- AT-Network - University of Manitoba Mailing Lists

Risks of cycling, walking and driving put in context
by Beth McKechnie 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

At the risk of overloading everyone on a sunny Friday afternoon (!), I also found this Vancouver Sun piece by Kay Teschke -- lead research investigator on the BICE study<http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/injuries/the-bice-study/>-- a real eye-opener. happy weekend, Beth * * * * * Risks of cycling, walking and driving put in context Opinion: Constructive discussion needed By Kay Teschke and John Carsley, Special to The Vancouver Sun | July 8, 2013 http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/op-… [View More]ed/Risks+cycling+walking+driving+con… We read with interest The Vancouver Sun article “It may be time to start talking about licensing bikes” and the subsequent letters to the editor. We agree that an open and constructive discussion of cycling issues is needed. We are writing to provide a more complete public health context, since there may be misconceptions. We address three issues related to modes of transport: the burden (or number) of injuries; the risk (or rate) of injuries; and other potential risks and benefits of various modes. The burden of deaths and head injuries The editorial suggests that “cycling remains the biggest cause of traumatic brain injury for all other forms of recreational activity among young people.” By this, we presume the authors meant the single most important recreational cause of traumatic head injuries. In Canada, cycling accounts for 10 per cent of head injury hospitalizations in kids. Of course, this includes mountain biking, the most risky cycling activity. We think that cycling as discussed in the article is better compared with other modes of transportation. The most recent B.C. Traffic Accident Reports (2005 to 2007) indicate that, on average each year, there were 31 children (up to age 19) who had head injuries when cycling, 60 when walking, and 703 when in a car, SUV, van or truck. Unfortunately, this data only include crashes with motor vehicles, so it does miss some cycling and walking injuries. Deaths are often considered a better comparison measure, since they almost always involve crashes with motor vehicles, are reliably recorded, and are the most devastating type of injury. So how do deaths compare between modes? British Columbia Motor Vehicle Branch data for the same years indicate there were 10 deaths a year on average (all age groups) when cycling, 70 when walking, and 300 when driving. Thus, bicycling had the lowest “burden” of deaths and head injuries of the three transportation modes. The numbers of deaths and head injuries indicate that all modes of transportation deserve public health attention. Death rates shows cyclists, pedestrians more vulnerable The burden of death and injury reported above does not tell us whether one mode of transportation is safer or riskier than another. For example, more trips are taken by car and more distance travelled. So when deciding what mode of transportation to use, it is important to consider the death rate, not just the raw numbers. A recent analysis compared the fatality rate by mode of travel in B.C. There were 14 deaths per 100 million trips for bicycling, 15 for walking and 10 for driving – remarkably similar. Per 100 million kilometres travelled, there were three deaths for bicycling, seven for walking and one for driving. Using distance rather than trips shows that cyclists and pedestrians are more vulnerable road users. Are these risks high? One way to think about this is the number of trips for one death to happen: one car occupant dies every 10 million trips and one pedestrian or cyclist dies every seven million trips. Other risks and benefitsof transportation modes In addition to injuries, transportation contributes in other ways to the risk of death. These are also vital to consider when choosing a mode of transportation. Motor vehicle travel increases time spent sitting and produces air pollution, and these are associated with increased mortality from chronic diseases. Both walking and bicycling are active modes of travel. The physical activity they entail reduces the risk of developing many chronic diseases, including heart disease, diabetes, certain cancers, and dementia. Many studies have compared these benefits to the injury risks. All have found that the benefits greatly outweigh the risks. The benefits of walking and cycling (lower risk of death from chronic diseases) are 10 to 100 times higher than the risk of death from injuries. This wonderful health benefit of active modes of travel is the reason public health experts around the world and in B.C. want to make it easy for as many people as possible to choose walking or cycling for at least some of their daily trips. A multi-faceted approach modelled on countries that have achieved higher rates of active travel would include, first and foremost, reduced vehicular speed (to lower injuries for all travel modes), protected bicycling infrastructure that makes cycling feel as comfortable as walking on a sidewalk, and education programs in schools to teach cycling and road skills at an early age. An emphasis on encouragement, rather than punishment, seems most appropriate for travel modes that have such large net health benefits. *Dr. Kay Teschke is a professor of the School of Population and Public Health at the University of British Columbia; Dr. John Carsley is the medical health officer for Vancouver Coastal Health Authority.* © Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun [View Less]

1 0

What if bike comfort is more important than bike safety?
by Beth McKechnie 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

Thanks, Erik, very interesting and apropos to a study I was looking at this morning comparing route safety to route preferences. UBC's BICE study<http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/injuries/the-bice-study/>by Kay Teschke, Meghan Winters and Mike Brauer "examined the association between *bicyclists’ injuries and the cycling environment *(e.g., route types, intersection types)" in Toronto and Vancouver, and then compared the results with those of an earlier study<http://cyclingincities.… [View More]spph.ubc.ca/opinion-survey/>of route types that motivate and deter cycling. Here's a snippet of the results: "We found that route infrastructure does affect the risk of cycling injuries. The following features were the *safest*: - cycle tracks (also known as “separated” or “protected” bike lanes) alongside major streets - residential street bike routes with traffic diversion - bike lanes on major streets where there were no parked cars - off-street bike paths - intersections with motor vehicle speeds below 30 km/h - residential street intersections The following infrastructure features had *increased risk*: - streetcar or train tracks - downhill grades - construction - sharrows (shared car / bike lanes) - traffic circles at residential street intersections - arriving at an intersection in the direction opposite to traffic *are safe routes preferred routes?* In our earlier study <http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/opinion-survey/>of route types that motivate and deter cycling, we found that people preferred to ride on bike-only paths, multi-use paths, residential street bike routes, and cycle tracks. They preferred NOT to ride on major streets. The graph below compares our injury study results on route safety to the results on route preferences. Preferences and safety largely agree. Major streets are less safe and not preferred. Bike-specific routes are safer and preferred. The main disagreement was that multi-use paths are preferred, but were not particularly safe. They could be made safer by making them straighter so sight lines are better and by removing obstacles like bollards." cheers, Beth On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Erik Dickson <edickson(a)scatliff.ca> wrote: > A very interesting article from this weeks’ Green Lane Project News ( > http://greenlaneproject.org/blog/view/what-if-bike-comfort-is-more-importan…). > For anyone who has ever debated “vehicular cycling” there are several good > points regarding whether the debate over what is safer is really the most > important debate or if we should instead being asking ourselves what is > more comfortable and likely to attract new riders. An interesting further > discussion may be should we always seek the most efficient routes for bike > infrastructure even though longer, parallel routes may have the potential > to be more comfortable. - Erik > > > *What if bike comfort is more important than bike safety?* *By Michael > Andersen, Green Lane Project staff writer* *August 14, 2013* > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/8884323350/> > > When I'm standing near the edge of a high ledge or cliff, I know, > rationally, that I'm unlikely to fall. I've spent most of my life without > spontaneously tumbling sideways, and standing on the edge of a cliff > doesn't change that. > > I know, statistically speaking, that I am almost completely safe. > > But that doesn't mean I like to stand near the edge of a cliff. > > When I'm in the front seat of a roller coaster, I know, rationally, that > my body is extremely safe. Tens of thousands of thrill-seekers have raised > their hands in the air without being harmed. > > But that doesn't stop me from being scared of raising my hands in the air > in the front seat of a roller coaster. > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rk_photos/9331712551/> > > When I'm riding my bike along a five-lane arterial road, I know, > rationally, that the professional truck driver next to me is statistically > unlikely to suddenly swerve to his right, crushing and killing me. > > But that doesn't mean I like to bike on a street like this: > > Last week, I interviewed<http://greenlaneproject.org/blog/view/at-last-feds-move-toward-a-green-ligh…>a man whose main ideas have been rejected by mainstream bike advocates in > the United States: John Forester, founder of the "vehicular cycling" > concept. Because cars and bikes rarely collide when they can see each > other, Forester and his allies argue, people should ride bicycles where > they are most visible: right down the middle of standard traffic lanes. > Protected bike lanes modeled on those in Northern Europe, they argue, move > people on bikes to the side of the roadway where they're harder for people > in cars to see. > > There's something to this argument. If there weren't, it wouldn't have > been nearly so successful in the 1970s and 1980s. To Forester and his > successors, such as Bicycle Quarterly's Jan Heine, peoples' desire to use > protected bike lanes is irrational and therefore unjustifiable<http://janheine.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/separated-cycle-paths-a-summary/> > . > > "Most Americans suffer from bicyclist inferiority complex," Forester told > me. "Most of the things that they like appeal to their phobias." > > There's a standard response to Forester, Heine and others who make this > case against protected bike lanes: that although no intersection is perfect > and a given protected lane might slightly increase the short-term risk of > collision at a given intersection, a city that offers a robust network of > protected lanes will actually become safer in the long run, because more > people will ride bikes<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_in_numbers#Examples_of_substantial_incr…> > . > > This is a pretty strong argument. > > But is it the best one? > > What if Forester, Heine and others are using the wrong metric to measure > the success of a bike lane? What if "safety," as calculated by government > statisticians who sit far away from speeding semi trailers, isn't actually > a bike lane's most precious characteristic? > > What if bike designers, instead of arguing about safety – an argument > that, to be clear, I think protected bike lanes would win – decided that*the most important measure of a good bikeway is whether people tend to like > it?* > > I'm not arguing that safety is unimportant. Obviously nonprofessionals are > imperfect judges of whether a particular lane or intersection is safe, and > cities must work carefully to design good, safe intersections with few > bike-car conflicts. > > But when professionals make safety their only absolute value, they presume > that physical safety is the most important value in people's lives. And > that assumption is demonstrably false. Of course people want safety. But > they want other things, too. > > *A restaurant doesn't measure its success by the percentage of people who > dine there without getting sick.* It measures success by the number of > people who come in the door, how much they pay and how often they return. A > public transit line isn't funded by the federal government based on its > anticipated vehicle failure rate. It's funded based on the number of people > who are expected to use it. > > And as for bike infrastructure, here's the thing: as one study<http://otrec.us/project/33>after another > <http://otrec.us/project/33>has found, people go out of their way to use > bike lanes, especially protected bike lanes<http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/08/07/study-cyclists-gravitate-toward-street…> > . > > *Bluebonnet Lane in Austin.* > > Surprise! It turns out that, rationally or not, people dislike biking on a > street that constantly reminds them of their own possible demise. > > Even if, rationally, they know they're almost completely safe. > > Here's what a more human-centric way of thinking about bike design would > involve: > > - In every city, making the number of anticipated users the primary > metric for designing a desired bike project. > - In every city, actually taking efforts to measure the usage of > important bike projects. > - Using the phrase "safety and comfort" as a pair of core values in > street design, but not as a pair of synonyms. > > This line of thinking is why, at the Green Lane Project, we use the phrase > "low-stress" to describe the bike networks we value most. We don't talk > about building "safer bike lanes," though ultimately a network of good ones > is safer. > > We simply talk about building "better bike lanes." > > People aren't robots, and they don't change their behavior based on > mathematics. They change their behavior based on feelings. Until bike > advocates and street designers alike understand this, bikes will never > successfully belong. > > *Green lane idea of the day: **Street designers should consider making > short-term safety a baseline requirement of better bike facilities, but not > the sole measure of bike projects' value.** * > > *Cycle track photo from Copenhagen by J.Maus/BikePortland; used with > permission. Cliff photo by Adam Baker. Roller coaster photo by raghavvidya. > * > > Regards, > Erik Dickson > > Suite 1120 – 201 Portage Avenue > > Winnipeg, MB R3B 3K6 > > ph: (204) 927-3444 ext. 242 > fax: (204) 927-3443 > web: www.scatliff.ca > > blog: http://scatliff.tumblr.com > > Please consider our environment before printing this message. > > > > _______________________________________________ > AT-Network mailing list > AT-Network(a)lists.umanitoba.ca > http://lists.umanitoba.ca/mailman/listinfo/at-network > > [View Less]

1 0

What if bike comfort is more important than bike safety?
by Erik Dickson 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

A very interesting article from this weeks' Green Lane Project News (http://greenlaneproject.org/blog/view/what-if-bike-comfort-is-more-importan t-than-bike-safety). For anyone who has ever debated "vehicular cycling" there are several good points regarding whether the debate over what is safer is really the most important debate or if we should instead being asking ourselves what is more comfortable and likely to attract new riders. An interesting further discussion may be should we always … [View More]seek the most efficient routes for bike infrastructure even though longer, parallel routes may have the potential to be more comfortable. - Erik What if bike comfort is more important than bike safety? By Michael Andersen, Green Lane Project staff writer August 14, 2013 <http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/8884323350/> When I'm standing near the edge of a high ledge or cliff, I know, rationally, that I'm unlikely to fall. I've spent most of my life without spontaneously tumbling sideways, and standing on the edge of a cliff doesn't change that. I know, statistically speaking, that I am almost completely safe. But that doesn't mean I like to stand near the edge of a cliff. When I'm in the front seat of a roller coaster, I know, rationally, that my body is extremely safe. Tens of thousands of thrill-seekers have raised their hands in the air without being harmed. But that doesn't stop me from being scared of raising my hands in the air in the front seat of a roller coaster. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rk_photos/9331712551/> When I'm riding my bike along a five-lane arterial road, I know, rationally, that the professional truck driver next to me is statistically unlikely to suddenly swerve to his right, crushing and killing me. But that doesn't mean I like to bike on a street like this: Last week, I interviewed <http://greenlaneproject.org/blog/view/at-last-feds-move-toward-a-green-ligh t-for-separated-bike-lanes> a man whose main ideas have been rejected by mainstream bike advocates in the United States: John Forester, founder of the "vehicular cycling" concept. Because cars and bikes rarely collide when they can see each other, Forester and his allies argue, people should ride bicycles where they are most visible: right down the middle of standard traffic lanes. Protected bike lanes modeled on those in Northern Europe, they argue, move people on bikes to the side of the roadway where they're harder for people in cars to see. There's something to this argument. If there weren't, it wouldn't have been nearly so successful in the 1970s and 1980s. To Forester and his successors, such as Bicycle Quarterly's Jan Heine, peoples' <http://janheine.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/separated-cycle-paths-a-summary/> desire to use protected bike lanes is irrational and therefore unjustifiable. "Most Americans suffer from bicyclist inferiority complex," Forester told me. "Most of the things that they like appeal to their phobias." There's a standard response to Forester, Heine and others who make this case against protected bike lanes: that although no intersection is perfect and a given protected lane might slightly increase the short-term risk of collision at a given intersection, a city that offers a robust network of protected lanes will actually become <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_in_numbers#Examples_of_substantial_incr eases_in_cycling_associated_with_reduction_in_danger> safer in the long run, because more people will ride bikes. This is a pretty strong argument. But is it the best one? What if Forester, Heine and others are using the wrong metric to measure the success of a bike lane? What if "safety," as calculated by government statisticians who sit far away from speeding semi trailers, isn't actually a bike lane's most precious characteristic? What if bike designers, instead of arguing about safety - an argument that, to be clear, I think protected bike lanes would win - decided that the most important measure of a good bikeway is whether people tend to like it? I'm not arguing that safety is unimportant. Obviously nonprofessionals are imperfect judges of whether a particular lane or intersection is safe, and cities must work carefully to design good, safe intersections with few bike-car conflicts. But when professionals make safety their only absolute value, they presume that physical safety is the most important value in people's lives. And that assumption is demonstrably false. Of course people want safety. But they want other things, too. A restaurant doesn't measure its success by the percentage of people who dine there without getting sick. It measures success by the number of people who come in the door, how much they pay and how often they return. A public transit line isn't funded by the federal government based on its anticipated vehicle failure rate. It's funded based on the number of people who are expected to use it. And as for bike infrastructure, here's the thing: as one study <http://otrec.us/project/33> after another <http://otrec.us/project/33> has found, people <http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/08/07/study-cyclists-gravitate-toward-street s-with-protected-bike-lanes/> go out of their way to use bike lanes, especially protected bike lanes. Bluebonnet Lane in Austin. Surprise! It turns out that, rationally or not, people dislike biking on a street that constantly reminds them of their own possible demise. Even if, rationally, they know they're almost completely safe. Here's what a more human-centric way of thinking about bike design would involve: * In every city, making the number of anticipated users the primary metric for designing a desired bike project. * In every city, actually taking efforts to measure the usage of important bike projects. * Using the phrase "safety and comfort" as a pair of core values in street design, but not as a pair of synonyms. This line of thinking is why, at the Green Lane Project, we use the phrase "low-stress" to describe the bike networks we value most. We don't talk about building "safer bike lanes," though ultimately a network of good ones is safer. We simply talk about building "better bike lanes." People aren't robots, and they don't change their behavior based on mathematics. They change their behavior based on feelings. Until bike advocates and street designers alike understand this, bikes will never successfully belong. Green lane idea of the day: Street designers should consider making short-term safety a baseline requirement of better bike facilities, but not the sole measure of bike projects' value. Cycle track photo from Copenhagen by J.Maus/BikePortland; used with permission. Cliff photo by Adam Baker. Roller coaster photo by raghavvidya. Regards, Erik Dickson Suite 1120 - 201 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, MB R3B 3K6 ph: (204) 927-3444 ext. 242 fax: (204) 927-3443 web: www.scatliff.ca blog: http://scatliff.tumblr.com Please consider our environment before printing this message. [View Less]

1 0

3 part series on cycling in Denmark
by Dave Elmore 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

A bit of a long read but interesting none the less. http://grist.org/cities/an-american-in-denmark-close-encounters-with-europea n-bicycle-culture/ An American in Denmark: Close encounters with European bicycle culture The first thing that struck me, climbing the steps from the train station into the city of Copenhagen on a recent Wednesday morning, was the great abundance of bicycles. The street outside the train station had been converted into a chaotic, open-air bicycle parking lot, with … [View More]

1 0

AT Webinar: Getting Better Data for Better Decisions, Wed, Aug 21, 2-3 pm, EcoCentre
by Beth McKechnie 15 Aug '13

15 Aug '13

Green Action Centre and Bike to the Future invite you to join us for a local viewing of the following APBP webinar at the EcoCentre (3rd floor, 303 Portage Ave). This will be followed by group discussion of local applications.* *Detailed description provided below. *Wed, August 21st | 2:00-3:00 p.m.* RSVPs are appreciated but not necessary. Hope to see you then! cheers, Beth (204) 925-3772 * * * * * ** Getting Better Data for Better Decisions: Improving Data Collections and Outcomes … [View More]

1 0

WFP: Winnipeg's soul got buried - Pedestrian-free iconic intersection cold, uninviting (Aug.14'13)
by Beth McKechnie 15 Aug '13

15 Aug '13

Winnipeg's soul got buried Pedestrian-free iconic intersection cold, uninviting By: Bartley Kives http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/winnipegs-soul-got-buried-219526071.… An eight-lane intersection, barred to the public by barricades under a 37-year deal to push pedestrians underground, cannot be considered a "great place" by anyone who loves cities. Great urban spaces are places where human beings congregate. Remove people from the streetscape and all you're left with is concrete and … [View More]asphalt. That's why there's no shortage of subversive genius behind a bid to designate Portage and Main -- off limits to humans for decades -- the greatest street in the nation, as part of a Great Places in Canada contest run by the Canadian Institute of Planners. Back in the early days of the Bill Norrie administration, Portage and Main was barricaded as part of the deal to build the skyscraper now known as the Commodity Exchange Tower as well as Winnipeg Square, the underground pedestrian mall. Whoever nominated Portage and Main as a 'great place' must have a fantastic sense of humour -- or a knack for inspiring outrage It was 1979, and Winnipeg was starting to suffer severely from a peculiar form of urban psychosis -- a belief in the revitalizing powers of downtown megaprojects. A decade earlier, entire blocks of northeastern downtown were razed to make room for the Manitoba Centennial Centre and the Civic Centre complex. This upgraded Winnipeg's institutional infrastructure, but whittled away at downtown's pedestrian streetscape, as small-scale buildings were replaced by concrete plazas. Unconvinced this was a bad idea, Winnipeg grew addicted to the magical powers of the megaproject. So down went an entire block bounded by Main Street, Portage Avenue, Fort Street and Graham Avenue. In its place, we received a nice skyscraper, a weird underground mall and the roots of a weather-protected walkway system designed to vacuum away what remained of Portage and Main's remaining pedestrians. It's now been 34 years since the barricades went up. Entire generations have been raised knowing that getting across that intersection without heading underground involves defying the edict of Gandalf: "Thou Shalt Not Pass." Portage and Main is no longer a streetscape, at least in the conventional sense. It's simply a multi-lane intersection where traffic signals maximize the movement of motor-vehicle traffic. Sure, there remains an idea of "Portage and Main" as the theoretical centre of the city. But that's a purely abstract sort of place name, used in the same manner international reporters use the term "Moscow" to describe the political machine at the heart of Russia. The real Portage and Main is a cold and uninviting place. At the southwest corner, you face a wall of the Commodity Exchange Tower complex -- Scotiabank windowglass frosted over with a Winnipeg Jets banner. At the southeast corner stands the stately, 100-year-old Bank of Montreal building, whose front entrance is seldom used. At the northeast corner stands the Richardson Building, whose wide and slightly more inviting plaza is adorned with Tree Children, a sculpture by Leo Mol. The office tower now known as 201 Portage Ave. graces the northwest corner, offering only a glass facade toward the actual intersection. On a sunny Tuesday morning in August, only one person stood, sat or walked at any of these four corners. Whoever nominated Portage and Main as a "great place" must have a fantastic sense of humour -- or a knack for inspiring outrage. Shortly before departing office in 2004, former mayor Glen Murray launched a design contest in the hopes of reopening the intersection in some way. A resulting scheme received the nominal support of six out of seven Portage and Main property owners, but died on the vine in 2006. That's when current Mayor Sam Katz declined to endorse a plan to replace the barricades with movable bollards, which would have been opened on evenings and weekends. Under the terms of the original agreement, the intersection is slated to remain closed until 2016. Even if it reopens in 2017, pedestrians trained to treat it like a minefield will not suddenly find themselves attracted to the intersection. Genuine public spaces draw people to them. Portage and Main keeps them away. It would be lovely to live in Winnipeg where "Portage and Main" is an actual place along with an idea. Instead, the streetlights change like clockwork, ushering cars through a city centre that is quite literally without a soul. bartley.kives(a)freepress.mb.ca *Is it time for Winnipeggers to come up into the sunlight? Should Portage and Main be open to pedestrians? Join the conversation in the comments below. [ http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/winnipegs-soul-got-buried-219526071.… ] * *Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition August 14, 2013 B1* [View Less]

2 1

Vote now to reopen Portage & Main to pedestrians!
by Beth McKechnie 14 Aug '13

14 Aug '13

http://globalnews.ca/news/778573/pressure-building-to-reopen-portage-and-ma… Pressure building to reopen Portage and Main to pedestrians [image: Lorraine_personalities 220x260px]<http://globalnews.ca/author/lorraine-nickel/> By Lorraine Nickel <http://globalnews.ca/author/lorraine-nickel/> Reporter/Anchor WINNIPEG — Portage and Main is famous as Canada’s windiest corner and the heart of downtown Winnipeg but for 34 years, something’s been missing. “Portage and Main which was, it … [View More]still probably is, the symbolic heart of the city has become a place for cars, not a place for people,” said Prof. Richard Milgrom, the head of the department of city planning at the University of Manitoba. For decades, people crossed Portage Avenue and Main Street freely. Then in 1979, the city signed a contract with area businesses that closed the intersection to pedestrians for 40 years and built the underground concourse. The contract expires in six years and key players are talking about plans to reopen the famous intersection to pedestrians. “85 per cent of our BIZ members would like to see Portage and Main reopened. Part of what makes downtown vibrant and excited is the ability for people just to walk around,” said Stefano Grande of the Downtown BIZ. Some city councillors are on board but say discussions haven’t started at city hall yet. “I like the idea of putting people on Portage and Main. You could do it on a gradual basis, like starting at six or on weekends,” said St. Boniface Coun. Dan Vandal. “I would love to have that happen somehow,” said River Heights Coun. John Orlikow. “I know there’s issues down below with some of the shopkeepers.” To take down the barricades, all the property owners on the famous corner must first agree. The Bank of Montreal and Creswin Properties (owners of the office tower at 201 Portage Ave.) want it opened. But the Richardson Centre “wants things to stay the same” and Artis REIT, the owner of the underground shops of Winnipeg Square, said “it’s premature to discuss the idea.” A lot has changed downtown since the 1970s, with the MTS Centre being built, several new condo and apartment developments going up and the Human Rights Museum slated to open next year. “The downtown in the last seven years has become a much more vibrant place,” said Jino Distasio, urban studies professor at the University of Winnipeg. But it’s not that simple, he admits. “There will be some growing pains. It’ll be some frustrated drivers who are going to have to wait on a corner that they’ve been able to speed through.” Former Mayor Glen Murray tried to open the intersection in 2002, asking architects to design a safe pedestrian crossing, but the 40-year agreement derailed those plans. “I’m disappointed it didn’t happen because I think it was critical for the city,” said Murray. “You can’t find a major city in the world anymore that has blocked off a street, never mind its main corner.” So will seeing people crossing Portage and Main remain a distant memory, or is there a new future for this famous intersection? “I think it has to happen if our downtown is going to become a vibrant place, an exciting place,” said Grande. http://globalnews.ca/news/778573/pressure-building-to-reopen-portage-and-ma… [View Less]

1 0

Bike theft deterrents
by Dave Elmore 14 Aug '13

14 Aug '13

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Slamming+brakes+stolen+bikes/8781652/stor y.html Slamming the brakes on stolen bikes Some cities, and even the University of Saskatchewan's Campus Safety, have experimented with bait bikes, equipped with GPS to track down thieves. (AP file Photo) As bike thefts in Saskatoon skyrocket this summer, some cities across the world are taking a more creative approach to deter cycle thieves. According to Saskatoon police, reports of stolen bicycles jumped 80 … [View More]per cent this year between June 1 and July 31, compared to the same time frame last year - to 149 from 83. Reported bike thefts during the same two-month period on the University of Saskatchewan campus also doubled - to 10 from five. City police are repeating the usual message, warning bicyclists to always lock up their bikes and make note of their ride's serial number. Fenced areas devoted solely to private bicycle parking can be found scattered throughout the city. Bike lockers can also be rented on the University of Saskatchewan grounds, and Campus Safety has experimented with bait bikes - rides equipped with GPS to track thefts - in the past. Cities around the world have used these same methods to deter bike thieves, but some aren't satisfied with the same old tricks. Researchers at Newcastle University in the U.K. recently targeted thief psychology with a simple poster, staring down potential stealers. The posters, each featuring a pair of watchful eyes and equipped with the warning, 'Cycle Thieves: We are watching you,' were placed around campus, and led to a 62 per cent reduction in bike thefts over two years in areas where posters could be found. "It's amazing that just a picture would have a bigger effect than a camera recording people," Melissa Bateson, an ethology professor at Newcastle University and one of the study's authors, told the Toronto Star in April. Police in Cambridge, Mass. instituted a similar strategy in one of the city's most frequently cycled areas. Two cardboard cut-outs of a Massachusetts transit police officer were placed in the bicycle cages at the Alewife Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority subway and bus station, where hundreds of people use the racks daily and bikes are frequently stolen. Police only saw one reported bike theft between July 5, when the cut-outs were placed in the cages, and Aug. 4, according to Deputy Chief Robert Lenehan. Last year, six bikes were stolen from the area over the same time period. "All you see is this imposing figure of a police officer," Lenehan told the StarPhoenix. He said the number of reported bike thefts also decreased by 56 per cent in the Alewife station over a oneyear period from July 2012 to July 2013 with the introduction of more patrol officers. He said there is no single best method to reduce bike thefts. "You can never arrest yourself out of a crime problem," Lenehan said. "There is no one magical way out of it. If the cut-out is deterring two or three bike thefts a month, or even two or three bike thefts each quarter, it's still part of the overall approach to try to drive down the crime." MBTA transit police were even able to stop a Craigslist bike thief a few years ago by following him online. The thief was snapping photos of bicycles locked up on the street and posting the photos to Craigslist, a popular classifieds website. When users on the site wanted to buy a bike, the man stole it. "You have to be aware. Every time you think you've locked the doors, you find out there is a window open somewhere," Lenehan said. Thanks Dave o _ ( \ _ (X)\ /(X) [View Less]

1 0

Flin Flon Reminder - Why not leave the car at home?
by Beth McKechnie 13 Aug '13

13 Aug '13

*From:* Reaney, Vicky (MLG) *Sent:* Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:06 PM ** ****

1 0

Active Commuting Cuts Risk of Diabetes, High Blood Pressure
by Beth McKechnie 09 Aug '13

09 Aug '13

Ditch the Car: Active Commuting Cuts Risk of Diabetes, High Blood Pressure By Tamarra Kemsley<http://www.natureworldnews.com/reporters/tamarra-kemsley> http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/3387/20130808/ditch-car-active-comm… By forgoing the car and opting for a more active commute, a person can cut their risk of developing diabetes by as much as 40 percent, a new study [ http://www.ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/amepre/AMEPRE_3837-stamp…] published in the *American Journal … [View More]

1 0