Important News - Toronto's new Road Safety Plan | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Important News - Toronto's new Road Safety Plan

Forum Sponsor
-D- said:
Ya just proved my point.
again, another dumb reply from you
Click to expand...

If you wanted to really prove your point, you would find a follow-up study measuring the effects of granting motorcycles access to un-guarded (by Jersey, rail, or other barrier) HOV lanes in the US. They have had them there for long enough that there should be something available showing the grand safety pay-off, especially in America the Land of the Studies.

It's a reasonably safe bet that Ontario highway planners would also be considering any and all such data that might apply to our highways, whether specific to motorcycles or in general to other initiatives. That's what they do, you know.

With a lack of supporting data, you are expressing an unsubstantiated want, not a need.
 
griff2 said:
If you wanted to really prove your point, you would find a follow-up study measuring the effects of granting motorcycles access to un-guarded (by Jersey, rail, or other barrier) HOV lanes in the US. They have had them there for long enough that there should be something available showing the grand safety pay-off, especially in America the Land of the Studies.

It's a reasonably safe bet that Ontario highway planners would also be considering any and all such data that might apply to our highways, whether specific to motorcycles or in general to other initiatives. That's what they do, you know.

With a lack of supporting data, you are expressing an unsubstantiated want, not a need.
Click to expand...


I had a study conducted. This is their findings.
I want to be safer and live when riding on the roads.
I want my fellow riders to be safer and live when riding on the roads.

Now let me show you just how stupid your ideas are.
How can you perform a study to show cars cutting bikes off in the middle lane vs. if bike is in far left lane they only have to worry about being cut in/off from the right?

How do you conduct a study to follow every rider that had a breakdown and was already in the left lane so they simply moved over to the emergency lane?
How do you conduct a study to find a rider was hit from the back because of bike breakdown or bike was stopping very fast to due a hazard in the lane?
How do you get a dead biker to tell us what happened?

Since we now live in the world of FEELINGS then I FEEL SAFER in the far left lane as it DECREASES my RISK of cars cutting me off and it gives me the emergency lane to bale into for any issues.

Here is another study that I want to initiate?
How many fellow GTAMER's feel/believe that griff2/turdodish add no value to this site but is only here to antagonize?
 
griff2 said:
If you wanted to really prove your point, you would find a follow-up study measuring the effects of granting motorcycles access to un-guarded (by Jersey, rail, or other barrier) HOV lanes in the US. They have had them there for long enough that there should be something available showing the grand safety pay-off, especially in America the Land of the Studies.

It's a reasonably safe bet that Ontario highway planners would also be considering any and all such data that might apply to our highways, whether specific to motorcycles or in general to other initiatives. That's what they do, you know.

With a lack of supporting data, you are expressing an unsubstantiated want, not a need.
Click to expand...

Been done years ago......

Study of that 2-year trial period found that motorcycles account for as much as 3 percent of the annual peak traffic volume on some HOV lanes. However, in the 2 years after the CTB authorized their travel on HOV facilities, there were only five motorcycle crashes on HOV lanes in the peak direction during hours that HOV restrictions were in effect. The study concludes that there is no evidence that allowing motorcycles to travel on HOV lanes in Virginia has an adverse impact on motorcycle safety or congestion on HOV lanes.

Jernigan, J.D. & Lynn, C.W. (1995). The Effect of Motorcycle Travel on the Safety and Operations of HOV Facilities in Virginia
Click to expand...

The reasonably safe bet here is the propagation of unreasonable policy, and you jumping to defend it. I've asked you before, and I'll ask it again; why come to a motorcycle forum and continually hate on motorcyclist?

While I'm asking questions, where's your study proving anything you've said here?

As is often the case reading your post, it is you lacking data; emotionally applying your motorcycle malcontent; expressing YOUR unsubstantiated want.... Why fight this? It's illogical on all fronts.


Post Script

Cool fact; motorcycle access to HOV is mandated nationally in the US by Federal law (Title 23, Section 166) and can only be restricted if the state can prove a safety hazard is present by allowing motorcycle use.. I can't find a list showing which states have actually made that happen.. maybe none..

By law, motorcycles and bicycles are allowed to use HOV facilities. However, a State may elect to restrict motorcycle or bicycle (or both) use of an HOV facility due to safety concerns. If a State does decide to exclude motorcycles and/or bicycles, a certification stating that their presence creates a safety hazard must be submitted to the FHWA for approval.


(b) Exceptions.—
(1)In general.—
Notwithstanding the occupancy requirement of subsection (a)(2), the exceptions in paragraphs (2) through (5) shall apply with respect to a State agency operating a HOV facility.
(2) Motorcycles and bicycles.—
(A)In general.—
Subject to subparagraph (B), the State agency shall allow motorcycles and bicycles to use the HOV facility.
(B)Safety exception.—
(i)In general.—
A State agency may restrict use of the HOV facility by motorcycles or bicycles (or both) if the agency certifies to the Secretary that such use would create a safety hazard and the Secretary accepts the certification.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
-D- said:
Here is another study that I want to initiate?
How many fellow GTAMER's feel/believe that griff2/turdodish add no value to this site but is only here to antagonize?
Click to expand...

Somebody has to keep the Fallen Riders section updated..
 
This whole thing is a bunch of BS so let's deal with it as such. There is a zero tolerance for E coli in our drinking water so why is there such an acceptance of E coli polluted brains in drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians but to a far lesser extent, motorcyclists.

The politicians have turned the traffic cops into ATM machines that only go after the easy profitable targets. Speeding, DUI and the stupid cell phone laws.

Unsafe turns, merging issues, lane usage, signaling, unsafe loads are ignored.

Pedestrian infractions are ignored

Bicycles are a gift from God and therefore untouchable. Ride anywhere, any way you want.

A driver can get a license in cow country and then be allowed on the 401 in Toronto rush hour.

We don't need another study. All we need is the universal enforcement of existing laws.

Unfortunately, to get elected our politicians play the PC game and do nothing.

To the future:

Some connected people will get millions to perform studies that result in nothing.

The road situation will get worse to the point that the mindless zombies will see another HTA-172 type law as salvation.

Rant over.
 
Shouldn't these new signs apply to all drivers and not just motorcycles? I fail to see how they help us specifically.

I agree with the opinion that the focus should be on other drivers. Motorcyclists are not fault-less but lack of driving ability, focus and care are the biggest problems. No one in a car gives a **** about motorcycles here. There's no mutual respect on the road, just people's bad attitudes toward each other. We don't need motorcycle specific signs, we need EVERYONE to be better drivers regardless of the number of wheels. And when I say "better" I don't just mean simply obeying the speed limit sign.
 
Neil_V said:
Been done years ago......
Click to expand...

Something from this century would be nice, and something that encompasses a broad variety of HOV lane types (physically segregated vs just line markings, etc) would be even better.

But mostly, something from this century.
 
Neil_V said:
Been done years ago......
The study concludes that there is no evidence that allowing motorcycles to travel on HOV lanes in Virginia has an adverse impact on motorcycle safety or congestion on HOV lanes.
Click to expand...
That quotation does not indicate that motorcycle use of HOV lanes improved rider safety. It indicates that motorcycle use of HOV lanes did not reduce rider safety or increase HOV lane congestion. Basically, that comment was focused on HOV lane usage, not rider safety.

However, despite that relatively poor reference to prove your point, there must be U.S. studies that show improved rider safety by using HOV lanes, otherwise they wouldn't have federally mandated it.
 
beverage said:
That quotation does not indicate that motorcycle use of HOV lanes improved rider safety. It indicates that motorcycle use of HOV lanes did not reduce rider safety or increase HOV lane congestion. Basically, that comment was focused on HOV lane usage, not rider safety.

However, despite that relatively poor reference to prove your point, there must be U.S. studies that show improved rider safety by using HOV lanes, otherwise they wouldn't have federally mandated it.
Click to expand...

To me, HOV usage is not about safety (though some would argue they feel safer); it's about congestion, which that quote addresses. The fact that it also indicates there is no significant safety concerns is supplementary, and contrary to the suggestions made by the person I was replying to... so... your point?
 
Motorcycles are already allowed in the city HOV lanes, it's the provincial highway ones that you have to have a passenger to get on them.
Since this is a city initiative, I don't think they'd look at provincial highway rules.
 
AF4iK said:
Shouldn't these new signs apply to all drivers and not just motorcycles? I fail to see how they help us specifically.
Click to expand...

I think the idea is that the signs target the unique risks faced by motorcyclists... which are different than car drivers face. There are already plenty of warning signs for drivers, none for riders... they do the same thing in europe, where the politicians understand that being on a bike is different than being in a car.

Also, in focusing the risk argument on other drivers most here are ignoring the multitude of serious bike collisions that are singe vehicle.

The derailing and level of critical thinking demonstrated in this thread reminds me of why GTAM is the motorcycling world's version of a donald trump rally...
 
Last edited:
These types of signs are already in use elsewhere in Ontario.. 15 side road comes to mind
 
I82l8 said:
Motorcycles are already allowed in the city HOV lanes, it's the provincial highway ones that you have to have a passenger to get on them.
Since this is a city initiative, I don't think they'd look at provincial highway rules.
Click to expand...

Then clearly the City and Province need to get on the same page and be consistent.
The city does it to move more traffic but the province bans it because it makes no impact to traffic flow???
 
Neil_V said:
These types of signs are already in use elsewhere in Ontario.. 15 side road comes to mind
Click to expand...
Yes, but how many of them have a motorcycle icon on them? That's the key difference, and one that most of the mouth breathers here won't recognize the significance of, it means that the city identifies us as a distinct group, which has never happened anywhere in Canada before, and just like cyclists, distinct groups get policy concessions. And to the knuckle draggers, no, that a absolutely does not mean lower speed limits
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom