Gender of Cyclists Observed on Streets in London Ontario
At Gorski Consulting we have stepped up our efforts to provide data about cycling in London and South-Western Ontario. As governments in North America are rapidly changing their roadway networks to create more access to active transportation, it is believed that the cycling mode of transportation will also see a rapid increase. This is good for correcting climate change and improving heath. However, uninformed change can have its detrimental effects. Good quality data remains the cornerstone of good change.
In the last month we have been examining our historical photos of cyclists who were observed riding in London, Ontario. We decided to select the years 2013 through 2020 as the range of our study. The focus has been on cyclists who were observed riding next to or within a city roadway. Thus we have excluded observations of cyclists on dedicated paths and lanes that are not adjacent to a roadway. We have also not included the data from our focused studies where we set up video cameras at a specific location and documented for several hours at that specific location. Thus the observations that were included were those where cyclists were seen riding along or adjacent to any roadway regardless of the location in the City.
We have just completed the first three years worth of data from 2013, 2014 and 2015. An interesting finding is the percentage of males versus females riding on London’s roads. The table below shows the results of these observations.
Of the 522 cyclists in the above table 426 were male and 79 were female. Each year the data indicates that about 85 percent of observed cyclist were male.
London Ontario, like most cities, is expecting a very large increase of cyclists in the next 10 years as a result of its intention to reduce its carbon emissions. There are some loose indications that the present cycling mode of transportation in London is about 1% of its total. The City expects to increase this to at least 5%, but if it is to meet its climate change commitments the needed percentage is likely to be in the range of 20 to 25%.
The disparity in gender becomes even larger when winter road conditions are examined. In the next table we look at observed cyclists just in the winter months (December through March).
Of the 101 cyclists where gender could be established, 96% percent of riders were male.
Male cyclist riding eastbound on Dundas Street near Maitland in February of 2015. Female cyclists are rarely observed in London Ontario in these wintery conditions.
The above tables demonstrate a potential problem. Is it likely that females will be difficult to entice to ride a cycle on a City street? Will this cause a difficulty in achieving the required increase in ridership? Why do females appear to be less inclined to ride a cycle along City streets? What is the purpose of male cyclists that causes them to ride along City streets and is that purpose different for females? Are unsafe conditions one of the reasons why females are not observed along City streets? Are weather conditions a factor? Answers to these questions will be needed if we can make an efficient transformation in mode of transportation.
We will have further to add once we have completed our analysis of data for the years 2016 to 2020.
Detailed Collision Data Needed To Understand Risk Of Unusual Roadway Behaviours
A Highway Traffic Act cannot solve all of our road safety problems. We need detailed collision information in order to recognize the relative risk of unorthodox human behaviours on our road systems.
As shown in the above photo, an elderly male rider has determined that his best option is to ride his medical scooter the wrong way on Brydges Street in east London, Ontario. This is so even though the sidewalk next to him may be a viable option. It is understood that vehicles should not be driving the wrong way on a city street yet there is some reason to believe that, for smaller mass vehicles such as bicycles and scooters, the rider’s ability to see and react to oncoming traffic could be improved when the rider faces that traffic. There are conflicting beliefs about what would be the safest approach.
This is why it is important to study the details of collisions. And it is important that collisions be properly documented with sufficient objective details so that a proper assessment can be made of their causes. When investigators do not possess the proper training or experience, or when they lack sufficient time and resources to complete a proper investigation, the final product produces error and variance in the collision data. That error and variance is often not understood or recognized by those conducting mass-data analysis. The end result is that we do not fully understand what needs to be done to reduce the risk of collision, injury and death.
Is That A Garbage Bag Lying On The Road?
If you observed this view for 1 or 2 seconds would you correctly identify the object in the road? Hindsight causes many to judge the actions of a driver based on what they know after a collision has occurred.
Cause of Collisions Is Often Not Correctly Detected
Many persons who are deserving of charges are not captured by typical investigations of motor vehicle collisions.
Look at the scenario above which commences when traffic is diverted due to a closed lane. The driver of the BMW SUV has been forced into the left lane along with all eastbound drivers at this Oxford Street location in London, Ontario. When this occurs vehicles become more compressed and visibility ahead becomes more limited.
In the next photo we see that an elderly rider of a limited-mobility scooter is seen in the centre, left-turn lane, and it appears he is intending to cross from north to south. It is possible that our BMW driver could have seen the scooter since, looking at the shadow caused by the vehicle ahead, there would appear to be a clear line of sight. But the BMW driver may not be focused on that area of the road. The BMW driver may be focused on the upcoming opening in the right lane and the opportunity to pass the vehicle ahead using that right lane.
Looking at the photo below it is clear that other eastbound vehicles are moving into the right lane after passing the area of construction. Or perhaps an eastbound vehicle has stopped in the left lane to allow the elderly scooter driver an opportunity to complete his crossing.
Indeed the photo below shows that the BMW driver steers into the right lane. And the elderly driver of the scooter is no longer in the median. So where is the scooter rider? In front of the white SUV? In front of the BMW SUV? Will this result in a death? Note that we see the illumination of brake lights in the white SUV on the left as well as the BMW on the right.
Fortunately the photo below shows that the elderly scooter rider passes through the intersection and the crisis is resolved.
However, consider who would be to blame if the scooter rider was struck.
Most likely the elderly rider of the scooter would be blamed for attempting to cross a busy, four-lane road at a dangerous location.
But what about the driver of the White SUV? Did this driver stop and cause the scooter driver to understand that it was safe to cross?
And what about the BMW SUV? Could a collision be avoided if the driver was more patient or more attentive to the surroundings?
How would we make these assessments?
Event Data Recorders (EDRs) can help. Modern vehicles are equipped with electronic modules that constantly monitor the motion of equipped vehicles. When a sudden change in speed occurs that resembles a collision the module will begin to store the data a few seconds preceding the event as well as for a short time afterward. But the change in vehicle motion must be of a sufficient magnitude to “wake up” the system. Impacts with pedestrians or bicycles would generally not be sufficient to wake up the system. And given the relatively small mass of the scooter and rider a similar situation would occur.
If the BMW struck the scooter and a recording was made, then there might be information about the BMW’s pre-impact speed, if and when braking was applied, and other important facts such as whether the BMW driver sped up by stepping on the accelerator pedal when he ought to have detected the scooter. But the timing of these events cannot always be determined from EDR data.
For example, the EDR can not tell an investigator the precise location of the white SUV that was in front of the BMW. So an investigator would not know the degree to which that white SUV prevented the BMW driver from detecting the scooter rider. Proving that the driver of the white SUV deliberately stopped to allow the scooter to pass might be difficult. In all likelihood the driver of the BMW would be absolved of any wrong-doing because the BMW driver “had the right-of-way”. The right-of-way is an ugly term coded in Highway Traffic Acts throughout North America. It allows for many judicial, bad decisions to be made expediently and unjustly.
We can also ask another question: Why would the City of London not face charges in a situation like this? Imagine that an employee of the City’s transportation department had sufficient training and data to understand that there were frequent attempts by pedestrians, cyclists and medical scooter drivers to cross this portion of Oxford Street. Imagine that this employee’s manuals told him/her that certain thresholds were met for the installation of some form of traffic control. Imagine that there were discussions with City politicians about costs and that this ultimately resulted in postponing of such traffic controls. Should the consequences of a death or serious, permanent injury be placed solely upon the drivers of the motor vehicles and scooter? Should the City also bear some responsibility?
In many instances there are multiple factors that, in their combined influence, determine whether a collision will occur and the magnitude of its consequences. Some understanding of these many factors must be had and considered. Collisions are complex matters but their causes are rarely, correctly identified. No education, experience, honorary titles and medals, or fancy equipment can improve this failing if there is no genuine interest in pursuing the truth. Too often cause for motor vehicle collisions is determined using simplistic logic that sounds true, rudimentary calculations that mimic science, and a belief by the general public that there is a Wizard of Oz behind the curtain who has all the answers.
Walking With Your Back to Traffic – Why Is It OK If You’re A Cyclist?
Why is it irrational to see a pedestrian walking within a travel lane with their back to traffic? Let us consider the photo below which shows a pedestrian walking on a cycling lane.
Is this dangerous? Not only is his back to traffic but the next photo shows that he is wearing headphones. Is there anything wrong with that?
If we understand current beliefs toward cycling safety there is apparently nothing dangerous about pedestrians walking in this manner. Even though, through our childhood years, we were told exactly the opposite: walking on the road with your back to traffic is dangerous.
So why is it also just as dangerous for cyclists to ride on the edge of a road with their backs to traffic? If an impact occurs with a motor vehicle do we seriously believe that the cyclist will be better protected than the pedestrian?
The cyclist shown below has difficulty seeing vehicles approaching from behind. While a mirror would help, in many cases typical commuter cyclists do not ride with mirrors.
As demonstrated in the photo below the cyclist below must turn his head over his shoulder and this is not ideal for observing dangers behind or new dangers that might develop in front.
Let us consider a further example. What if a mother was pushing a baby carriage in the same location where we showed the pedestrian above. Would that be dangerous? Consider the view below. Would we consider that the mother and baby in the carriage would safe walking in a cycling lane with their backs to traffic?
What about the child next to the mother walking with the small cycle? Do we seriously believe that this child would be safe riding on their small cycle at the edge of lane of motor vehicle traffic, or in a painted cycling lane? What is the safety difference when we exchange these pedestrians with an adult cyclist?
Some adults who ride in cycling lanes will transport their children in flimsy mini-trailers towed behind the cycle such as the example below. Little do the realized is that, if they were struck from behind the first thing to be struck would be the mini-trailer.
It is important to recognize that these mini-trailers are low to the ground. This means that they are more difficult for drivers to detect. In congested areas drivers may be able to see the taller cyclist but may not be able to see the mini-trailer. And because these mini-trailers are not frequently used drivers do not expect them to exist behind a cycle. Thus drivers may believe they have enough time and distance to avoid striking the cyclist only to discover at the last moment that there is a mini-trailer attached behind the cyclist.
The stiffest portion of motor vehicle is at a low level: the bumper level. And the most vulnerable portion of a child’s body is at the head level. While seated in a flimsy mini-trailer the head of a child is exactly where the stiffest portion of a motor vehicle would make contact. Why is this so wise?
Why has our society continued to create these dangerous conditions for cyclists? In many instances cyclists would be better off riding facing traffic if they are to ride on a roadway or in a painted cycling lane. At least there would be a greater opportunity to attempt an evasive motion should a motor vehicle stray into the cyclist’s path. But this is not a solution. The solution must be to change our understanding of cyclist safety and remove cyclists from such dangerous conditions.
You must be logged in to post a comment.