Support All Ages Cycling on North Van Low Level Road

The HUB North Shore Committee is urging that the City of North Vancouver and Port Metro Vancouver provide safe all ages and abilities walking and cycling facilities on the proposed Low Level Road. They are  strongly recommending a separated 4.5 metre path on the south side of the new Low Level Road.

Take Action
Please write to the Council of the City of North Vancouver before June 18  and encourage your friends and family to do the same. More info at:
http://nsvacc.cheakamus.com/index.php/Low_Level_Road_Project

South side Low Level Road multi-use path proposed by HUB

The Petition
City of North Vancouver: Include safe pedestrian and cycling facilities on the Low Level Road - Sign the Petition!

BCCC's Letter

Dear Mayor Mussatto

Thank you for the opportunity to address this important project at the Public Hearing. The British Columbia Cycling Coalition (BCCC) strongly supports the recommendations of our member organization, HUB, as detailed in their letter of June 4, 2012.

Since the meeting, I have learned that the current design is significantly worse for people using bicycles, wheelchairs and personal mobility devices than I had thought. I had incorrectly assumed that the proposed lower path east of the lane was accessible to users of wheeled devices. As the design includes stairs, this is certainly not the case. To detour all but the bravest up a steep hill is not going to encourage more people to cycle. Children; seniors; beginning cyclists; and people suffering from leg injuries or chronic conditions that make cycling uphill difficult; the people that are most likely want to cycle on a route separated from traffic are the least likely to want and to be able to cycle up steep hills. While a nice walk or a ride on a summer day, the current Spirit Trail route won't attract a significant number of people to cycling.

I must say, in 2012, it is really quite surprising to see a proposed design for a new road that is not accessible to all users of all ages all of the time.

A Shared Path on the South Side

A 4.5m multi-use path along the south side of the road has none of these issues and will attract people of all ages and abilities. It will also be an all season route usable by all cyclists, pedestrians, users of Personal Mobility Devices and in-line skaters at all times of the day and night. By lowering motor vehicle speeds to 50kph and narrowing the lanes and shoulders as well as making use of narrower barriers and other measures to make efficient use of space, such a path would require only widening the right-of-way by a metre or two possibly by cantilevering over the rail tracks where the clearance is sufficient.

Cycling on Sidewalks Next to Painted Bike Lanes

A couple of events following the public hearing demonstrate the problems with bicycle routes that are not separated from traffic. 

On my way down Chesterfield, I saw a young man in this mid-teens cycling on the sidewalk right next to the painted bike lanes. If painted bike lanes on a street without much traffic don't appeal to teenage males, not exactly the most risk adverse segment of the the population, they obviously don't have broad appeal. This is to be expected as the Cycling in Cities research by UBC, http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/opinion-survey/ has indicated that cyclists of all abilities and levels of experience strongly prefer cycling facilities that are physically separated from traffic.  

The separated bike lanes on Hornby and Dunsmuir Street have significantly reduced sidewalk cycling over the previous painted bike lanes.

Safe Late Night Cycling

Early the morning following the Public Hearing, a man riding a bike was killed by a suspected drunk driver speeding along Dewdney Truck Road in Maple Ridge. Painted bike lanes offer no protection from drunk, careless or reckless drivers. As sections of the Spirit Trail are unlit, cyclists, pedestrians and users of personal mobility devices have really no safe options at night when drinking and speeding drivers are likely more common. Some Pedestrians and users of  personal mobility devices, will likely end up using the painted bike lanes at night, which certainly is not safe.

Cycling for Everyone

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/cycling/regional_cycling_strategy/cycling%20for%20everyone.ashx

The current design is at odds with the vision articulated in Cycling for Everyone – A Regional Cycling Strategy for Metro Vancouver, "By 2040, Metro Vancouver is renowned locally and globally as a cycling-friendly region where cycling is a desirable and mainstream transportation option because it is safe, convenient, comfortable, and fun for people of all ages and all cycling abilities." 

A path along the Low Level Road meets all the positive factors that influence the decision to cycle (Cycling for Everyone, Table 3, page 21); it has beautiful scenery, it is separated from traffic, it is flat and it is shorter than the other option. While this path would be adjacent to motor vehicle traffic, the noise and pollution from the levels of traffic that can be carried by the Low Level Road are unlikely to discourage cycling. Burrard Bridge, Cambie Bridge, Beach Avenue, Dunsmuir Street and Hornby Street are among the most popular bicycle routes in the region and all have levels of traffic higher than or at least similar to that of the Low Level Road. Of note, the path would have less noise and pollution than the painted bike lane on the north side.

Travel Times

Besides safety, a major advantage of a separated path is that most cyclists would not have to stop at the St. Andrews Ave and 3rd intersections. This decreases travel time and effort and, perhaps more importantly, increases the predictability of travel times.

3rd intersection

The 3rd intersection in particular looks problematic for cyclists:

 - The intersection is rather long and thus it will take cyclists and motorists a long time to clear intersection. There is a good chance that even fast cyclists entering at end of green phase could get stuck in intersection facing nearing head on traffic. 

- Also drivers running reds will pose a threat particularly due to the long intersection clearing time

- Westbound cyclists must cross lane of traffic with no signalization

Spirit Trail

While the high level Spirit Trial route is a nice walk, jog or cycle and serves some trips well, a path along the Low Level Road has several advantages:

- The Low Level Road is much flatter. The hills on the trail both increase effort as well as decrease safety by increasing cyclist speed and thus the chance and severity of collisions with pedestrians and other cyclists;

- The Spirit Trial does not connect conveniently with Main Street;

- The Low Level Road is lit. The Spirit Trial is not. Thus for a significant part of the year, the Low Level Road will be much better for commuting;

- In icy conditions, the lower grades of the Low Level road will make it much safer. As well, the Low Level Road is much more exposed to sunlight that can help melt the icy;

Painted Bike Lanes Collect Debris

Debris and tends to collect on bike lanes requiring frequent sweeping. If not, the usable area of the lane decreases forcing cyclists dangerous close to traffic. Separated paths typically require much less sweeping.

Separated Paths are Drier in the Rain

All the rain that falls on the road flows over bike lanes making them very wet to ride on and icier if it freezes. Well designed separated paths are significantly drier.

Other Projects

Other road improvement projects around the region are providing much better cycling and pedestrian facilities.

King Edward Overpass

The new King Edward Overpass over Highway 1 in Coquitlam, has a shared pedestrian and bicycle path on one side and painted bike lanes on both sides.

Powell Street Overpass

The Powell Street Overpass, a similar project along the Port in Vancouver, has sidewalks on both sides and a separated bike path.

http://vancouver.ca/powellstreetoverpass/pdf/factsheet.pdf

New Highway 1 Overpasses in Burnaby

The new Kensington and Willingdon Overpasses across Highway 1 in Burnaby have shared paths, allowing two-way cycling, on one side with bike lanes on the other.

Emergency vehicles

Regarding emergency vehicles, the path could have a curbs that emergency vehicles can mount so they can use the path if they needed to get passed an obstruction in the road. Sidewalks and paths are separated from traffic by curbs all over the region and there doesn't seem to be much of a problem of vehicles crashing onto pedestrians on the sidewalks.

Collisions

A collision that blocks the street with only two lanes of traffic will likely block the street even if there are bike lanes. Collisions close roads with far more lanes of traffic around the region.

In conclusion, the BCCC strongly recommends a separated 4.5 metre path on the south side of the new Low Level Road.

Sincerely

Richard Campbell

President

British Columbia Cycling Coalition

Proposed ICBC Changes Could Improve Safety

ICBC is proposing to change the way it calculates insurance premiums.  These changes could very likely make the roads safer for everyone including cyclists. Anyone can make a submission on-line at: http://www.publicengagement.icbc.com/index.html  The deadline is June 22, 2012.

As in the end, this is likely to be a political decision, it never hurts to send comments to Premiere Clark and your MLA http://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/3-1-1.htm as well.

From Tannis Braithwaite:

The proposed change is intended to be revenue neutral, and to better align premium with risk in individual cases.  Structurally, it's a switch from "vehicle-based" insurance to "driver-based" insurance.  Under the current "vehicle-based” system crash history follows the insured vehicle.  So, for example, if "A" crashes "B's" car, the crash is recorded against "B's" insurance.  If "A" has had a bunch of crashes in one vehicle and then insures a second vehicle, the second vehicle is insured at a rate reflecting zero crashes.  Under a driver-based system, "A's" crash history would follow "A".  In either system, vehicles/drivers are only penalized for “at fault” crashes, which ICBC defines as having been at least 25% at fault in a collision.

Statistically, if you crash your car, you are much more likely to have a second crash within the next year than is someone who didn't have the first crash.  Insurance premiums go up after a crash, not because the insurance company is trying to recover past losses, but because you are more likely to cost them again in the subsequent policy year. 

Factors that predict your crash risk

ICBC is prohibited from considering age, sex, race or any other prohibited ground of discrimination in determining crash risk.  The factors they do/propose to use for determining premiums in the new system are:

Driving Experience

The likelihood of having a crash decreases dramatically with each year of driving experience for the first 5 years, continues to decrease a fair bit over each of the next five years, and continues to decreases a little bit for each additional year of experience….forever.  The current system recognizes the number of years of crash-free driving, but doesn’t recognize that a person with more years of driving experience is less likely to crash than a person with an equivalent crash history but fewer years of driving experience.  According to ICBC, experience isn’t just a stand-in for age.  Even if you don’t start driving until you are older, you are more likely to have a crash in the first several years of driving than you are with more years of experience.  ICBC proposes to recognize years of driving experience, not just years of crash-free driving experience.  ICBC wants feedback on how often premiums should be adjusted to reflect driving experience.

Number of Past Crashes

The more crashes you have had in the past and the more recently you've had them, the more crashes you are likely to have in the future.  It takes 15 years for the statistical effect of a single crash to wear off completely.  So, for example, someone who had a single crash 9 years ago is still 15% more likely to have a second crash in the current policy year than is someone who has never had a crash.  The current system recognizes the effect of a previous crash for only 3 years.  ICBC proposes to extend the number of years that a crash will continue to count in calculating your insurance premium to up to 15 years.  They want feedback on how long you think crash history should count for.  ICBC is also considering a system that also weights more recent crashes more heavily than crashes that occurred longer ago, which is in keeping with statistical risk.  But, ICBC thinks this might be too hard for people to understand(!??)  Surely it’s not.

No More Free Crashes

ICBC currently has a policy of giving drivers one "free" crash after 12 years of crash-free driving.  A person with a very long term crash-free record can have up to 3 crashes in quick succession with no impact on premium.  There is no good rationale underlying this policy.  Statistically, if you have a single crash, you are 40% more likely to have a second crash in the policy year than someone who didn't have the first crash, and this is true even if you’ve previously had a long period of crash-free driving.  ICBC proposes either getting rid of the free-crash policy or offering an opt-out option in exchange for a premium reduction.  And, of course, there's really no such thing as a "free" crash, since the $$ have to come from somewhere.  Failing to penalize a driver for having a crash means penalizing drivers that don't have crashes.

Other Driver Crashes

About 20% of crashes are by drivers other than the registered owner/principal driver of the at-fault vehicle.  Under the current system, the vehicle owner pays the increased premiums regardless of whether they were driving at the time of the crash.  Under a driver-based system, the crash would follow the driver rather than the vehicle.  The problem for ICBC is that not all crash-causing drivers have an insured vehicle, so they need to work out how to collect from uninsured drivers who crash.  Three options that have been proposed to deal with this problem are: spread the cost of the uninsured driver across all insured drivers, continue charging the cost against the vehicle owner, or send a bill for $500 to the crash causer and then try to collect.  Personally, I think ICBC can come up with something better, like maybe true driver based insurance where you have to be insured to drive.  Just not sure how this would be enforced.  Also, most "other driver" crashes are by members of the same household, e.g., child driving parent's car, so this may affect the best options for enforcement.

Driving Violations

Driving violations are a strong statistical indicator of crash risk.  ICBC tried to introduce driving violations into its assessment of crash risk a couple of years ago, but was prohibited from doing so by the Provincial government (call it, the leading edge of the tsunami of political interference in regulated utilities that we've seen lately).  Now, they are trying again, but this time proposing to limit consideration of driving violations to the most serious ones, such as, impaired driving and street racing.  Again, there is no reason for basing crash risk on only the most serious driving violations.  Statistically, every driving violation correlates with higher crash risk, and there is no reason why lower risk drivers should be subsidizing higher risk drivers.    This is especially true when you consider how many un-ticketed driving violations occur and the police focus on the most egregious ones.  Also, it seems to me that including all driving violations in the assessment of crash risk is a good way to provide drivers with an incentive to follow the rules of the road.  ICBC just needs to spin this issue better next time, and they really need to hear that the public supports the use of driving violations in calculating insurance premiums.

Some things that came up in discussion

• Giving credit for higher levels of driver training, similar to discounts that can be obtained on fleet insurance for organizations implementing safe driver programs
• Relationship between distance driven and crash-risk. Proposal for distance-based insurance and better availability of alternative types of insurance such as temporary or occasional coverage.
• The system doesn't include any impact to premiums based on the severity of the crash.  There must be correlations or indicators of severe crash risk, such as high risk driving violations, or past crash history that help to predict the risk of a severe crash.
• Insurance brokers don’t want the system to be too complicated to explain to people, or to take too much risk in people not understanding or not being told the right thing.
• BC has a very low % of uninsured drivers compared to other jurisdictions.  We need to consider whether there is a tipping point where high risk drivers just stop insuring their vehicles in large numbers.
• It’s good to have incentives that prevent owners from loaning their vehicles to high risk drivers (re other driver crashes).
• Driving records are at the heart of driver-based insurance and all violations should be considered, though not weighted equally.

Founding Meeting of a National Cycling Organization - June 25

For the past three years cycling association leaders and professionals across Canada have been engaged in a consensus process leading to the formation of a National Cycling Organization to represent cycling activities such as commuting, touring and recreation.

The purpose of this not-for-profit and non-partisan organization includes working with federal and national agencies to advance a national cycling strategy and to develop new funding sources for infrastructure and programs - with local and regional groups - to significantly increase support for cycling organizations and initiatives throughout Canada.

Other potential services include sharing of information and expertise, co-ordinating local and regional proposals, increasing public cycling capacity and progressive policies and guidelines.

The post on the last Federal Election outlining some of the national issues and opportunities remains one of the most popular indicating strong interest.

On behalf of this new national group the British Columbia Cycling Coalition is hosting a half-day founding national meeting scheduled from:

8:00 am to 12:00 pm, June 25, 2012,

in the Port McNeil Room, 4th floor, North Tower of the Wall Centre,

1088 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC.

The meeting is in conjunction with the Velo-city Global 2012 international cycling conference.

Cycling advocates, experts and practitioners are invited to attend or call in. We are expecting representatives from cycling organizations, industry and government. Conference call-in capability will be provided - details to follow.


Please RSVP at:
http://gvcc.bc.ca/Founding-Meeting.html

Bike Lanes Needed at Fulford Ferry Terminal

From John Rowlandson of Island Pathways:


Will BC Ferries continue its practice of securing public roadbed for motor vehicle traffic without considering cycling and pedestrian access and egress to its terminals? Unfortunately yes. After almost two years of consultation with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI), BC Ferries has ignored the solutions presented by local and provincial bodies and opted to do nothing to enhance the safety of cyclists, pedestrians and transit users on Salt Spring.

On May 8th, the local Ferry Advisory Committee heard that BCF would be asking MOTI to transfer its public road resource to the ferry corporation so that BCF can widen its existing holding lane. Although MOTI earlier had indicated that sufficient room was available for a bike land/sidewalk, BCF has ignored this option and will move forward with lane widening.

The Fulford terminal is the busiest minor BC Ferries route on the coast. Last year 640,000 passengers moved through the village. Local NGOs such as Island Pathways and the Salt Spring Island Transportation Commission proposed a multi-modal approach to the terminal enhancement, insisting that all modes of travel including cyclists must be addressed in the upgrade. They are urging MoTI to support bike lanes in the Fulford ferry terminal upgrade project.
Fulford is the launch point for the CRD Regional Trail on Salt Spring which will be confirmed in the soon-to-be-published CRD Regional Pedestrian and Cycling Masterplan. Those concerned with BCFerries actions should contact Hon. Blair Lekstrom - Minister of Transporation and Infrastructure ( blair.lekstrom.mla@leg.bc.ca), Harry Bains - Critic for Transportation and Infrastructure (harry.bains.mla@leg.bc.ca)

 Salt Spring MLA Murray Coell (Murray.Coell.MLA@leg.bc.ca), Sannich South MLA Lana Popham(lana.popham.mla@leg.bc.ca) and Capital Regional District Director for Salt Spring, Wayne McIntyre (directorssi@crd.bc.ca). 


Some good information in http://www.gulfislandsdriftwood.com/news/149933965.html

Urge Premier Clark to Approve Funding for Transit and Cycling

Unfortunately, it looks like Premier Clark may be getting cold feet regarding funding for transit and cycling. The Metro Vancouver mayors have requested that the province give the region the authority to implement funding measures for transit and cycling including a vehicle levy, road pricing or a carbon tax. This is in spite of promises to work with the region's mayors to fund funding solutions.

With by-elections just announced and the provincial election just a year away, it seems like Premier Clark may be greatly overestimating the political risk of supporting funding for transit. Sure, there is a very vocal anti-tax minority who clog the airways and Internet but it certainly appears as if the average voter supports transit. The large majority of mayors who championed funding for transit just before the elections won by landslides.

The last Premier who rejected a vehicle levy approved by regional politicians, Ujjal Dosanjh, faired very poorly, losing by a landslide. Rejecting transit funding certainly appears to be a bad political move.

Giving people transportation choices by improving transit and cycling is good for everyone. Reductions in motor vehicle traffic reduces collisions and the associated health care and insurance costs. The economic cost of motor vehicle collisions is around 3% of GDP costing the regional economy billions of dollars a year. Congestion is also reduced meaning drivers can get where they need to go faster. For only $30 dollars a year, it seems a bargain.

Cycling and transit are also affordable transportation options that help cushion the high cost of housing in the region.

In addition to increasing the funding for cycling from $3 to $6 million a year, according to TransLink this funding will significantly improve transit around the region. "By 2014, annual bus and SeaBus service will increase by 415,000 hours, or 7%, providing more service around the region toimprove reliability, reduce crowding and serve new demand frompopulation growth and the expanded U-Pass BC program."

Email Premier Clark
Please email Premier Clark and urge her to support the vehicle levy, carbon tax and other funding for transit:
Hon. Christy Clark Premier@gov.bc.ca and cc: adrian.dix.MLA@leg.bc.ca

Please cc your MLA. You can find their email address at:http://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/3-1-1.htm

World Invited to Salt Spring Island to Experience Bicycle-Heaven-on-Earth

British Columbia looks to be the centre of the cycling universe this June. In addition to Velo-city Global 2012 in Vancouver from the 26-29, Salt Spring Island will be hosting Velo Village.

Island Pathways organizers today announced that registration for all Velo Village activities is now open. “Velo Village celebrates rural cycling,” said Island Pathways President, Brenda Guiled, “Between June 21st and 23rd, Salt Spring Island will be bicycle-heaven-on-earth – the most welcoming place on this planet to be on a bike.”

Guiled noted that “there will be fun, games and knowledge exchange – all at an affordable price.” In addition to bicycle-themed performances, art exhibits and workshops, Velo Village will demonstrate the joy, wonder, and value of rural cycling in British Columbia. In development for almost a year, festival highlights include:

·     June 18th to 25th – Bike photography, sculpture, paintings, mixed media and working bike exhibits will be on display at Art Spring

·     Thursday, June 21st – a solstice themed Film-at-the-Farm. Cyclists enjoy the longest evening of the year powering the sound and projection systems for acoustic acts and a feature film presentation at this zero-footprint event.

·     Friday, June 22nd – more than 200 delegates attend the Cycling and Rural Mobility Conference – a think tank and networking event for bringing the interests of city cyclists and their country cousins closer together. That evening,  Islanders join delegates for an Art auction supporting World Bicycle Relief and the Spoke ‘N Song Gala, featuring human-powered adventurers Colin & Julie Angus.

·Saturday, June 23rd – At 10:00 am BC’s first cyclist-only ferry leaves Swartz Bay for Fulford Harbour. Carrying 400 cyclists, the BIKE FERRY will be the point-of-departure for a day of family-oriented events: rides, workshops, musical acts and more.

Jean Gelwicks, a Velo Village organizer, describes the festival as a transformational event. “As beautiful as our Island home already is,” said Gelwicks,  “Velo Village will reveal an entirely new dimension. Nearly a hundred beautifully painted bikes will line the cycle routes, Islanders will wave to and welcome visiting cyclists, and merchants will make  special offers available to cyclists during the three days of the event.”

Persons wishing to attend the event are advised to register and book accommodations early (http://velovillage.ca/registration/). 

Urge the Federal Government to Mandate Truck Side Guards

Side guards on trucks can help prevent serious injury and death in collisions with cyclists and pedestrians.

From the Globe and Mail:

Side guards are designed to prevent exposed road users, such as pedestrians and cyclists, from falling under the sides of trucks and getting crushed by the back wheels. The recent death of a cyclist in Toronto has reignited the issue of whether the federal government should make them mandatory.

The family members of cyclists who have died in collisions with trucks are urging the Federal Government to take action. From Grieving families plead for truck side guards:

“The Canadian government has a responsibility to ensure the safety of its citizens. Side guards are a no-brainer, like seatbelts and airbags,” said Karen MacNeil Hartmann, whose husband, cyclist Ulrich Hartmann, was killed by a cement truck on Sept. 11, 2006. 

Speaking at the Kensington Market yoga studio where Jenna Morrison taught before the young, pregnant cyclist was killed by a truck earlier this month, MacNeil Hartmann said she still searches her soul to understand the senseless death of the man she described as a “gentle teddy bear.”

In addition to protecting cyclists, side guards can also protect people in automobiles, SUVs and pickup trucks.

Take Action
Safetrucks.ca has a lot of information and ways that you can help out. They have also started a petition in support of safer trucks.

While the federal government needs to take action to make side guards mandatory throughout the country, cities, companies and other organizations can help by installing side guards on their trucks and requiring their suppliers to do the same. Montreal borough St. Laurent, has started installing side guards on their trucks.

MP Oliva Chow has introduced Bill C-344 calling for mandatory side guards on trucks. There is also a petition in support of the bill on her site.

Please email Denis.lebel@parl.gc.ca and cc your Member of Parliament in support of mandatory side guards on trucks.

Also cc: olivia.chow@parl.gc.ca, Elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca, denis.coderre@parl.gc.ca, James.Moore@parl.gc.ca, John.Weston@parl.gc.ca, Fin.Donnelly@parl.gc.ca, Libby.Davies@parl.gc.ca, Joyce.Murray@parl.gc.ca, Hedy.Fry@parl.gc.ca

Here is the BCCC's letter:

January 10, 2012

The Honourable Denis Lebel

Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

330 Sparks Street

Ottawa, ON    K1A 0N5

Dear Minister Lebel:

Re: Truck Side Guard Legislation

The British Columbia Cycling Coalition strives to encourage all levels of government to make cycling a safe and enjoyable means of transportation for everyone.

On May 9, 2007, Ms. Olivia Chow MP introduced a petition in the Commons asking for legislation that trucks and trailers in Canada have underrun protection similar to the European ECE Regulation No. 73. The petition was initiated by the Toronto Cycling Committee after a number of cycling deaths involving trucks. Further support was found in a recommendation by the 1998 analysis of deaths among Toronto’s cyclists by the Regional Coroner for Toronto. Soon after she introduced the petition, two cyclists were killed in Portland, OR, as a result of collisions with trucks. One accident was due to a cyclist being in the blind spot of a truck.

The Regional Coroner for Toronto concluded that trucks and other heavy vehicles were involved in 37% of accidents leading to the deaths of cyclists in that city. The British Columbia Coroner’s study of bicycling deaths in BC over the period 1986 to 1995 showed that in 34% of the cases a cyclist died as a result of a collision with a truck or other heavy vehicle. This latter analysis also shows that bicycle helmets offer only limited protection in accidents with trucks, especially when the cyclist is pulled under the wheels of the truck or the trailer.

At the time,  the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition, one of our member organizations, wrote a letter to the then Minister of Transportation asking him to introduce legislation requiring that large motor vehicles like trucks and trailers have sideguards in order to protect cyclists and pedestrians from serious injury or death in the event of a collision.

As cities around Canada are actively encouraging the use of bicycles, we will see a continuous increase in the number of bicycles on the road, not only in the cities, but also on provincial roads. We think it therefore mandatory that the government should move on this issue with laws and rules that will make traffic safer. In particular, underrun protection and blind spot mirrors are relatively cheap and effective measures to increase the safety around trucks and other heavy vehicles. They can prevent fatalities and serious injuries in case of accidents.

In Europe, open side underrun protection has been mandatory since 1995. There is, however, a movement to take an additional step and make closed side underrun protection mandatory. Closed protection is safer in that victims cannot be caught in the protection itself and has two added benefits: better fuel efficiency, and less spray when it rains. It is important to note that (side) underrun protection is to the benefit of cyclists, pedestrians, motorcyclists, and car drivers. Making it mandatory would increase traffic safety for all road users and would also reduce health care and insurance costs

In addition to underrun protection, blind spot mirrors are another important device for increasing the safety around trucks. The better the driver can see what is going on around the vehicle, the better he or she can anticipate the admittedly sometimes less than admirable behaviour of other traffic participants.

Accidents involving trucks have a high human toll. These accidents are more likely to result in fatalities and serious injuries and vulnerable road users like bicyclists and pedestrians are often the victims. But let us also not forget the trauma these accidents can cause to the truck drivers when the circumstances of the accident show that nothing done on their part could have prevented the deadly outcome.

MP Olivia Chow has now renewed her efforts to encourage the Government of Canada to introduce legislation to make sideguard protection on trucks mandatory.  Since 2007, we know that at least 2 cyclists have died in Metro Vancouver from crashes involving trucks and recently cyclists in Toronto and Victoria where run over and killed by trucks. 

The British Columbia Cycling Coalition therefore urges you to initiate and support legislation on this issue that will make Canada’s streets and highways safer for all road users, especially the most vulnerable.

Sincerely,

Richard Campbell,

President, British Columbia Cycling Coalition

president@bccc.bc.ca

cc:            Olivia Chow, NDP Transportation Critic                                   

Elizabeth May, Leader, Green Party of Canada                       

Hon. Denis Coderre,  Liberal Party Transportation Critic           

Hon. James Moore - MP Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam
John Weston - MP West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country
Fin Donnelly, MP New Westminster—Coquitlam
Libby Davies, MP Vancouver East
Joyce Murray, MP Vancouver Quadra
Hon. Hedy Fry, MP Vancouver Centre