Vast Differences in Cyclist Helmet Use Across City of London
Surprisingly, there is a vast difference in cyclist helmet use across the City of London Ontario. Equally surprising is the lack of concern or recognition demonstrated by official entities such as the City of London, Police and organized cycling groups.
These findings stem from recent cyclist observations by Gorski Consulting. The observations are summarized from the 2021 through to 2023. They are comprised of documentations of cyclists riding along streets throughout London, from observations along multi-use paths such as the Thames Valley Parkway (TVP) and from observations from specific sites where traffic studies have been conducted, such as Colborne Street at St James Street.
The observational data from across the City from 2022 shows that, of 1030 cyclists who were observed, 64.4 percent were not using helmets. We also selected the more specific population of cyclists who were observed riding on sidewalks in 2022, a total of 365 riders, and found that 76.7 percent were not using helmets.
Even less cyclists wore helmets in specific neighbourhoods such as along Hamilton Road in south-east London. Observations were made along Hamilton Road between Highbury Ave and Adelaide Street through 2021 up to the first quarter of 2023. This revealed that, out of 64 cyclists, 56 were not wearing helmets, resulting in a non-use rate of 87.5 percent. These numbers demonstrate the lack of basic safety precautions used by some cyclists, many who still do not believe that helmets improve their chances of reducing the severity of their injuries.
In contrast we also looked at cyclist helmet use at three locations along the Thames Valley Parkway. This 2021 data from 452 observations showed that just 27.2 percent of riders were not wearing helmets. Given the numbers involved this cannot be a statistical glitch, but suggests a real difference exists.
Even more remarkable is the data recently obtained from the specific site of Colborne Street at St James. This is the site where substantial traffic documentations have been conducted in 2022 and 2023. Our interest at this site was to understand how the painting of a new cycling lane on Colborne would change the lateral travel paths of motor vehicles and cyclists. While conducting these observations we recognized the large percentage of cyclists who were wearing helmets and we decided to examine this more closely. We found that, out of 54 observations of northbound cyclists on Colborne just 13.0 percent were observed not to be wearing helmets.
Why do such stark differences exist in various neighbourhoods of London? Hamilton Road has experienced several fatal cyclist collisions yet there has been no information revealed about how those collisions occurred and whether helmet use was a factor. Differences in road widths also play a role. Colborne Street, where almost everyone wears a helmet, has much wider lanes than Hamilton Road. The involvement of such factors need further study. As the population of cyclists increases in London the probability that more cyclist collisions will occur is inevitable. Yet no one is conducting cyclist safety studies in London except Gorski Consulting.
Passing Motions On New Cycling Lane of Colborne St – First Session Completed
A successful completion of the first video documentation session of passing motions in the northbound lane of Colborne Street in London Ontario was completed by Gorski Consulting on August 29, 2023.
The next procedures will involve shrinking each video so it can be inserted into a video editting program (Adobe Premiere), where all the synchronized views are combined. Following this the analysis of video content can begin. While there has been no official count, my impression while at the site is that the number northbound cyclists appeared to have increased compared to previous sessions. The official analysis will determine if this impression is accurate.
The video session occurred between 1600 and 1800 hours. The session occurred on a Tuesday so this would be representative of a workday situation. This would be a time when many cyclists would be leaving the downtown area, perhaps on their way home. Motor vehicle traffic volumes would also be expected to be higher during this evening rush hour.
What we hope to accomplish with this data is a comparison to previous video sessions before the painted cycling lane was created. While there is much opinion about the safety, or lack of it, provided by painted cycling lanes there is essentially no objective data collected by anyone to examine the details of how cyclists and motor vehicles interact at such lanes. Our documentations are the only publicly available data of these interactions. Stay tuned as we conduct the analysis and report it on this Gorski Consulting website.
Painting of Cycling Lane on Colborne St Completed – Additional Observations Can Begin
The City of London has finally completed painting the new cycling lane on Colborne Street between Oxford and Cheapside Streets. Gorski Consulting attended the site on August 27, 2023 and applied fresh paint to the orange markers that were painted there prior to observations in April 2023. With these actions completed observations can begin of cyclists and motor vehicles in the same manner as was done earlier this year when the cycling lane did not yet exist.
Additional markers had to be added across the road because the creation of the cycling lane. Thus originally the markers were painted over a width of just 2.0 metres. Now additional markers have been painted to create a width of 3.0 metres. This is needed to capture the lateral position of motor vehicles which will be travelling further away from the east curb due to the presence of the cycling lane. In the original set-up observations were conducted as shown in the photo below. It will be interesting to see if and how the lateral positions of traffic units changes due to the creation of the cycling lane.
In a CBC News article published on August 23, 2023 the City of London claimed that overall cycling volume increased by 15 percent between 2022 and 2023. The City also claimed that cycling volume increased by 50 percent at its counters located at Dundas and Colborne. While that appears to be good news there is still no attention being paid to the safety of riders. Other then counting cyclist volumes at its designated traffic counters there appears to be no other study by the City that examines whether the infrastructure on which cyclists ride is sufficient to keep riders reasonably safe.
Safe Sharing of Sidewalks Between Cyclists and Pedestrians is Achievable
Pedestrians being struck and injured by cyclists riding on sidewalks is one of the main reasons why many jurisdictions make sidewalk riding illegal. Yet, with proper actions by the cyclist, a safe coexistence can occur. In the example shown in the photo above the cyclist is riding on the sidewalk because riding in the right lane of Oxford Street is dangerous to cyclists. Oxford is a main arterial road in London that provides no safe opportunity for cyclists to ride in the right lane. In particular many cyclists simply fail to wear helmets, often due to ignorance but also because many persons and cycling organizations, who ought to know better, tell cyclists that helmets do not matter. When struck from the rear by a motor vehicle a cyclist’s head often strikes dangerously stiff portions of the vehicle exterior when helmet use could be of substantial benefit. Much like a seat-belt a helmet may not prevent all injury but in the vast number of instances they reduce the severity of injuries. Thus when cyclists do not wear helmets it becomes even more important that they stay out of traffic lanes and ride on a sidewalk.
As shown in the next photo, a crucial part of responsible cycling is to warn vulnerable pedestrians, in reasonable time and distance, of their approach. We can see below that the woman pushing the stroller has turned her head possibly because the cyclist has rung his bell thus allowing her to consider how she might avoid the oncoming cyclist. Many instances of collision with pedestrians is that cyclists fail to reduce their speed on approach whereas it is very easy for a cyclist to reduce his/her speed to a level which is less than 5 km/h higher than the vulnerable pedestrian. Such actions can give everyone involved plenty of time to react to each other.
As shown in the next photo, the cyclist has chosen to ride off the sidewalk while the man in the medical cart has also chosen to ride closer to the right edge of the sidewalk. With proper warning given by the cyclist, and a slow speed, such passing motions can be performed in safety.
In the photo below it can be seen that the cyclist can pass the female and her stroller in safety because the female moved over to the right while the cyclist has moved over to the left. This passing motion can be done in safety if both partners perform their actions correctly. This cannot be done if the cyclist does not provide sufficient warning of his approach and he does not reduce his speed.
In summary, pedestrians and cyclists can co-exist on sidewalks in safety if proper procedures are in place. Most importantly cyclists need to understand their obligations when riding on sidewalks. When in the presence of pedestrians they need to give sufficient warning of their presence and they need to slow down such that they are travelling only a few kilometres per hour faster than the speed of the pedestrian. These procedures must to taught to all persons involved but mostly to cyclists who have control over how a passing motion unfolds. Cyclists need not be banished to dangerous travel lanes of arterial roads where they could meet their death from impact by much larger and heavier motor vehicles. With proper guidance and enforcement by authorities cyclists and pedestrians can co-exist on sidewalks.
Guilty Verdict in Cyclist Hit-&-Run Collision Ends Further Inquiry
The only important matter is that we find someone guilty. Then we can move on to the next future tragedy. That seems to be the case in a well-publicized cyclist hit-&-run collision where the cyclist was permanently disabled.
Much publicity has been focused recently on the trial of a motor vehicle driver, Jesse Aaron Bleck, whose vehicle struck a cyclist on Exeter Road near Wonderland Road in London, Ontario, on July 21, 2019. The cyclist who was struck, Tristan Roby, suffered major and permanent brain injuries and is currently reportedly confined to a wheelchair and a very altered future.
A few days ago Bleck was found guilty of being the driver in the hit-&-run collision. Much publicity was given to the fact that Roby and his family could close this difficult chapter and move on. And to some degree, this is a successful end. Yet, the result is troubling.
Although news media focused on the court proceedings with respect to who was driving, essentially nothing was reported on how and why the collision happened. And there has been no concern expressed by anyone that this lack of information existed. Whether it be the police, or news media, politicians or anyone interested in cycling safety, or road safety as a whole, expressed any concern that the public was provided with no information as to how and why the collision happened. And this is a merry-go-round that keeps being revisited after each collision tragedy.
Officially many persons express their desire to achieve the propaganda of Vision Zero. Various improvements are discussed, often related to roadway design improvements, driver controls, vehicle design improvements. Yet very little thought is given to the practical changes that are essential with respect to how we learn from previous tragedies. Details as to how and why a major collision occurred are continually hidden from public view. This leads to the fact that very few persons have even a minimal understanding of the complexity of collision causes. This reality is demonstrated over and over again when various persons express their thoughts about major collisions that occur and these are displayed in social media chats or in official news media articles. In the absence of knowledge and education the standard beliefs exist that all “drivers are stupid” except for the holder of that opinion. Whenever a collision occurs opinions are expressed that the particular road where the collision occurred is “the most dangerous” and that something must be changed, regardless of whether there is any objective data to determine what exactly needs correction. Opinions are given that speeds on a particular roadway are much too fast and the posted speed limits must be reduced, with the belief that reducing the posted speed will magically reduce average speeds. And opinions are expressed that, when average speeds are reduced, safety is improved, with no consideration whether the behavior of the very small group of problem drivers has been changed.
The greater tragedy in the Tristan Roby collision is that, without knowing how and why the collision occurred, we are building the foundations for the occurrence of the next tragedy because we have learned nothing from it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.