No ridiculous car trips

   
No ridiculous car trips is an informational film about a campaign bearing the same name. This campaign, now in its fourth year, aims at convincing more people too choose cycling over driving in Malmö City in Sweden.


No ridiculous car trips from Martin Lang on Vimeo.

The idea of ridiculous car trips is spot on. I still remember getting appalled with one of my then colleagues who shamelessly told me how she would drive down her driveway to pick up the mail... Ok, that one is pathological.
Yet, too many trips are made that could easily be done on a bicycle. Malmö's campaign was successful and brought them some international recognition.

Nice videos: Will you ride with Sophie?

An extremely cute, well-done video targetting the general public as well as younger, more feminine demographics.
Particular outstanding achievement from Seattle based Cascade Bicycle Club.

This video is old news by the way, it has been in circulation for a good while, but is still as interesting  and as relevant as ever.

Traffic calming tools

  
I cannot remember in which post I mention these. Bornes escamotables in French.

Random picture from the Internet

 They are awesome traffic calming devices. In parts of Europe, neighbourhoods will put these all around their entry points. Only area residents would be equipped with special cards/laser devices that are scanned directly on the thing. They then disappear into the ground to allow those residents to proceeds.

Marché Jean-Talon

Others walk or bike.
How come they are not more widespread? A perfect area to implement them is the Old Montréal with its narrow Nouvelle France streets.

A closer look. These ones do not look magnetic. Still...

Keeps off unwanted traffic, and especially, prevents any rat running in residential streets!
These are a cyclist's best friends, even more than cycle lanes. This is how Bordeaux became a cycle friendly place (from the mess it used to be), along with other adjustments, of course.

If we have them in Jean Talon, we can perfectly have them all around Montréal!

Overcrowded bike paths

 

How many cities can pretend to have this kind of problem hum?

Well, believe it or not, our bike paths are overcrowded, or so it seems. Now, I have made that comment a million times, yet some people seem to remain quite skeptical about this. I totally understand as most North American cities are nowhere close to experiencing this so it is hard to imagine for those who have not been in Montreal recently.

However, it is becoming a problem, not just for cyclists anymore but for pedestrians and municipalities as well. Westmount is one of the many municipalities making up "Montreal".

Here is an article from the Montreal Gazette. Integral and original version can be found here. I did not write it. I have inserted my comment in colour.

*****************

Overcrowded Westmount bike path has become safety hazard: group

Residents propose new routes for cycling trail

By RENÉ BRUEMMER, The Gazette September 28, 2011
 

"The two-way de Maisonneuve bike path that traverses Westmount should be changed to a one-way bike lane running westward, with eastbound cyclists diverted onto Ste. Catherine St. W., says a citizens advocacy group.
Westmount Citizens for Safe Cycling is also recommending cyclists be routed around Westmount Park, that bike lanes running in each direction be added to Ste. Catherine St., and other east-west thoroughfares in the municipality, [...]"

I have no idea who these folks are, so I cannot determine whether friends or foes. 
Yet they are totally right in what they are saying here. What they are recommending corresponds to the newer generation of bike paths: one way only, going in the same direction as the street they are on, allowing for more space each way, i.e. instead of sharing the space for a come lane and a go lane, the entire width is dedicated to a single direction.
De Maisonneuve and Ste Catherine are two parallel streets that go in opposite direction and cross downtown entirely.

"[...] and enforcement be stepped up because the de Maisonneuve path is becoming a dangerously overcrowded commuter throughway.
"Fundamentally it's a safety issue, because cycling certainly has outgrown what that path was intended for when it was opened," said Don Taddeo of the 25-member WCSC, who lives on de Maisonneuve Blvd. [...]"

For the record, that path was opened in 2008 and, as it crosses the entire downtown area, it was always meant to be a commuting throughway.

"[...]As an infrastructure it's inadequate - and given the volume of traffic it accommodates, it's unsafe" for cyclists, motorists (?)  and pedestrians.
The group presented an 18-page brief in early September to Westmount's master traffic-planning committee, formed to find solutions to the municipality's burgeoning congestion.
The number of cyclists using the de Maisonneuve path that connects Notre Dame de Grâce (i.e. NDG)  to downtown has jumped to as many as 500 an hour during peak hours, studies have shown.[...]"

That's actually not that much. There are sections of the cycling network that see a lot more cyclists than this. But I agree that, as they are, the infrastructures are totally insufficient. 

"[...] Of that group, 88.5 per cent ignored traffic signals, a WCSC survey found. [...]"

Totally irrelevant to the discussion and weakens their argumentation. If they are trying to help solve the problem, they should NOT single out, wag fingers at or antagonise cyclists. Everybody knows nobody respects any of the traffic rules in this city and pedestrians are just as bad as cyclists.

"[...] The width of the bike lanes are narrower at several points than the minimum proscribed by Vélo Québec and the provincial transport department, sightlines for cars and cyclists at intersections are restricted, and the path is intersected by numerous streets, lanes and driveways. [...]"

All of this is the result of sucky municipal/administrative planning. In particular, the lack of sightline at intersections is worsened by the fact the the Code rule saying that cars should never park within 5m of any intersection is never enforced by the Police. Everyone complains there is no money in the coffers of the City: this is easy money, how come they are not grabbing it?

Well, you cannot encourage something, all be it passively, and then bitch-and-complain about it.

"[...] The brief notes car traffic along de Maisonneuve Blvd. used to intersect Westmount Park via Western Ave., but in 1976 the city closed the avenue to bridge the northern and southern portions of the park. Now, cyclists on the bike path have replaced the cars, Taddeo said, posing a hazard to pedestrians. [...]"

That's entirely the authorities' fault, who failed to see that cycling is no longer only a recreational activity but has become full fledged transportation again. This was already a visible trend in 2008. 
Bike paths used for transport should never go through parks, sidewalks or other pedestrian turf.

"[...] The WCSC suggests the two-way bike path be phased out over two years.
In its place, a one-way bike lane running westward delineated with painted lines would go from Wood Ave., to Claremount Ave., with a detour around Westmount Park via Ste. Catherine St.
Eastbound cyclists would be routed onto Ste. Catherine St., at Claremount Ave., and transferred back to de Maisonneuve at Wood, one block west of Atwater Ave.
The move may placate residents, but would likely frustrate cyclists forced out of their way on a route that includes a steep downhill pitch with a traffic light at the bottom, followed by an uphill slog.
The WCSCWestmount Ave., and Côte St. Antoine Rd. [...]"

This is all freaking bullshit. 

Again, I don't know who these folks are but this part of their plan is totally lame.

First of all, for some reason, in Montreal, it simply cannot take less than ten years for an idea to go from concept to administrative reality, et encore. Go figure.

Then, they want to remove from cyclists a straight-line throughout path and swap it for a tortuous "turn here, then left, then right" type of detour shit-path. 

And such shit-path will no longer be a protected path anymore (with a border or within a park) but will only be bullshit paint on the road.  Right now most of it is a bollard delineated path.

And not happy with imposing a detour to cyclists, then we'll have to go down a slope, climb back up, bear tons of lights and negotiate even more intersections.

So, we get short-changed.

Now, I am all for sparing and protecting parks but they need to propose something where everyone gets something, win-win style. 

And anyways, cyclists will not respect this. I know I won't. I will continue cycling through the damn park just as I never dismounted during the summer festivals and cycled through the crowds on the Maisonneuve path to no end.

Note to the authorities:

I don't take crap like this anymore and I am not the only one. Show us respect and we will respect you. Do not build a deficient facility and then bitch-and-complain that people are using it too much. Do not have a path running through a park or festival area and then complain when cyclists use it to get around the very way it was intended. Grow balls, use your $@!?&@# brains to plan properly and everyone will be happy.

Build decent facilities and we will use it. Give us crap and we'll shit on it. As simple as that.

"[...] The master traffic planning committee was to present its findings to Westmount's city council Tuesday night.
"When I opened the bicycle lane (in 1992, i.e. the section that runs through the park), it was intended for recreational use and it's really transmogrified into a means of transport, which is good," Westmount Mayor Peter Trent said Tuesday afternoon. "But the problem is we do get a tremendous number of complaints from people on the street. [...]"

All your fault. Should not have waited until the situation got to this point. 

For the record though: 

Westmount is an extremely high income area, a very bourgeois neighbourhood, golden ghetto-style, that has a particularly high proportion of elderly people who get scared pour un oui ou pour un non. They can get heart attacks at the very sight of their own shadows. So they are scared of bicycles, which is understandable. We all know cyclists are reckless delinquants who snatch old ladies handbags and cycle away with an evil laugh.
Yet, they are not scared of driving those Mercedes down three blocks to go get a loaf of bread, which is somehow a lot less understandable. 

Oh, and while we are on the subject of big fancy cars, wished those elderly eyesights got checked a bit more seriously, you know, could spare the city quite a few deaths every year, particularly among pedestrians. Ahem.

"[...] The municipality is open to converting the path to a oneway lane, Trent said, "but where do you put bicycles going the other way? Our eastwest arteries are completed blocked. [...]"

No they're not. Somebody simply does not have the courage to put their foot down on that nonsense.
Take a full lane from both Ste Catherine and de Maisonneuve, build decent PROTECTED bike paths and that's it. There is NO reason to be driving in that area, there are more metros stations and bus lines than needed in the sector. If needed, increase their frequency. People drive down there because it's feasible. Prevent it and the mess stops.

"[...] I do know one thing - we have a real conundrum. We can't handle the cars, we can't handle the bikes and sometimes we can't handle the pedestrians. [...]"

Then somebody is lazy. Or incompetent. Or both.

"[...] It's really a problem. [...]"

No it's not. 

You're the problem. Grow @#%@?& balls, that's all that is needed.

Hint: a colleague of yours grew quite a nice pair over there in the Plateau area and it is working.

The problem will only get worse once work begins on the Turcot Interchange, Trent noted.

Hell yes! This is gonna be an absolute mess but one that they'll have to suck up on their own. The Turcot interchange is one of the dumbest projects this city has ever gotten into.

rbruemmer@ montrealgazette.com

© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

Nice videos: the Dutch Cycling Embassy

 

And it's a go!
The Dutch Cycling Embassy kicks off nicely, launching with with this very inspirational video, included here for your enjoyment.


Cycling For Everyone from Dutch Cycling Embassy on Vimeo.

I wish them all the best of lucks. All help is needed in the promotion of cycling as a valid transportation alternative.


 .

Important! Public consultation on sharing the cycle network

The city of Montreal will be holding public consultations throughout the boroughs to discuss fair and proper sharing of the the cycle network.

We all know that cycle paths are not only used by cyclists, the users for which they were conceived, but by joggers, dog walkers, stroller pushing parents, wheelchairs, mopeds, e-scooters, roller-bladers, skateboards and plain old obnoxious pedestrians.

The issue of who should or not not have access to the network will be à l'ordre du jour. If you are in Montreal, please book the relevant dates in your agenda.

I truly hope that we can get those *freaking* electric mopeds ruled out once for all.

Now before anyone sends me loads of bitchy e-mails, THIS is what I am talking about:

Those need to go: they are bulky, heavy and dangerous. They will fight back, expect a big turn out at the city Hall as they got screwed by the sellers who promised them they could go on cycle paths forever. Tough luck, everywhere in the world they are being expelled from them.

Normal e-bikes are fine. Like these.

Basically, the cut-off is you should be able to pedal it like a normal bike. If you cannot handle a Tour de l'Ile on your "bike", get out of the path.

Now, pedestrians. Well, there are pedestrians and pedestrians:

- You have those, obnoxious, PITA pedestrians who pay no attention, don't give a fuck about your bell ringing, step right in front of you and insult you. These need to be steeply fined. 

These are general assholes anyways and cause problems to all. They are the same who jaywalk left and right, cause accidents everywhere, smoke in your nose where it is prohibited, yell in their cell phones in libraries, cut you off and overtake you on the right on the highway etc.

By that, I mean there is no "pedestrian issue" with these, there is a general common sense and manners issue.

- The other pedestrians can be lumped with the joggers etc.

With these, we usually have an infrastructure issue. They will be on the path because there is no sidewalk, or the sidewalk is too narrow, full of holes, of obstacles, too busy (i.e. not big enough), poorly designed, was located in an area that should be exclusively pedestrianised or was stolen from them!

Below, example of a well designed path where it is clear, by design, that only cyclists are allowed, with proper sidewalk next to it..

Poorly designed "path" where said path looks like some plain old sidewalk.

Of course, pedestrians do not realise they are on a bike path! In addition, Place des Arts (the location in this picture) is a central location in Montreal where virtually *ALL* the festivals are held. Why cut a bike path across this area? You know there will be permanent conflicts with peds. As a matter of fact, the path was closed virtually all summer with cyclist dismount signs everywhere. And this was true for most of the Maisonneuve path: around Berri (picture below), Crescent, McGill College etc. Fucking useless!

Another example: sidewalk/footpath too narrow AND stolen from pedestrians. In the Parc Lafontaine, one of the nicest bike path sections of Montreal, both bike path and footpath are extremely busy.

The bike path is pretty decent,

Wikimedia Commons image

But the footpath is tiny. Normal a good chunk of it was allocated to the bike path!

Wikimedia Commons image

This area is source of major conflicts with joggers and dog walkers, who, understandably also want to enjoy the park!

Last example is the Old Port which is a so-called"mixed" area. Perfect example of too busy an area for telling cyclists they can use it.

Image: Alex Drainville

 
So, unless these infrastructure deficiencies are addressed, problems will persist.

Now, for the other users:

- Roller blades and skateboards *BELONG* in the bike path, end of discussion.

- Strollers get in bike paths when the sidewalks suck. Fix'em and parents will go back on it.

- Wheelchairs: well, I don't know what to say. I know my opinion will sound very cruel and insensitive to many.

By law they belong on the sidewalk. The chair is a substitute for legs and does not have a vehicle status. Therefore, they are pedestrians who, by law in Montreal, belong on the sidewalk.

I do not have any personal problem in sharing the path with them. But it would be much better if they lobbied to obtain better sidewalks. Same with parents with strollers.

They might want to remember that all sidewalks corners have be lowered for their convenience. If they abandon them now, no one will be there to push for their improvement. In the same fashion that cyclists cannot ride the sidewalk, I truly believe wheelchairs should not use cycle paths.

Yet isn't it filthy hypocritical coming from someone who claims rights to BOTH path and road and occasionally rides the sidewalk? Well, yes. That's why, whatever the final decision, I am ok with wheelchairs.

I am sure a big crowd will show up, it will be a blast!

Full communiqué below, in French.

*****

Montréal, le 12 septembre 2011 - La Commission permanente sur le transport et les travaux publics invite la population à participer à l'assemblée publique itinérante qui portera sur la question du partage du réseau cyclable montréalais, et ce afin de donner suite à une demande citoyenne.

Conçu à l'origine pour répondre aux besoins des cyclistes, le réseau cyclable montréalais fait actuellement l'objet d'un partage. On constate que ce réseau est également utilisé par des personnes qui se déplacent à pied, tant au pas de marche qu'au pas de course, en patins à roues alignées, en planche à roulettes, en aide à la mobilité motorisée ainsi qu'en scooter et en vélo électriques. 

Par conséquent, la commission devra se pencher sur la problématique de la compatibilité entre ces différents types de déplacements sur les voies du réseau cyclable montréalais. Ainsi, dans le cadre de cette assemblée, il est prévu de réserver la première séance publique à la présentation de l'information technique caractérisant la configuration du réseau cyclable montréalais et les différents groupes d'utilisateurs se côtoyant sur ses pistes. Les représentants de la Division des transports actifs et collectifs, de la Direction des transports de la Ville de Montréal, se chargeront de cette présentation. À cette occasion, le public aura la possibilité de poser des questions aux experts. Par la suite, les personnes qui le souhaitent seront invitées à prendre la parole lors de l'une ou l'autre des trois séances réservées à l'audition des commentaires et au dépôt des mémoires. Quant à la dernière séance inscrite au calendrier 2011, elle vise l'adoption des recommandations de la commission, le cas échéant.

L'assemblée de consultation publique se tiendra comme suit :

HEURE:  19 H 00

DATES ET LIEUX:

- Le 22 septembre 2011 − Présentation du dossier (Centre-ville)
Hôtel de ville, salle du conseil, 275 rue Notre-Dame Est / Métro Champ-de-Mars

- Le 26 octobre − Audition des commentaires et dépôt des mémoires (Nord-Ouest de l'île), Centre communautaire de l'Est, 9665 boul. Gouin Ouest / lignes 68, 268, 213 et gare Sunnybrooke

- Le 27 octobre − Audition des commentaires et dépôt des mémoires (Centre-Est de l'île), Arrondissement de Ville-Marie, salle du conseil, 800 Boul. de Maisonneuve Est / Métro Berri-Uqam

- Le 23 novembre − Audition des commentaires et dépôt des mémoires (Sud-Ouest de l'île), Arrondissement de Verdun, salle du conseil, 4555 rue De Verdun / Métro Verdun

- Le 1er décembre − Adoption des recommandations (Centre-ville)
Hôtel de ville, salle du conseil, 275 rue Notre-Dame Est / Métro Champ-de-Mars

Documentation
Le document de soutien à l'assemblée publique peut être consulté dans les bureaux Accès Montréal et les bureaux d'arrondissement, les hôtels de ville des villes de banlieue, de même qu'à la Direction du greffe, salle R-134 à l'hôtel de ville de Montréal. Le document est également accessible sur le site Internet des commissions : www.ville.montreal.qc.ca/commissions

 

Inscription Les personnes qui souhaitent participer à la période de questions et de commentaires du public sont priées de s'y inscrire, à l'avance, en communiquant avec la Direction du greffe au 514 872-3770 ou par courriel à l'adresse suivante : commissions@ville.montreal.qc.ca. Il est également possible de prendre la parole en s'inscrivant sur place, et ce 30 minutes avant le début de la séance.

Les commissions permanentes sont des instances de consultation publique instituées par le conseil municipal et le conseil d'agglomération. Conformément à la Loi sur les cités et villes et à la Charte de la Ville de Montréal, leur mission consiste à éclairer la prise de décision des élus municipaux et à favoriser la participation des citoyennes et citoyens aux débats d'intérêt public.

La Commission sur le transport et les travaux publics est présidée par M. Luis Miranda, conseiller de ville et maire de l'arrondissement d'Anjou. Quant à Mme Elsie Lefebvre, conseillère de ville à l'arrondissement d'Ahuntsic-Cartierville, elle agit en tant que vice-présidente. Les membres de la commission sont : M. Maurice Cohen, conseiller de ville à l'arrondissement de Saint-Laurent; Mme Véronique Fournier, conseillère de ville à l'arrondissement du Sud-Ouest; Mme Ann Guy, conseillère d'arrondissement à l'arrondissement de Verdun; M. Beny Masella, maire de la Ville de Montréal-Ouest; M. Alex Norris, conseiller de ville à l'arrondissement du Plateau-Mont-Royal; M. Lionel Perez, conseiller à l'arrondissement de Côte-des-Neiges−Notre-Dame-de-Grâce; M. François Robert, conseiller d'arrondissement à l'arrondissement de L'Île-Bizard−Sainte-Geneviève; M. Edgard Rouleau, maire de la Cité de Dorval et M. Bertrand Ward, conseiller de ville à l'arrondissement de Pierrefonds-Roxboro.

Ganging up: TRANSIT

Serendipity, once again!

It must have been already up in the air for me to connect to it so accurately, akashic style.
Barely a month ago, I wrote a post, part bitchy rant, part serious analysis, at the end of which I recommended that cyclists should not to entrust their hopes and advocacy efforts to other "cyclists" but to any grouping of the following:

- Pedestrian associations 

- Health associations of all kinds promoting sound lifestyle policies and comprehensive disease prevention

- Child obesity concern groups 

- Child safety groups

- Lots of school administrations would love to see car traffic decrease in their areas

- Folks against sound pollution and urban noise (they exist)

- Elder leisure groups who like to walk and visit their towns

- Architectural heritage folks who like to preserve cachet and correct the mistakes from the 60s and 70s (like the movement for the removal of urban highways)

- Better living, livable environment folks

- Voluntary simplicity folks

- Those in the degrowth movement (stronger in Europe)

- Peak oil activists (those ones really rock the cashbah)

- Those for the empowerment of minorities, of people living in poorer neighbourhoods and for the integration of immigrants

- Student associations

- Political parties who are very clear on cycling infrastructure issues

- And of course urban planners of the new school type

 And I concluded:

"That's a lot of folks. Properly ganged up, there is no reason for the situation not to change fast."

You can read the whole post here.

Little did I know that merely a month later, such a gang would really get created for the specific purpose of lobbying for better transportation alternatives!

This group calls itself TRANSIT, "Alliance pour le financement des transports collectifs au Québec", i.e. alliance for the (proper) financing of collective transportation in Quebec.

It is composed of the following organisations:

• Accès transports viables, a group concentrating on viable transportation alternatives in the Quebec City region;

• Association des usagers du transport adapté de Longueuil, an association of disabled users of Longueuil's public transit service;

• Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique, a provincial association against air pollution;

• Centre d’écologie urbaine de Montréal/Montreal urban ecology centre, focuses on sustainable urban development and the management of urban affairs. They are the current organising host of Ecocity 2011, a conference that ended this past week;

• Coalition québécoise sur la problématique du poids, a group focusing on weight issues, i.e. obesity, particularly with regards to children;

• Communauto, of course, our famous, successful and much appreciated car-share program had to be part of the gang;

• Conseil central du Montréal métropolitain – CSN, a labour union. Not sure what their contribution is but hey, the more, the merrier!

• Conseil québécois sur le poids et la santé, another group dealing with weight issues and their prevention through social, environmental and behavioural changes;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement Capitale nationale, a group defending the environment and promoting sustainable development in the Quebec City area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement de Laval, same as above for the Laval area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement de Montréal, same a above for the Montreal area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement et du développement durable de l’Outaouais, same as above, for the Ottawa area;

• Convercité, an agency promoting the optimisation of the urban space and environment;

• ENvironnement JEUnesse, an organisation focusing on sensitizing and educating youth about various environmental issues, including active transportation;

• Équiterre, a well-known NGO active in organic farming, alternative transportation, fair trade and local consumption, climate change, green advocacy in general;

• Faculté d’aménagement de l’Université de Montréal, University of Montreal school of urbanism, architecture and design;

• Fondation David Suzuki, a well-known environmental advocacy NGO that became pretty vocal recently on cycling issues;

• Forum URBA 2015, a group ralated to the University of Quebec in Montreal, dealing and organising conferences on urbanism and tourism;

• Greenpeace, well of course, everybody knows this one;

• Mobiligo, a consulting company specialising in commuting and mobility management;

• Mobili.T, a centre for mobility management and the promotion of alternative transportation in the Quebec City area;

• Regroupement national des conseils régionaux de l’environnement du Québec, yet another group pushing for sustainable development. It is a federation of all the "Conseils régionaux" above;

• Table de concertation des aînés de l’île de Montréal, an organisation focusing on the 55 plus group, on issues of well-being well-aging, agism and autonomy. This is very important to me, as I think the seniors will become a very powerful force in imposing the concept of livable, walkable and quiet cities in the future. Aging in the suburbs is simply bullshit. One cannot be reliant on a car past a certain age;

• Vélo Québec, of course;

• Vivre en Ville, an organisation supporting livable communities, alternative transportation, green urbanism etc.;

• Voyagez Futé, a centre for mobility management and the promotion of alternative transportation in the Montreal area;

Some of them I already knew, others I discovered today.
These folks, whether individually or collectively have done and are still doing far more for urban cycling than any cyclist could ever dream of.
Cycling organisations overall have been complete failures at obtaining significant improvements in cycling conditions for their members. Political activism, better urban planning, green advocacy and image makeover (Cycle chic and others) have done far more in far less time.

I am still in shock due to the timing of all of this!
I wish this coalition all the best, and I hope we all reap the fruits of all these advocacy efforts.

Saga Cité

Came across this cute little video. It is all in French of course, but one can easily figure out what this cartoon-like livable city advocacy video is trying to convey.
This is the type of initiative cyclists should associate with if they hope to obtain anything in terms of better infrastructure planning.

Basically, the vid tells the story of Colvert, a typical North American drowning in environmental, social, urban, traffic and health problems. It goes over how the city got there, through suburban sprawl, car dependency, etc. Then it relates how its population and mayoress solved the problems with courageous decisions, architectural overhaul, urban planning makeover, emphasis on public and active transportation etc.

Enjoy!



You can learn more about the Saga Cité project here (in French).

R.I.P. Jack Layton

Alas...

Montreal born, social democrat, federal MP, NDP leader and opposition chief, Jack Layton passed away last night in Toronto at only 61. Despite multiple health problems that finally got the best of him, he led his party through last federal elections which took Quebec by storm, providing us all with some fresh oxygen and new hope for a real alternative future.

A long time progressive, Dr. Jack Layton was one of the most sincere, honest and inspiring federal politician since Tommy Douglas, fellow NDP member and father of Medicare. Of course, there is no point rewriting a biography that is widely available everywhere on the Internet. Yet, I feel it is important to underline the fact that Jack Layton did not just "talked the talk" like most bullshitters politicians usually do but he actually "walked the walk", in particular regarding transportation policies on which he had very clear positions...

Dating back from earlier years, as a young man...

Source: www.thestar.com

Source: The lobe and Mail

To later years, as a respectable university professor...

Source: The (Western) Gazette

A man who actually cycled for real, whether casually...

Credit: Rick MacWilliam/Edmonton Journal

Professionally...

Source: www.thestar.com

Chilling comfortably on the Couch Bike...

Source: Tree Hugger

Through uncool weather...

 Source: www.cbc.ca

To support the right causes...

Source: www.biketoronto.ca

Source: CP Photo/Aaron Harris via CTV

He was a man of integrity, true to his word, who did not own a car.
May your soul rest in peace! Cyclists all across Canada shall always remember you...

Tribute on College street, Toronto

Farewell...

[Updated for the last picture]

Avoidable death

Again from the Montréal Gazette:

"Death highlights bike path peril

Cement truck crushes cyclist"

This article has got to be the weakest analysis I have read in a long time.

Facts:

On August 9th, a 56-year-old cyclist was crushed to death by a cement-mixing truck as it turned north onto Frontenac St. from Notre Dame St. Both truck and cyclist were travelling west, probably obeying the same green traffic lights. The truck driver didn't see the cyclist.

Now, to represent cyclists, the reporter interviews Suzanne Lareau, Vélo Québec's CEO. She declares:

"whether it's a cyclist or motorist approaching an intersection, they have to slow down, that's the only way you'll be able to see everything that's going on around you and be able to react to the unforeseen."

Wow, what an analysis. We could never have figured that one without her. And then it goes on:

"Lareau doubted whether a separate set of traffic signals for cyclists would make a difference along Notre Dame St., noting that an existing system of signals for cyclists along Rachel St. are so unsynchronized they don't even allow enough time to cycle across an intersection."

For some reason, the Vélo Québec folks are always making soft-assed statements, such as these above, every time they are interviewed by the media. They never says anything deep, concrete or energetic while we all know they could do much better. What's up with that? Scared of loosing some financing or what?

So, we are to understand that because Rachel St. lights are unsynchronised, it means no improvements should be made on Notre Dame St., Right? No? Then you would think that she would offer suggestions... like... hum... What about proposing something... such as... uh... well... hum... let's see... Oh, yeah, getting the damned lights, well, synchronised? How hard is it to just say this? Just that bit, nothing more, bare freaking minimum but at least she would be suggesting something!!

Well, in her defense, maybe she did and it was cut out by the interviewer... Maybe...

Well, as it turns out, the problem on the Notre Dame bike path is extremely simple: poor design. 

It is a mostly recreational type bike path carved out in a park-like setting (the path is lined with trees on both sides) while trailing along a highway type boulevard where cars go particularly fast. This path was obviously an after thought and is not well integrated. At every intersection big surprise: Cars turning into the lane do not see cyclists coming until the very last minute and vice-versa.

 Here is the light at said intersection. Does anyone see a problem?

 When the light turns on green, first the upward arrow appear along with the pedestrian symbol followed, barely seconds later, by the turning arrow. 

This should never be allowed: you cannot have conflicting sets of road users, i.e. right turning cars vs. pedestrians and cyclists moving forward, acting on the same light.

So why did this guy die? Because nobody in this damned city has the balls to make the necessary changes, meaning:

- Stop requiring cyclists to "obey the rules of the road" and car "traffic lights". This is bullshit, and we all know it. Bicycles are NOT cars, are cyclists are NOT motorists.

Cyclists are nothing more than fast moving pedestrians. They should have the same lights as and have the green at the same time as pedestrians, each proceeding on their respective parallel infrastructures, i.e. bike path for the cyclists and crosswalk for the pedestrian.

Like this one

Or that one



- While these two categories of road users proceed, the third one waits on a red light. When the motorists lights turn green, pedestrians and cyclists wait. They alternate but can never proceed at the same time.

What's so freaking hard about this? We actually already have intersections like this in the city, so what's up with that? Is it because Hochelaga-Maisonneuve is a poor blue-collar neighbourhood nobody gives a fuck about? 

Or rather, because Notre-Dame boulevard is "sacred". Can't touch it, can't slow the damned traffic even by one km/h otherwise it would be the Apocalypse! It is already totally gridlocked at rush hour:

The necessary traffic interventions will increase waiting time at the lights for sure. So what? 

Aren't people in cars sitting comfortably anyways? Isn't it the reason they prefer cars anyways? Then, they can wait a little bit, it won't kill them but will save both pedestrians and cyclists lives.

The cause of traffic is traffic. Simply that, too many cars. Sounds silly but the only reason anyone gets stuck in jams is because they choose (not all but most of them) to take their cars to travel instead of any other mean. Traffic is not caused by lights, pedestrians, cyclists, cycle paths, Festivals, God or any other scapegoat one might come up with.

Now, it would be nice if the people supposed to represent us were more assertive in their demands for a change. Speak up! If Vélo Québec really wants to represent urban cyclists, it need to grow balls.

In the meantime, when it comes to traffic lights, cyclists should always follow the pedestrian signs. If it is not safe for a pedestrian, then it is not safe for a cyclist either. 

Last point, and the gem in the article:

"This possibility has led Montreal police to repeat their warning to cyclists and pedestrians to establish eye contact with the driver turning onto an intersection they are about to cross."

Transposed into different context:

"This possibility has led Montreal police to repeat their warning to women at risk of getting raped to always wear a female condom when walking outside, just in case."

Brilliant.

Nice videos: High fashion cycling

Further indicating a possible "mainstreaming" of cycling, high profile designers have chosen to communicate on this theme.

Armani



3.1 Phillip Lim



Now, is any of this a sign that cycling is becoming mainstream?
Those who believe in this theory seem to forget that fashion does not follow the crowds, it precedes it, it is avant-garde, sometimes engaging into areas where, well, not everybody follows them...
Then, another obvious point is the fact that these folks do not really care about cycling per se. It is the newest trend for them right now but we simply do not know how long designers will be interested in cycling. Their new-found caprice may last one season before scuba-diving or bare-ass skiing or whatever takes over.

Therefore, it is nice, we should definitely highlight it and surf the wave: it contributes to the positive zeitgeist, but I would not count on it in lieu of straightforward advocacy for decent infrastructure and laws.

Nice videos: Velo city 2011 - Seville

My all time favourite cycling promotional video!
The lyrics are very inclusive, very poetic, while being simple and accessible.
This video is a promotional masterpiece. It was produced as part of the promotional package for the Velo city 2011 conference in Seville.

Song:              La cumbia de la Bicicleta by David Aguilar.
Animation:  Luzdemente

What's not to love?

Mayor with mega political balls

Now, THAT's what I'm fucking talkin' 'bout!!
Somebody with the balls to enforce rules and laws that make sense.

Check this one out:

ORGASMIC isn't it?
Vilnius (Lituania) Mayor Arturas Zuokas get freaking fed up with the parking-in-the-bike-lane bullshit and SOLVES the damned problem in situ, executive style.

Unfortunately, we all know it is not tomorrow that ball-less Gerald Tremblay will grow such a pair...

EDIT: Of course, this was a PR stunt... We suspected so, too good to be true! Yet, you can still enjoy the images.

What Peak Oil means: the End of Suburbia

Now, we can choose not to look at the bigger picture. After all we are all free to think that, hey, cycling is just a fun activity, a sport we practice, it has no context, it is not political, bla bla bla...
Why not after all? I am not worried about the cycling ostriches pushing these theories. They already cycle anyways! The day shit hits the fan, they'll know what to do.

It is the others that I am worried about. This next video continues on the issue of Peak Oil and what it will mean for North American societies. I think it is well worth watching the whole thing.

Whoever is already at ease with the idea of calve-juice fueled vehicles is well damn ahead of the pack. Now this will definitely reconcile the many cycling gangs once for all.

And I say: bring it on! Just cannot wait for the show to begin!


*********

Watch part one of the serie - "Peak Oil: How will you ride the slide?"
Watch part three of the serie - "How to survive Peak Oil: the power of community"

Gangs of cyclism

As in any activity developed or mature enough to have a substantial base and a critical mass, the bigger community will further divide itself into sub-groups, tribes or factions. This is absolutely normal. Normal and healthy. Confrontation between (even the bickering among) these groups eventually generates progress, new ideas, so long as the general interest is kept in mind by all. Any social movement pushing a specific agenda experiences this phenomenon. Most manage to keep some sort of balance between these tribes and keep those tensions in check, the goal being to avoid jeopardizing the movement. The key idea here is to avoid jeopardizing the movement.

Well, that's not the case with cyclism.
 Anyone who thinks (or pretends) that cyclists are one big united community, "We are family!" type of cotton candy picture is living in a severe bubble-gum cyclotopia.

There are several nomenclatures for the different cycling tribes. This one is mine:

- Commuters

- Urban cyclists

- Sports

- Recreational / week-end / occasional / fair-weather / fitness

- Vehicular

Some of these groups overlap: vehicular cyclists tend to be commuters but are also present among sports cyclists. Most urban cyclists commute. Yet these distinctions make sense to me as they separate different mindsets and realities.
Particularly, people often wonder about the difference I make between commuters and urban cyclists. This differentiation is really mine, I have not seen too many people emphasize it so much.

Basically, urban cyclists are those for whom a bike is the only transportation vehicle, along with maybe public transport in the winter and some occasional car-sharing (i.e. Communauto). They do everything with their bikes. Commuters on the other hand seem to overly focus on their commute. Going to work and back, that's about it. For other activities, a significant proportion of them seem to revert back to their cars, which they usually still own as opposed to urban cyclists who do not own cars. Urban cyclists will live in town or very close. Commuters will live slightly outside of the city core, but in an environment that is still considered "urban". They'll bike to work, but if they have to visit friends or family or get groceries, all the sudden, there are all kinds of good reasons why it is not feasible yet for them.
I actually have lots of respect for this; I see it as an intermediary step toward full urban autonomy. Usually after a few years, they sell their cars and move into full urban mode.
The progression usually follows this pattern:

Casual-leisure-part-time cyclist => Commuter => urban cyclist

Now, back to the greater picture. Among cyclism's sub-groups, some do not and have not always behaved with cycling's best interests in mind. Cycling has got two main internal enemies:

- Those who do not care at all because cycling is only and exclusively a sport to them:

They cycle like others go to the gym or play hockey. They will load their bikes on their SUVs and drive up to their recreational centers, sometimes honking at and endangering some of their fellow cyclists along the way. Traffic, commuting, transportation mean only one thing to them: cars.

These really are motorists and nothing else. They are like foxes in a hen house. If allowed to much say in cycling organisations they will block any progress towards better cycling infrastructure and will oppose traffic calming measures as if their lives depended on it.

- Those who are very comfortable with the way things are: 

Crazy traffic, psychopath maneuvering, criminal speeding, bring it on! They love it, gives them such hard-ons... Just merge in with the freaking traffic and "drive" your bike like a car... three, four, five lanes... gotta love them! Just make sure you signal all right, so the dude coming at 70 km/h behind you will give you all due respect for that oh-so-visible fluorescent jacket. And as you switch from lane to lane to make that left turn, make sure you are pedaling at traffic speed with 2 years old junior in the back seat, pooky the chiwawa bobbing his head in the front basket and one week worth of groceries hanging and clanking in the side panniers.

(Meet Pooky!! Yeah, I know, that's not a chiwawa... Just for the sake of argumentation, let's pretend it is)

These folks are called vehicular cyclists. 

For them, if more people do not cycle, it's because they're too chicken. They're whinnies and pussies who need to be shaken up. So they'll offer cycling classes. Organise all sorts of campaigns. They'll push gear like it's cocaine. Then they'll shove you into traffic. Manage!

Mind you, they'll never encourage their own children, wives (yeah, most are men, surprised?) or grannies to attempt any of this. But YOU yes.

These folks are absolute enemies of cycling. They are a selfish little clique of elite cyclists who only care about themselves. They are not interested in see cyclism grow or in making it easy for beginners. On the contrary, they want to keep it a chasse-gardée for their own little elitist and egocentric enjoyment.
They are the worst type as they can go largely unnoticed until it is too late. By the time people realise what is happening, it is usually too late: they've taken over most prominent cycling organisations and started advocating against infrastructure improvements, claiming bike lanes and bike paths are dangerous.

They've controlled most western cycling organisations from the seventies up to very recently. They've preached their nonsense for all these years. Results: none! Cycling rates never passed 2% in any of the countries in which they have wrecked their havoc.

They've got to be squashed to silence and verbally beaten down to a pulp as they have been harming the cycling community for too long.

Now, I am NOT saying that all sports cyclists are so careless, nor that all vehicular cyclists are that thick. Lots of them are perfectly fine people. However, in general, urban/commuting cyclists will usually not receive much help from these people.

Strategically speaking, it would much better to forge alliances with:

- Pedestrian associations 

- Health associations of all kinds promoting sound lifestyle policies and comprehensive disease prevention

- Child obesity concern groups 

- Child safety groups

- Lots of school administrations would love to see car traffic decrease in their areas

- Folks against sound pollution and urban noise (they exist)

- Elder leisure groups who like to walk and visit their towns

- Architectural heritage folks who like to preserve cachet and correct the mistakes from the 60s and 70s (like the movement for the removal of urban highways)

- Better living, liveable environment folks

- Voluntary simplicity folks

- Those in the degrowth movement (stronger in Europe)

- Peak oil activists (those ones really rock the cashbah)

- Those for the empowerment of minorities, of people living in poorer neighbourhoods and for the integration of immigrants

- Student associations

- Political parties who are very clear on cycling infrastructure issues

- And of course urban planners of the new school type

That's a lot of folks. Properly ganged up, there is no reason for the situation not to change fast.

(EDITED for pictures and links)

Follow-up post:" Ganging up: TRANSIT"

Pimping up your city

In the art of marketing a city to its own inhabitants as well as to foreigners as a cycle-friendly environment, several approaches are possible. Yet, most will fall in either of two categories: minor league vs. major league style.

- The minor league approach

This video is an example that perfectly illustrates the points I am attempting to make.

Vancouver will be hosting the 2012 Velo-city Global conference. This video is a preview that debuted at the closing ceremonies of the 2011 Velo-city in Seville. It was produced under tight time constraints in a end of winter, beginning of spring context which may explain some of its shortcomings.

Still, it has all the elements of a minor league cycling approach.

In a minor league approach, unimportant elements will be prominently emphasized. In the video above, Vancouver's Olympic status is waxed on despite a complete lack of relevance to urban cycling. 

Gear will be thrust in the viewer's throat, if not verbally, at least visually. Helmets will be pushed like drugs, and safety-oriented contraptions will be displayed in very not-so-subtle fashion: high visibility vests, fluorescent apparel, protective gear etc.

This point is extremely important as the psychological impacts of such tactics run very deep in the collective psyche. The subliminal message behind this is that cycling is dangerous. Then it promotes the idea that a person's safety and physical integrity are an individual matter. Do not expect society or your city to be organised to ensure your protection because it won't. Don that armour and be afraid, very afraid... Should a car hit you, it was your fault. Everybody knows helmets and protective gear stop cars from running you over by creating an electro-magnetic field that repels motor vehicles.

Cycling will be portrayed as a tough-guy, sports kind of activity. In this video, the presenting host, Skip Swain, Norco's VP Sales, looks and sounds like a biking John Wayne avatar. The tone is dynamic is assertive. You see scenes of cycling along busy highways. You have the mandatory stop at the bike shop, i.e. cycling as also being about the mechanics, get-yer-hands dirty kind of attitude. Commuting is the biggie. There will be talks of showers and locker rooms at work, because you know, cycling is about sweating buckets and you necessarily have to arrive at work drenched in sweat. 

Untold psychological messages are that quality of life in such places is something for go-getters that one sweats to obtain. Not something casual, easy going, that everyone deserves for just being.

There will be no diversity in the people sampled. Only a few women, of the hard-ass type and mostly white break-ya-neck twenty something males or white mature hardcore men. Racial diversity will be minimal with no children or elder folks to be seen anywhere. 

Demographics will be terribly homogeneous which is a problem in the case of this video as Vancouver is a highly racially diversified city. What happened to the Asian community? Don't they bike as well? If yes where are they? If no, doesn't it tell loads about the "normalizing" of cycling in Vancouver, i.e. it is only a sub-cultural activity for whites only and has not yet reached mainstream status?

Unfortunately, this approach will only seduce those susceptible to identify themselves to this limited portrayal of cycling.

Which terribly sucks as Vancouver is actually a much grander cycling city than portrayed. I am convinced that none of these "mistakes" were intentional. They derive from a very pervasive take on cycling that is typical of North America. But with this approach, they ensure cycling rates will never improve beyond the residual sub-cultural groups already interested in cycling.

What you want is mainstream appeal.

- The major league approach

This second video is Seville's Velo-city 2011 Global conference promotional video.
Feel the difference.

In a major league approach, a woman does the talking or someone with a soft voice in a relaxed tone. No need to rush or hurry, there is plenty of time. 

The focus will be on the city itself as a liveable and safe environment. Quality of life is a given. It is being promoted. It is something the authorities will stand for in your name. Attacks on the car culture are clear and to the point: "cars are a thing of the past", "cars are the main polluters", there is no noodling around this, no talk of composing or compromising with the car culture. We fight it in your name! Trains and tramways are rubbed in your face.
Cycling is not just an individual choice, it is being pushed as public policy for everybody's benefit. Cycling will be presented as an integral part of a urban transportation cocktail of which bicycles are the centerpiece.

In that kind of approach, there will be talk of how laws and structures have been modified to ensure protection of citizens, whatever their transportation choice. You see loads of normally dressed folks cycling at a leisurely pace on nicely organized lanes. Women in flowing dresses, women in heels. Casual hats. People carrying groceries. Wicker baskets. Children casually accompanying their parents. Minimal helmets including on children.

You might also see folks strolling bare-feet by the beach or along marinas on cruisers. Bikes parked in front of terrasses and cafés whose owners are sipping expressos and caipirinhas. Folks cruising parks. Lovers of all kinds holding hands or piggy backing because it is safe to do so. Folks giving each other lifts. Racial and age diversity will be obvious as every community and every demographic will feel safe in joining in.
There is talk of culture as well as sports as these are major components of urban and fulfilling quality of life.

So, where do we stand in Montreal?
Montreal cyclists overwhelmingly are voting of a major league approach as they take over the city on their clunkers. However, our authorities and administration are still stuck in minor league scared as they are of God knows what...

A similar discussion already took place at the Urban Country which you can read here along with James' amazing analysis.

Le gamin au vélo

I have not seen that movie. I do not know whether it is good or not. Here is a link to a critique in the Guardian.
It won the 2011 Grand Prix du Festival de Cannes.

I just like the images. I wonder about the impact such images can have in the long term. What will happen as more and more bicycles are featured in mainstream media?
And would it be enough? Are PR, marketing and image communication enough? Should we give up on traditionnal advocacy?

Here is the official trailer

The kid's bicycle is pretty well featured throughout the film as something normal that normal people do.

Of course, it's a French movie and the story happens in France where the approach is more of the Major League type.

We can only only wish that this trend continues. For sure it will at least have some sort of positive subliminal impact.