Death Should Not Occur From Simple Guardrail Impact

by | Feb 1, 2023 |

There was no explanation provided by the OPP as to how and why the passenger in this collision with a guardrail died and the driver sustained critical injuries. Guardrails exist to reduce the severity of injuries, not increase them. The poor quality of this photo fails to explain the cause of these unexpected injuries.

A disturbing lack of understanding of cause of death has been exhibited both police and all else who failed to question how and why fatal injuries occurred to an occupant whose while struck a guardrail on Hwy 403 near Hamilton Ontario on August 22, 2022. The story has been revisited now because on February 1, 2023 the OPP has announced on their Twitter account that charges of Careless Driving Causing Death have been laid against the surviving driver. We will never know what factors came into play in this decision and that is not the focus of the concern. Rather the focus should have been on the reasonableness of occupants sustaining critical and fatal injuries from an impact of a guardrail.

When a driver loses control of a vehicle at highway speed there can be many dangerous possibilities that can develop. The vehicle may exit the lane of travel and strike an opposing vehicle. Alternatively, if no other vehicle exists the loss-of-control vehicle may exit the roadway. There are many dangerous things existing along any roadway. In the past, before Electronic Stability Control (ESC), almost all loss-of-control events caused a vehicle to enter a yaw, or a rotation about the vehicle’s vertical centre-of-gravity. Such a rotation would inevitably cause the vehicle to reach a magnitude of rotation that was almost 90 degrees. At this point the vehicle’s tires would engage enough resistance that the vehicle would begin to rollover. The deceleration in a rollover is generally benign and that is not what makes it dangerous. It is that when a vehicle rolls over it exposes the softer, upper portions of the windows and roof to the stiffer environment and deformation of the vehicle structure is easy to achieve. If this is a “soft” rollover with minimal deformation the occupants, if wearing their seatbelts properly, can ride-down the collision with minimal likelihood of significant injury. However if the vehicle strikes something stiff or immovable the story is much different. Major injuries occur in those instances.

In some instances a loss-of-control vehicle does not reach a point of rollover but strikes something while still upright. This is something that occurs more frequently now that ESC keeps the vehicle pointing generally in the direction it is moving. So the vehicle may still be out-of-control of the driver but at least its pointing angle is more favourable if an impact should occur. The safety standards available in frontal impact are far superior to those in a side impact, principally because there is more structure at a vehicle’s front end where energy dissipation can occur in a controlled manner. So in most cases the actions of ESC control are beneficial.

There are many dangers such a trees, poles, rocks and embankments along roadsides that can bring a vehicle to a sudden stop in a dreadful hurry. Sometimes in as little as a 1/10th of a second. So where such dangerous roadside features exist it makes sense to erect more forgiving structures prior to where those dangers exist. And erection of those structures are more likely to done along highways where there are high traffic volumes.

Along expressways such as Highway 403 there should be the maximum “level of service” which is a term commonly used to discuss how much protection will be implemented in road design. Guard (Guide) rails are one of those protections that are stalled on expressways so that vehicles striking them will encounter a more beneficial ride-down of an impact.

Guardrails have purposeful “failures” designed into them. They are designed to buckle, deform and be displaced for the purpose of removing the kinetic energy possessed by the striking vehicle. Wooden anchorage posts may be pushed and then subsequently fractured to allow the rail to be displaced by the impacting vehicle. This longer time and distance of contact is what reduces the overall peaks of “deceleration” (technically “negative acceleration”) that would otherwise be experienced by the impacting vehicle and ultimately by the occupant in the “second collision”. The second collision refers to the impact of the occupant’s body with the vehicle interior. Generally speaking guardrails are not supposed to create decelerations of a vehicle that are life-threating, and why would they? Clearly if the guardrail should produce such decelerations then why bother to pay the price of installing them?

In their original description of the collision on Hwy 403, the OPP never mentioned that the vehicle struck anything else except the guardrail. The photo that they posted on their Twitter site was of poor quality. No one would be able to decipher the specifics of the damage to the car, the damage to the guardrail and how the two interacted. And no one questioned these results. The investigating police never mentioned that fatal injuries should not occur from impacting a guardrail. No one in the official news media raised the issue. And the numerous comments coming from the general public demonstrated that they had no understanding of the issue.

Confusing Markings After Road Construction Need Accountability

by | Jan 16, 2023 |

After construction in 2021 this westbound lane of Brydges Street had its left turn lane removed on approach to Hale Street in London, Ontario. But the old centre-line was not completely removed leading to some potentially catastrophic incidents.

The deaths of six young occupants of a vehicle that fell into a large drainage hole in a construction site on McKay Road in Barrie Ontario in late August, 2022 point to lack of monitoring of roadway construction activity in Ontario. Municipal roadway operations in the Province of Ontario have become accountable to no one. It is not clear how this developed.

London Ontario is no different than other municipalities. As shown in the above photo certain roadway operations create potentially deadly scenarios. The results of these obvious roadway deficiencies are not publicized. In fact, an effort is engaged to hide those deficiencies from the public. Here are some examples.

Two Examples of the Problem

The above photo was taken in September, 2021 after road construction was completed near the intersection of Brydges and Hale Streets in east London. A left-turn lane along westbound Brydges Street was to be removed and a new centre-line was painted through the middle of the road. It can be seen in the photo that, although the old centre-line was partially removed, it was far from invisible. It fact it was very visible to westbound drivers. This was apparent when observations of traffic were made. The sequence of photos below shows an example of one westbound vehicle driver who obviously mistook the old centre-line to be still in effect.

This view shows a westbound driver of an SUV on Brydges Street approaching the intersection at Hale Street. The traffic signal is red and an eastbound vehicle is stopped on the west side of the intersection. We can see the driver of the SUV is braking. We can also see the newly painted centre-line and the SUV is travelling to the left of it.
As the SUV progresses further westward the above photo shows that the traffic signal turns green. The SUV is fully to the left of the newly painted centre-line of the road.
As the westbound SUV reaches the intersection the driver of the eastbound vehicle would be expected to accelerate forward and it is not clear whether that eastbound driver was confused or if he/she recognized that the westbound driver was following the guidance provided by the partially- obscured, old centre-line.
In this photo it can be seen that the eastbound driver likely recognized the confusion of the westbound driver and proceeded past without incident. But what if both vehicles had been approaching each other on a green signal? Would that same understanding unfold successfully?

In a quick survey of just over 18 minutes conducted on September 12, 2021, 12 westbound vehicles were documented on Brydges Street as they approached Hale Street. On eight occasions the westbound vehicles were observed travelling onto the wrong side of the new centre-line, and following the guidance of the old centre-line. A quick call to police led to modifications whereby traffic cones were laid down to guide drivers from the old centre-line to the new one as shown in the photo below. Up to the time that the call was made neither police nor city officials were aware of the danger.

After a call was made to police some traffic cones were laid a few days later guiding drivers from the old centre-line to the new as shown in this photo of September 19, 2021.

A scenario like this is not uncommon, as exemplified by the photos below, taken on January 7, 2023, showing a confusing centre-line marked in the southbound lanes of Wellington Street at King Street in downtown London.

In the fall of 2022 road construction on Wellington Street in London required that northbound traffic be diverted into the southbound lanes and this was done through a gap in the centre median outlined by the traffic cones in this photo. Following the completion of the construction northbound traffic was once again allowed to proceed along the northbound lanes. But someone forgot to remove the centre-line that was painted while the detour was in effect.
As can be seen in this southward view along Wellington Street there is a yellow centre-line painted between the two southbound lanes. Even more confusing is that there are painted arrows in the southbound passing lane that inform drivers that traffic must proceed northbound in this southbound lane.
Drivers not familiar with the fact that these lines were painted due to a detour could easily become confused and panic, possibly steering quickly out of the passing lane thinking that they are travelling the wrong way.

After over a week passed by the City of London began another construction activity in the northbound lane of Wellington Street. This new activity was right next to the spot where the centre-line was painted in the southbound lanes from the previous construction. It should have been simple for someone to recognize the painted centre line in the southbound lanes since work was being done right next to it. But that did not happen, as can be seen in the following photos.

This is a view looking south along the southbound lanes of Wellington Street on approach to King Street on January 16, 2023, or about 10 days after the photos shown above. An SUV in the passing lane is approaching King Street in the passing lane of Wellington Street while the traffic signal is red. The confusing centre-line painted in the southbound lanes is just ahead of the SUV so the driver may have detected its confusing guidance.
Upon crossing through the confusing markings it can be seen that the SUV quickly steers into the curb lane, suggesting that this action was because the roadway markings indicated the driver was driving southbound in a “northbound” lane.
As can be seen in this photo taken on January 16, 2023 the confusing roadway markings were still present in the southbound passing lane of Wellington Street.

Many incidents such as the one shown above become resolved due to the ability of human drivers to unravel these complexities which require a superior understanding of context. However, what would happen if the driver of the southbound vehicle did not exist? What if this was a “Self-Driving” vehicle or one in some form of automated control? Would the self-driving features of the vehicle detect the situation correctly or would it violently steer the vehicle into greater danger because of the markings on the pavement? One can only wonder. But not every human driver is the same. When municipalities create confusing contexts there will be instances where drivers cannot unravel the conflicting messages in time to prevent a collision.

Discussion

The City of London must employ road inspectors to patrol roads like this as prescribed in the Minimum Maintenance Standards (MMS) legislated in the Municipal Act of Ontario. If such inspectors actually passed through this site as required there should have been an obvious ability to detect the problem with the centre-line marking and this should have been corrected immediately. Yet, for at least 10 days, the problem with the roadway marking has not been corrected. So how and where did this failure originate?

If a collision occurs and a claim is made against a city like London there is a Risk Management Department available to protect its interests. In many instances the lawyers in this department are not obliged to simply pay out claims even when there is some fault on the part of the City. Their job is to minimize those payouts and to protect City employees and departments from liability. And often the Risk Management Department works to maintain secrecy about problems in the City that could generate a claim. This often involves operating behind the sight of elected officials who are obliged to appear transparent in the eyes of the electorate. This is why, when an elected official is approached about a roadway complaint the complainant is steered toward staff employees who are not obliged to be transparent and are not obliged to inform the public about their activities.

This secrecy is at the heart of many road safety problems that are not resolved even after there have been tragic collisions that could have been prevented if a road problem was properly identified and corrected. Plaintiff and defense lawyers alike play games to absolve their clients from liability but this does nothing to improve the safety of the general public.

Is Con-Drain The Only Entity Responsible For The Six-Death Collision On McKay Road In Barrie?

by | Jan 15, 2023 |

It was a slow process that eventually revealed that six youths were killed on McKay Road in Barrie Ontario in mid-August, 2022. Initially news media reported that the six persons were missing, as per Barrie Police who reportedly posted a missing persons report at approximately 2000 hours on Saturday, August 27th, 2022. The news media then reported that a Barrie police officer happened to come across a collision site at approximately 0200 hours on Sunday, August 28th. The site was reported to be in the area of McKay Road and County Road 27. The area was a municipal construction site. There was a very large drainage hole in the road and a vehicle was found in the hole with six occupants in it, all deceased. News media reported that “the intersection was closed since springtime” but it was not clear what intersection was being referenced, the one at County Road 27 or the one at Veteran’s Drive. It would seem more informative to state that McKay Road was closed rather than a specific intersection, if that was the case.

In many instances the news media will disclose if police believed that certain factors, such as alcohol impairment, were suspected to play a role in a crash. But in this case the Barrie Police refused to comment.

Instead of any details about the crash, news media filled their reports with the usual comments from dignitaries offering their condolences: Ontario’s Premier, the Mayor of Barrie, Barrie’s City manager, and Barrie’s Fire Chief.

By September 8, 2022 it was reported that police believed the collision occurred shortly after 0600 hours on August 27th. It was stated that the six young adults were heading to a local casino when the crash occurred.

By January 12, 2023 notice was given by news media that police laid a charge of criminal negligence causing death against Con-Drain Group, which was the contractor responsible for the McKay Road construction site. The charge of criminal negligence against a commercial company is unusual. This may be the only time in recent history where such charges were laid with respect to a motor vehicle collision. Almost exclusively such charges are laid against a vehicle driver. The idea that charges could be successful against a commercial entity leads to some bazaar thoughts.

Would police place the building housing the Con-Drain Group in some kind of metal cage with all of its employees inside? Is that how the punishment would be delivered against the firm? Perhaps a single representative, or several, should be surrendered as scapegoats. Maybe the company receptionist or its janitor? These comments are ridiculous, but seriously, it is difficult to understand how a commercial entity can be named and it employees can be successfully prosecuted. The outcome of failure to provide reasonable notice to drivers of the existence of the drainage hole could be the result of actions/inactions by several persons, each having some role but none exclusively to blame. If the owner of the firm did not provide sufficient training to his employees would he/she be solely responsible? Should the supervisor be solely responsible if he/she failed to examine whether those under his supervision failed to install proper signage even through he properly instructed them? Would the employee who was supposed to install the signage be fully responsible if the signs were not installed at the proper locations etc. if the employee was not properly trained? In the end this could be a result of the partial negligence of several persons, all with some partial negligence but none who could, or should, be prosecuted for the total harm.

Separately, if the condition of lack of warning existed, what did other entities do or not do, besides Con-Drain? For example police should be patrolling along roadways looking for possible dangers to the public. And the City of Barrie should have road inspectors doing similar patrols. If McKay Road was closed “since springtime” then did these road patrollers have the opportunity and ability to detect the safety problem? Was there neglect upon the Barrie Police for failing to train its officers in detecting roadway hazards? How often has it been observed that police are told they are not responsible for roadway infrastructure but they are there to control dangers related to driver behaviors? Should the Barrie Police charge themselves with criminal negligence? Is there a conflict of interest here?

There is legislation in the Province of Ontario dealing with Minimum Maintenance Standards (MMS) that provide clear thresholds for matters such as the number of inspections that should be carried out by municipal road inspectors depending the class of roadway. So a Class 1 roadway with a high traffic volume should be inspected at a greater frequency than a lower Class roadway. What Class of roadway was McKay Road and was it being inspected at the minimum frequency as assigned in the MMS?

Checking the Open Data database for the City of Barrie there is information provided on the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on McKay Road. Not unexpectedly the data is confusing. A count reportedly taken in the year 2018 reported an ADT of 2293 vehicles yet the cell describing the Peak Hour Volume also contained a value of 2293 vehicles. Obviously the total traffic for the day cannot be the same as the traffic in only the peak hour of the day. Never-the-less if we assume the correct ADT data is 2293, then we can look at the MMS and determine that this would be a Class 3 road and its inspection frequency should have been once every seven days. And if the roadway was closed for April through to August, 2022 then that would be a total of just over 150 days. Thus there should have been a minimum of 22 roadway inspections carried out from the time that the roadway was closed up to the time of the collision. So If there was a roadway deficiency, such as a lack of proper signage, a road inspector should have had about 22 opportunities to identify the hazard. If these assumptions are valid then there should be no argument that the City ought to have known about a deficiency if it existed over that time frame.

Photos on various news websites shortly after the collision showed signage at the intersection of McKay Road and County Road 27. These signs indicated “Road Closed” with a tab below indicating “Local Traffic Only”. Whenever there is such a “Local Traffic Only” tab it leads drivers to disregard the “Road Closed” sign because it suggests that certain persons are allowed to travel on the road. In many instances such a sign indicates that the road is not completely blocked and that it is possible to travel through the closed portion. But was this signage erected or modified after the collision occurred?

We still do not know anything about what police found that caused them to charge the contracting firm with criminal negligence. And this is approaching five months after the collision occurred. Official news media indicated they asked police about the basis for the charge however a police spokesperson would only say that this was a very complex investigation, one of the largest they had been involved in in recent times, but the spokesperson apparently refused to answer the question. At some time in the future these comments will have to be compared to the evidence that will eventually have to be revealed.

Curiously, why have official news media not picked up on this issue of additional responsibilities for roadway safety by the Barrie Police and the City of Barrie? Why have professional journalists not researched this area, found the traffic volume of McKay Road, and reported the importance of roadway inspections, as required?

In summary, It is crucially important to identify what conditions actually existed at the time of the collision, why they existed, and whose actions or inactions led to the result. Even more important that applying punishments to those deemed at fault, is the importance of properly informing the general public. It is not the courts, politicians, police, or news media who should have the final say on how the repercussions of this tragedy will be dealt with. It is up to the general public that must be fully informed so that those representing the public act according to its wishes. Up to now no such knowledge or information has been disclosed.

Once Again Collision Destroys Harpoon Hazard – Will It Rise Again?

by | Jan 8, 2023 |

For years this harpoon hazard has existed at the intersection of Quebec and Oxford Streets in London, Ontario while no one understood its danger. The issue may now be moot as a collision has destroyed it, maybe permanently (?)

Many simply refuse to recognize safety hazards to the point that they become willfully blind to them. Many roadside objects that harpoon or puncture wayward vehicles are ignored. They rest in place for many years because the probability that they will be struck is remote. Such has been the case of the railing that existed at the intersection of Quebec and Oxford Streets in London, Ontario.

The earliest view of the railing that we have on record comes from August, 2002, shown in the photo below.

This 2002 view of the railing at the intersection of Quebec and Oxford Streets in London, Ontario is partially obscured by the stopped van. A close view shows that some of its horizontal bars are not joined together. The height of these bars is in line with the height of the windshield of a passenger car. Would that be a problem?

Subsequent photos show that over the years the harpoon hazard has taken slightly different forms. The view below shows the railing in April of 2016.

View of the harpooning rail in April of 2016. Note that the ends of the horizontal bars are not protruding out as much as in the next photo below.

A closer view shows that it was quite different in years past. For example the photo below was taken in November, 2016 and it shows how a previous anchorage had existed as demonstrated by the anchorage hole in the square concrete block. Also the horizontal bars now protrude much further out from the anchorage post. So somewhere between April and November of 2016 the railing changed characteristics, possibly because it was struck, destroyed and replaced again.

Sometime in January of 2019 the railing was struck and destroyed as shown in the photos below taken on January 26, 2019.

View looking westbound along Oxford Street on January 26, 2019. The harpooning rail was destroyed likely a few days before this photo was taken.
This view from January 26, 2019 shows that a part of the harpooning rail still remains as traffic cones have been placed at the location where the railing is missing. What are the cones supposed to protect? If they are there to protect vehicle occupants from the protruding horizonal bars then those bars were in existence when the original railing was there.

It was hoped that someone recognized that the safety situation had improved with the destruction of the railing. But no. Sometime later the railway was replaced. again. We see in the photo below, taken in March of 2019, that the railing has been re-installed, with the dangerous horizontal bars waiting to impale the next wayward vehicle.

An interesting thing happened when the railing was struck and repaired. Someone in the City of London recognized the harpooning hazard and placed caps at the ends of the horizontal bars, as shown below.

As if something safer was going to take place, the City of London attached some plugs to the ends of the horizontal bars of the railing, as shown in this photo from November, 2021. The belief that these plugs would prevent a bar from penetrating the windshield of a wayward vehicle is just ridiculous.

Then the railing was struck again in January, 2023, thus demolishing most of it as on previous occasions.

This photo from January 1, 2023 shows the damaged railing after it was struck a few days earlier. It is more likely that the angle contact must have come from a vehicle travelling perpendicular to the length of the railing and none of the horizonal bars are buckled and the anchorage posts are moved to the north.

Shortly afterwards the railing was completely removed and replaced by portable concrete barriers as shown in the photos below.

This view, taken on January 7. 2023 shows that the railing has been completely removed and replaced by portable concrete barriers.
This view from January 7, 2023, looking east along Oxford Street, shows that the railing has been completely removed.

The question remains: Will the dangerous harpoon-railing be re-installed? Or will the City of London finally understand that such a dangerous installation should not exist at the edge of any busy, arterial roadway.

2022 Cyclist Observations Provide Important Data on Cyclist Safety

by | Jan 4, 2023 |

The death of a cyclist on January 2, 2023, on Wellington Road just south of the London Ontario city limit provides an indication of the importance of understanding how cyclist injuries and deaths occur. Unfortunately essentially nothing is transferred from those investigating such collisions to the general cycling public who are the victims of the collisions.

Why deadly collisions occur is a complicated question that has many answers. One of the key faults lie in the rudimentary belief that cyclists are motor vehicles with no engines and that they must share the roadway with their backs to the passing tonnes of metal behind them, regardless of the weather conditions, design of the road, or their capabilities and experience.

It is left to independent agencies such as Gorski Consulting to step up and inform the public about cycling safety issues. For example, in 2022 Gorski Consulting made a total of 1083 observations of cyclists travelling on, or adjacent to roadways in London, Ontario. A variety of information was obtained from these observations which can be used to understand more about the safety issues involved.

The 2022 Cyclist Observation Data

With respect to cyclist gender Gorski Consulting was unable to establish whether a rider was male or female in 53 of those observations. Thus this resulted in a study of the remaining 1030 observations. Of those 1030 cyclists where gender could be determined there was a vastly higher number of male cyclists than female. For example, of the 1030 observations, 895 were males and only 135 were females. This results in a percentage of females of only 13.11 %. An unbiased observer would question why there is such a disproportionate number of males versus females.

A curious finding is that in the summer of 2021 we also conducted gender studies on the Thames Valley Parkway (TVP) in London. A total of 457 cyclists were observed at three sites on the Parkway: St Julian Park, Banana Kingdom and Greenway Park. It was found that there were 330 males and 122 females observed over a period of six hours. This meant that 27 percent of the observations were females. This percentage is more than double the percentage of female cyclists riding on or adjacent to the City’s roadways. Why is that?

An obvious difference between these studies is that the observations made on or adjacent to the City roads were made where cyclists were in the presence of automobiles, heavy trucks and buses. Conversely the Thames Valley Parkway is a pathway that is separated from these automotive transport units. Is that relevant? Is it possible that females may not wish to ride in areas of greater danger? Does this data say something about the relative danger posed to cyclists travelling on or adjacent to City roads versus the TVP?

We also looked at where cyclists travelled with respect to the road right-of-way. We looked at whether cyclists rode within a traffic lane or whether they rode on a sidewalk. It was found that 584 of the 895 males were observed on a sidewalk and 98 of the 135 females were observed on a sidewalk. With respect to percentage, 65.3 % of males were observed on a sidewalk versus 72.6% females. One might be tempted to conclude that females appear to be on a sidewalk more than males however the number of observations is simply too small to draw that conclusion.

A conclusion that is better supported by the data is that, overall, there appear to be more cyclists located on a sidewalk than within the roadway. This may be puzzling when we consider that there are laws, both in London and in the Province of Ontario that make it illegal for cyclists to ride on a sidewalk. So why would two-thirds of males and three-quarters of observed females involve themselves in these illegal activities? Does this say something about cyclists or does it say more about the law? Why are cyclists refusing to ride on an urban road in London, Ontario? And why is this question not receiving more attention?

Another issue that has been explored in the 2022 observational data is the issue of helmet use. In our view cycling helmets are like seatbelts for motor vehicle occupants. They cannot prevent very injury and they cannot prevent every head injury, but they are much more effective in preventing head injury than no helmet at all. Yet our data provides some startling results.

For cyclists observed on or adjacent to an urban roadway, we were able to detect 566 male riders out of 895 who were not wearing cycling helmets, or a percentage of 63.2 % were non-users. With respect to females 76 out of 135 were observed with no helmets, or a percentage of 56.3% non-users. So what we can say is that, overall, there appear to be more cyclists not wearing helmets than those who wear helmets on or adjacent to city roads. If these observations were with respect to motor vehicle occupants not wearing seatbelts we would view them as alarming. So why is it different when cyclists are involved.

Furthermore we can compare the helmet results from 2022 to the results we observed along the TVP in 2021. From the three sites on the TVP we found that 99 of the 330 males were observed not wearing a helmet, or a percentage of 30.0% non users. For females 24 of the 124 were observed not wearing a helmet, or a percentage of 19.7 % non users. But surely these are stark differences from the observations on city streets. Why are there so many more cyclists riding on the TVP with helmets yet, on city roadways, where the dangers of being struck by motor vehicles is so much higher, there is a much lower incidence of helmet use?

Discussion

The cycling public is not provided with basic information about how collisions occur and what is important in preventing their injuries. This is part of the reason why unsafe actions, such as a refusal to wear cycling helmets, develop.

Our 2022 data also demonstrate the contradictions that exist between what cyclists are told is safe and what they sense in the real world. Being told that riding on a sidewalk is less safe than riding on the road with motor vehicle traffic does not appear to agree with the minds of most cyclists. Despite that they could face fines cyclists continue to ride on sidewalks and this likely demonstrates their belief that they are safer riding on that sidewalk.

The two photos below demonstrate the paradox in official instructions provided to cyclists about their safety. In the first photo is a demonstration of what the Province of Ontario deems to be an unsafe act of a cyclist riding on a sidewalk. The cyclist is instructed that it is safer to ride on the road, seemingly as demonstrated in the second photo.

The Province of Ontario would advise this cyclist to ride on the road because it is less safe to ride on the sidewalk. But does that mean that the cyclist should ride on the road as shown in the following photo?
Is the cyclist more safe in this case, riding on the road next to a concrete mixer, than on the sidewalk? Surely safety in the scenario must be taken in context. Each site and each roadway environment may be different and in some instances cyclists may be safer riding on a sidewalk.

If the volume of cyclists is to rise exponentially in the next few years it is doubtful that safer roadways can be built fast enough to keep up. Thus there may be more cyclists riding on roads that are unsafe for cyclists. It is important during this time to conduct observations of cyclists to establish an objective understanding of the safety problems that may be developing in the near future.

Archives

Recent Posts