bike is and where it can be used, no discussion of the e-bike's future.

Of course, there are 60 days to discuss all of this. Go to the website, read the draft strategy and press the button to submit your responses.

The Cycling Dead: Zombies don't use bike helmets, why should you?

I think I've found the most compelling argument against wearing bicycle helmets: Zombies don't wear them.

You'd think that the undead would take the most basic precautions to avoid being dead again, and yet there they are, shambling around without protection for that vital brain case. Clearly they have made this decision because the wearing of bicycle helmets is an intrusion on their personal space, an infringement on their right to choose and finally, few bicycle helmets come in the appropriate zombie colours.

If it's good enough for the zombie apocalypse, it's good enough for the cycling apocalypse. Join the undead.

(Photographic evidence of widespread zombie adoption of head protection is welcome, should anyone wish to contradict this premise. Sporadic helmet use by zombies should not be considered an indication of a widespread trend or an indication of a clearly considered choice intended to extend their unlives.)

Lower speed limits are in our future

Way back in 2010, while at Velo-city Global 2010 in Copenhagen, I posted on a presentation from John Whitelegg, a prof in transportation studies from John Moores University in Liverpool.

The post was titled "Are lower urban speed limits in our future?", based on his research showing that 95 per cent of peds and cyclists will survive being hit by objects travelling at a speed of 32 km/h or less, while fully 55 per cent won't survive being struck at 48 km/h or faster.

So, of course, it was with interest that I read the reportage on the recent Ontario coroner's report on pedestrian deaths in Ontario. While the coroner's Report on Cycling Deaths (released in June, go here for both reports) made virtually no mention of speed limits, the attention on the Pedestrian Death Review seemed to be entirely about the speed limits.

In fact, that was one recommendation of many. Here's the recommendation: "The MTO should amend the Highway Traffic Act to allow local municipalities to lower the unsigned default speed limit to 40 kilometres an hour on residential streets from the current limit of 50 kilometres an hour." (It was later elaborated to indicate that speed limits on residential streets should be reduced to 30 km/h while all other municipal streets should be 40 km/h.)

There were lots of other recommendations: that Ontario communities should adopt a "complete streets" approach to planning and redevelopment (a recommendation that also was the first item in the cycling deaths review); that the province should develop a walking strategy; that side guards be manadatory on transport trucks (also in the cycling deaths review); that the Driver's Handbook be updated to reflect the new realities (also in the cycling review); and that there be publlic education and police education and enforcement (also in the cycling review).

You could view both reports as convergent (the exceptions being the speed limits, mentioned only in the pedestrian review, and the three-foot passing law and mandatory helmets, mentioned only in the cycling review).

I think you can read a few things from both reviews:

One is that complete streets is the way of the future for municipal planning. No surprise since it is already happening at the grassroots level. Eventually, the provincial funding agencies will respond.

Another is that truck side guards are going to happen. They are already happening ... you can see examples on the major highways every day.

And another is lower speed limits. Not one of the "convergent" items, but cyclist and pedestrian advocates have been talking about lower limits for years. It fits with the complete streets planning model and is the logical way to reduce insurance costs, health funding, and energy consumption. Every roadway innovation of recent years -- traffic calming, roundabouts, community safety zones -- has been intended to reduce speed limits in the urban/suburban setting.

Lower speed limits are in our future and that can only be good news for cyclists.

There could be an e-bike in your future

I've been watching the growth of the e-bike community with interest. There's a lot of controversy, especially because so many North American e-bike owners flagrantly disregard the regulations that permit them to treat e-bikes like bicycles (no licensing, no insurance, yet can ride on most thoroughfares). Principal among them is the disabling of the pedals, with No. 2 being riding on sidewalks.

You don't have to go far to find stories about support for changing the regs, to require e-bike operators to take lessons, be tested and have a separate licensing structure.

I think that would be a huge mistake. Frankly, the arguments for licensing e-bikes are just about the same as the arguments for licensing bicycles, and I don't think there are many cyclists who want to go down that road. If you are a commited cyclist who doesn't want to see more bicycle regulation, you would be wise to argue for education of riders and enforcement by police of the existing regulations.

I have heard enough from police who allege that they don't know how to treat e-bikes, from an enforcement perspective, to suspect that they are only too willing to side with the testing-licensing factions (because they are too lazy to read the new regs?). If you have any contact with your local police force (through your bicycle advisory committee, your local police force, your brother-in-law's uncle), use it to argue for enforcement of the existing regs: Just read the MTO FAQ. It's not rocket science.

Anyway, it was with interest that I surveyed the e-bike offerings as ExpoCycle in Toronto on the weekend.

I saw about six booths dealing with e-bikes, with most of the offerings looking like bikes with battery packs, rather than the scooter-like clones that seem to be so popular (probably because they are structured to carry two riders).

Most of the e-bikes offered at ExpoCycle were the conventional hub-drive bikes. Pedego was the one I took the closest look at. Co-owner Terry Sherry was happy to talk about the vehicle he is confident will revolutionize urban transport (and Greg Moore, of Toronto's ezriders, which sells Pedego, would happily offer you a test ride).

(Above, a Pedego. The focus is on cruiser styling with lots of colour options.)

Sherry says that the average age of Pedego buyers is 59. "These are people who getting out and having fun again. These bikes open up the world to them again. You can watch them go from 55 to 15 (years of age) in a turn of the wrist" because terrain that was too daunting to them before, is now manageable. While he sees his main market now as the Baby Boomer, "gas costs will be the tipping point."

The people at Vancouver-based Epik cycles are focused on e-bikes with more of an urban, street vibe. And they are commited to the crank-case point of contact for the e-assist. The lower centre of gravity provides better control, they say, and ease of movement.

The pedElec system crankcase mechanics mean there is no drag on the wheel when freewheeling, as there can be with hub-mounted systems. The Epiks look darn nice, too. Epik reps weren't saying how many bikes they were selling, but said they are very happy with how they are selling in Vancouver. Anyone who has ridden the varying terrain in that city can understand why an e-bike might be desirable.

Police reporting in Fogolin cycling crash not up to standard

More news about cycle coach Frank Fogolin of Kitchener and his injuries from Sunday's crash are on the Record website.

What surprises me in all this is how lightly his injuries were treated by Waterloo Region Police Service.

There was not a major incident report released to any of the local media after the event on Sunday, when Fogolin was knocked down from behind and taken to hospital. In fact, it took a Facebook message from one of his cycling students, Olympian Leigh Hobson, to let anyone know that this had happened.

When I first asked questions about this earlier this week, I was told there was no report, and perhaps the incident had happened outside the Waterloo Region. Later, when I got the actual location from Hobson (on Ira Needles Boulevard in Waterloo), WRPS came up with a report. But even that report fell short of the reality of the case.

I posted on the incident on Wednesday, based on what I had learned from the police and Hobson, but the major media had to depend solely on the police report which said that Fogolin had received minor injuries and had been taken to hospital, held overnight for observation and released.

Clearly, the injuries weren't minor. The guy was knocked unconscious, had a bleed to the brain, has had part of his memory wiped and will be in rehab for months. This is minor?

And clearly, he is still in hospital and will stay there for some time. If this is the standard for police report-taking, how many cases can be thrown out of court because the reporting officer did a slipshod job?