Stephen Rees's blog

Thoughts about the relationships between transport and the urban area it serves

Do it yourself bike safety tip

with 7 comments


Written by Stephen Rees

October 4, 2007 at 7:50 am

7 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. This biker is asking to get hit.

    For the most part bikers are fairly good at hugging the curb and on standard width (e.g. No.2 Road in Richmond, not Granville St. in Vancouver) it is an easy procedure to get around them in a vehicle without cutting into the other lane.

    Not so if they had this thing on.


    October 5, 2007 at 3:49 pm

  2. On the contrary, this cyclist is asking for the motorist to allow adequate room. I would not ride on No 2 Road as the traffic speed regularly exceeds 60kph – despite the posted limit of 50 – and there are no bike lanes. Much safer to use Railway or Garden City (both marked cycle routes).

    Have you thought about slowing down – or maybe actually signalling your intention of passing?

    Stephen Rees

    October 5, 2007 at 3:54 pm

  3. If you’re coming from the BCIT aerospace campus and need to get to Granville on the west side of Richmond there’s no choice but to take No. 2 road. I’ve seen some that are brave enough to do it, but you’re right – I’d never do it myself. I’d just bike on the sidewalk for that stretch unless if I was going at Tour de France speeds.

    The way bikers typically ask for adequate room is taking up the centre of the lane. Putting this one meter extension out with a near bullseye isn’t going to help them, and it won’t help traffic pass by them either.

    People naturally slow down when there are bicycles and usually give enough room. Putting this device in the way will increase the chances of the stick getting smacked and will endanger the cyclist much more than without. No driver wants to hit a cyclist, but no driver wants to see them take up the middle of the lane either.

    Technically bikes shouldn’t even be on the road. They like pointing out 183(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, but they never point out section 145, dealing with slow driving.


    October 7, 2007 at 10:41 am

  4. Section 145 applies only to motor vehicles.


    October 9, 2007 at 5:17 am

  5. What part of 183(1) “… a person operating a cycle on a highway has the same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle” do you not understand?


    October 9, 2007 at 12:25 pm

  6. Section 145 refers specifically to motor vehicles. Section 183(1) refers to vehicles. There is evidence that the Act differentiates between the two – see for example 179(4): “A pedestrian, cyclist or the driver of a motor vehicle must obey the instructions of an adult school crossing guard . . .”

    I can see reasonable people coming to either conclusion. There’s no need to be snarky. Regardless of technicalities which may or may not be accepted in practice, the law clearly does not intend that “bikes shouldn’t even be on the road”.


    October 9, 2007 at 1:22 pm

  7. Thanks, Geof. You explained it well.


    October 10, 2007 at 5:26 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: