Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[Sheba]

Vancouver intersection notorious for pedestrian collisions finally gets traffic light

Residents of a of a neighbourhood on Vancouver’s west side finally have access to a long-awaited crosswalk signal at an intersection notorious for crashes.

As of Friday morning, the pedestrian-controlled traffic light was active at the intersection of West 4th Avenue and Waterloo Street.

In September, Global News reported about a series of pedestrian collisions in a crosswalk at the intersection, where people on foot must make their way across four lanes of traffic.

...

[Migrant_Coconut]

Think they might as well shut down that part of Waterloo altogether and make McBride one big park.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Think they might as well shut down that part of Waterloo altogether and make McBride one big park.

Isn't Waterloo closed to traffic there already, or have they reopened it? I'm sure removing the paving will happen in time.

[FarmerHaight]

Moved from transit thread.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

For that, you'll need to get City Hall to stop listening to HUB (who basically want to be able to ride anywhere, anytime).

Changing City is correct, HUB clearly instructs all cyclists to follow the rules of the road:


Source

I don't many bike advocates in favour of outright breaking the rules of the road. I know some in favour of the Idaho Stop and others who think children should be allowed to ride on sidewalks, but otherwise advocates just want everyone including drivers and cyclists to follow the rules of the road.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

...advocates just want everyone including drivers and cyclists to follow the rules of the road.

It's been my observation that there are idiots who don't follow the rules using every mode of transport. And that the worst idiots always seem to be in whatever transportation mode you aren't currently participating in.

[logan5]

So cyclists.

I gave up bike riding because my e scooter is just so damn enjoyable to ride, so i am still a huge advocate of bike infrastructure.

[Zepfancouver]

4 pm today - Flagger steps into the bike path with her stop paddle clearly facing the cyclist but cyclist refuses to stop, the cyclist even give the finger to the trucker.
The flagger is juggling 2 idiot entities here, earlier this week 2 cars accelerated past the truck on the right before the flagger finally got control of the cars and cyclist for this turn (Harwood at Burrard).

The link has the sound of the exchange between the parties involved.


https://makeagif.com/i/gxLYwk

A full view - The cyclist had a half a block to see that a truck was turn right. The cyclist is viewing his/her surroundings through the eye of a needle


https://makeagif.com/i/e8VwZ6

[officedweller]

The flagger is also probably there because of the fatality at the Hornby & Pacific intersection a year or 2 ago.

The dump truck (with trailer) needs to take a wide turn (occupying both lanes), so cannot see cyclists in the bike lane through his/her sideview mirror.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Zepfancouver

4 pm today - Flagger steps into the bike path with her stop paddle clearly facing the cyclist but cyclist refuses to stop, the cyclist even give the finger to the trucker.
The flagger is juggling 2 idiot entities here, earlier this week 2 cars accelerated past the truck on the right before the flagger finally got control of the cars and cyclist for this turn (Harwood at Burrard).

Come on down and take your Darwin award

[madog222]

Is that clip going to make it onto YouTube?

[Zepfancouver]

Originally Posted by madog222

Is that clip going to make it onto YouTube?

I have it on my channel

https://youtu.be/CEJiDM8Bku4
and on Imgur https://imgur.com/gallery/fJ7OuRv

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The flagger is also probably there because of the fatality at the Hornby & Pacific intersection a year or 2 ago.

The dump truck (with trailer) needs to take a wide turn (occupying both lanes), so cannot see cyclists in the bike lane through his/her sideview mirror.

Out of curiosity, why do we think the flagger gave the truck priority instead of the cyclist?

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

Out of curiosity, why do we think the flagger gave the truck priority instead of the cyclist?

It's a good question since traffic turning right is supposed to yield to cyclists going straight in the bike lane. I would guess because the flagger is being paid as part of the construction project, and not to enforce traffic laws more broadly.

However, as a cyclist, I am not too fussed about stopping for construction equipment because a) they tend to block at least a couple lanes while completing a turn so it's in the best interest of everyone to complete said turn ASAP; and b) they could squash me like a bug.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

Out of curiosity, why do we think the flagger gave the truck priority instead of the cyclist?

That’s their job, to control the unpredictable general public.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

It's a good question since traffic turning right is supposed to yield to cyclists going straight in the bike lane. I would guess because the flagger is being paid as part of the construction project, and not to enforce traffic laws more broadly.

However, as a cyclist, I am not too fussed about stopping for construction equipment because a) they tend to block at least a couple lanes while completing a turn so it's in the best interest of everyone to complete said turn ASAP; and b) they could squash me like a bug.

And it only adds like 30 seconds max to your commute. People (cyclist and drivers) just have no patience for such things these days, apparently.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

However, as a cyclist, I am not too fussed about stopping for construction equipment because a) they tend to block at least a couple lanes while completing a turn so it's in the best interest of everyone to complete said turn ASAP; and b) they could squash me like a bug.

As a car driver, cyclist, pedestrian, you name it. Just wait and let the giant dump truck do their thing. Especially when a flagger is literally in front of you.

As I say to my kid "risk vs reward". That cyclist is a complete idiot and that type of behaviour will eventually send them to the ER.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

Out of curiosity, why do we think the flagger gave the truck priority instead of the cyclist?

My guess would be because the truck would be blocking both lanes of traffic on the roadway (or turning from the left lane) and there could also be the possibility of a stupid driver trying to pass the truck in the right lane and getting quished when the truck turned.
As for waiting to let the cyclist pass, there would likely always be another cyclist coming, so the timing is in line with when the truck approached, not stopping any particular cyclist.
It may also be harder for the truck to stop and then start up again (well, you'd see a big puff of exhaust if it did).

[jollyburger]

The never-ending debate about cyclists wearing helmets (and the rolling through stop signs)

Oh, and here’s a parting thought. If we were to be genuinely public health-minded, people driving cars should probably wear helmets. According to an Australian study, a mandatory helmet law for vehicle drivers has the potential to save 17 times as many people from death by head injury as a helmet law for cyclists.

Maybe until we get autonomous cars, people driving should wear helmets too? Time for legislation?

If you ever see someone pull out this "fact" as an excuse why they shouldn't have to wear helmets or a dig at fossil cars then you go read the paper and realise it's from the mid-1990s and airbags just started to become mandatory in Canada in 1999.

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/move-...ar-one-8201345

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

The never-ending debate about cyclists wearing helmets (and the rolling through stop signs)



If you ever see someone pull out this "fact" as an excuse why they shouldn't have to wear helmets or a dig at fossil cars then you go read the paper and realise it's from the mid-1990s and airbags just started to become mandatory in Canada in 1999.

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/move-...ar-one-8201345

For me: if you go slow and only for a few block under 20km/h speed - helmet is optional.

When I go on a 2-3 hours ride with my road bike, and speeds unto 40 km/hours (30 average), yeah it's a no brainer...

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Lexus

For me: if you go slow and only for a few block under 20km/h speed - helmet is optional.

When I go on a 2-3 hours ride with my road bike, and speeds unto 40 km/hours (30 average), yeah it's a no brainer...

Yeah, having helmets just be a blanket "all cyclists must wear at all times" ha always been heavy-handed.

Seatbelts aren't even mandated in all situations, after all. Buses, for one, don't require them, even on highway buses. It's deemed safe enough due to heft, I suppose?

Golf carts don't require seatbelts either. Safe enough due to lower speed and usually on paths.

This logic really should apply to bicycles, imo. Riding a bike on a dedicated bike path should make helmets optional. Routes like the CVG, Seawall, Arbutus bikeway.

On street cycling and painted bike lanes can require them.

For insurance and legal purposes, you'd probably have to make all intersections helmet free (no one is taking their helmet off just for the intersection anyhow) as bikeways sometimes cross streets. There's some precedent for that at rail crossings. You don't have to follow the rules of a railways to cross railways after all. Rules can be different where different modes of transport intersect.

There are also different rules and signals for pedestrians and vehicles at intersections, come to think of it... so just make bikeway/roadway intersections the same.

If there is a problem with last-mile helmet usage, perhaps set a distance which a cyclist can ride without a helmet (to get to and from a bikeway), perhaps not requiring helmets under a certain distance when not on major roads. I don't know, just an option. In practice, if you're a few blocks from a bikeway you can make that judgment call anyhow.