Edgewater Hotel Sign Comes Down
The Art of Not Knowing
If You Tweet It, He Will Come
Historicist: "The city that nobody loves"
The Daily Photoist: November 20, 2009
Cyclists arrive along Bloor Street, east of Avenue.
Earlier this afternoon, hundreds of cyclists converged on the stretch of Bloor Street West outside of the Sephora where, two nights previous, bike courier Darcy Allan—Al—Sheppard was killed. Many had just come from a mass ride that had started on Bloor at 5 p.m., picking up the crowd of about one hundred cyclists waiting at Bay and Bloor, and another crowd waiting at Bloor and Yonge, before riding together down Yonge, then along Queen, then back up University, escorted and gently directed by bike cops the whole journey.
Outside Sephora, a man strummed "Wish You Were Here" on guitar, as news media and mourners gathered around the flowers and Post-it notes and scraps of paper and newspapers and candles placed around and on the tree and mailbox that Sheppard was slammed into before he lost his grip and slipped under the rear wheels of the car that killed him. Running along the south edge of the road were Take the Tooker's handmade bike lanes, the same strips that they had used on almost the same stretch of Bloor a year and a half ago, an attempt to demonstrate then just how important bike lanes were on Bloor. One woman's small handwritten sign read "Justice for Al."
Above: cyclists wait at Bay and Bloor, where the protest was scheduled to start. Below: the pack makes its way along Bloor.
Rob Anderson stood near the curb. A self-described "acquaintance" of Sheppard's for about a year and, for thirteen years now, a bike courier in Toronto himself, Anderson told us about the Al he knew: "a good guy, really happy-go-lucky guy," a guy who "didn't deserve to die, didn't do anything bad." What happened to Al was a surprise to Rob—the "level of violence" is like nothing he's seen in all his time being a courier, though he says he's the type that avoids confrontation ("I'm a diplomat, or I run away"). "A tiger doesn't lower himself to fight with a worm, that's the kind of way I look at it: 'you're an asshole, bye.' I've got things to do, I gotta make deliveries, not get into a fight with some guy I don't know or care about."
Others we talked to hadn't been so lucky.
Rosanne Keen, who came to the protest at 5 p.m. at Bay and Bloor, didn't join it when the group took off together on the mass ride that would precede the gathering further west. She doesn't bike anymore, because she's been in too many accidents. She thinks that, downtown, cars are superfluous, and need to be taken off the roads altogether. "Somebody's got to do something," she told us. "Someone prominent, that has the balls to say—it's almost like you need a dictatorship, because nobody's gonna say it, nobody's gonna say...'okay, no cars in the downtown,' because nobody's gonna vote for them. This is the whole problem. It's all about votes and it's all about politics. And that's why I'm afraid nothing will change."
Arthur Y, who wouldn't give his full last name, waited at Bay and Bloor, too; a year and a half ago, he was the victim of a hit and run as he turned left at Queen Street East and River Street, an accident that—when the driver slammed into him and his bike from behind—broke his neck and would have killed him if not for his helmet, though it left him quadriplegic and in a wheelchair for six months. (He's out of his wheelchair now, but still has "a lot of defects," and plenty of issues with the right side of his body.)
Above: along Yonge, near Dundas. Below: the cyclists pass Tamil protestors on University.
In spite of the massive number of cyclists, Bloor was never fully closed on Wednesday night. As the crowd of cyclists grew, the available lanes for cars shrunk and shrunk and shrunk, down to one westbound lane at one point, until a wailing ambulance was let through at about 6:10, pushing one more lane open, and police began to shut the protest down at 6:20 to cries of "shame," in spite of the event that preceded it being yet another example of a protest that saw mostly cooperation between participants and police. By 6:45, three lanes, including one eastbound, were back open.
Earlier, we'd found Yvonne Bambrick, executive director of the Toronto Cyclists' Union, in the middle of the crowd. "He certainly won't die in vain," she told us, just after much of the crowd had raised their bikes over their heads in unison. "It's allowed us to have a massive national discussion about the rights and responsibilities of everyone to share the road safely and the need to incorporate cyclists into the mix. We pay the same taxes as everybody else, and lots of us are drivers too. We're all humans and we all deserve to be accommodated in our own transportation system."
Above: cyclists turn back onto Bloor, routed by police officers. Below: bikes raised in unison.
"What we've been advocating and will continue to advocate," Bambrick explained, "is for the meaningful integration of cyclists and bicycles into our transportation network, into our shared public space—so that means bike lanes that not only allow people to move through the core but that allow people to come into the core from the suburbs," and, in the suburbs, where speeds are higher and roads wider, lanes that are physically separated.
As a trumpet played by Communist's Daughter bartender and New Kings band member Michael Johnson swelled up a few feet away, Bambrick continued. What's needed is not just infrastructure, but "public education, for both cyclists and drivers, about the fact that we belong on the roads, that we have a right to use the lanes." "One of the key components to culture shift," she explained, is better and increased public communications, though the city's budget for its bike plan provides for no such action. "We're going from bikes [being] perceived as recreational to a really amazing way to move through the city. It's a transportation mode that more and more people are choosing and we need to accommodate it and acknowledge it. We're just starting to get into that shift. Change is hard, but that doesn't mean we don't do it. It's not a question of if but how."
All photos by Andrew Louis/Torontoist.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
That was a fitting vigil and I want to say thanks to the police who were very respectful and even helpful in setting up the blockade to make this safe.
So a guy that few people know, who was by all credible accounts drunk, aggressive (his GF calling the cops on him hours earlier) and possibly just as full of road-rage as Michael Bryant is the new martyr for... bike lanes?
From what we do know this is a horrible tragedy and worthy of a memorial, but the ease in which some cyclists have politicized and adopted Sheppard as a poster boy for cyclist victimhood seems crass and misguided.
Meanwhile, ambulances are blocked and activists cry "shame" when the police show up. As eager as Yvonne Bambrick and Michael Johnson are to capitalize on this tragedy, they seems incapable of "advocating" in the "shared space" of anywhere but city streets, shared by pedestrians, transit commuters and drivers alike.
I don't like these organizations - they are almost fascist in their approach. They are hypocritical as well. Sure, I am all for no cars downtown, but then don't cry when the grocery stores are not supplied, downtown businesses are not busy and all sorts of workers are not available for downtown area.
I also don't like that this incident has been twisted and turned. We have a court and that's where the justice will be served based on facts and not on emotions.
Why couldn't this be used to celebrate the poor guy's life instead of using it as a political platform? And wow, all these people turned up for a guy that noone knows. And also, quite unfortunately, noone cares about.
Rubish!
I agree more needs to be done for bike safety in this city but I think this may be the wrong poster boy for the cause, he didn't die because he was hit by a car, he died because he chased and held on to a moving car then hit a tree and some other sidewalk stuff. What was he thinking chasing and holding onto a moving car? Most likely it was road rage but who can know for sure.
It may not be nice for me to say but it sure sounds like he was mostly responsible for his own death, I agree Bryant didn't react properly and should be charged with something but I can also see his side of it, if someone I had just been in a confrontation with chased down my car and held on while I was trying to drive away I would be terrified for my safety and the safety of my wife who was in the car too, I would be very hesitant to stop even though that is the proper thing to do, someone who would do such a thing is someone who is potentially very dangerous since they have such little regard for their own life and safety, what regard would they have for the life and safety of the person they were chasing? I think the lesson to be learned from this tragedy is to never chase and hold onto moving cars, take down their license plate number and call the cops instead.
I'm sure the only reason some are rallying around this for the cause of bike safety is because of the high profile of the car driver involved and not because it demonstrates the need for more bike lanes, bike lanes would've done nothing to save Sheppard's life in this case, it was mainly his own behaviour that lead to his death. I think what happened was very sad but if anything it demonstrates the danger of road rage more so than the need for more bike lanes.
Agreed.
Cyclist activists lost me somewhere after they thought it was good idea to stage an UNANNOUNCED Critical Mass rally up the Gardiner Expressway ramp, with some kids in tow. The worst part? There's barely a message beyond spreading "awareness" which seems to be synonymous with "annoyance" to regular people that don't necessarily share their sensibility.
And I'm not unsympathetic either, I take the TTC to work and run home 5 miles each day, sometimes dodging cyclists that just as careless as drivers when it comes to traffic...
Cyclists unite in support of drunken cyclist road rage!
Anybody who takes it upon himself or herself to paint a fake bike lane on a street is a f*king asshole and should be arrested. That, and charged when the first person dies in an accident in it.
Screw Darcy the Psycho Cyclist. You get drunk, get in altercations with the police, then try to jump onto the side of a guy's car?
YOU LOSE SIR, GOOD DAY!
I'm not saying Bryant was right to go on his little destruction derby, but if some drunk rageaholic psycho grabs onto the side of my car, I would probably tear ass out of there as well. You don't bring a bike to a car fight.
Actually, I believe that's exactly what you're saying when you joke about it being a "car fight." Cars aren't for fighting, they're for transportation. I'll be sure to weep for you if you ever bring a car to a truck fight.
Cyclists and drivers shouldn't be at odds: we're all just trying to get to where we're going and most of us don't think about dying while doing it. The bile I've seen here and elsewhere in the last couple of days just makes me sad.
As for Darcy's personal demons, sure, they make him a odd character to become a tragic figure that people focus on, but the circumstances and symbolism of the whole ordeal are what people are gravitating to. Also, the fact that Bryant was a career politician (who couldn't negotiate his way out of this one non-violently for some reason, by the way) makes this a high profile and polarizing case. I'm sure that come mid-October we'll be retreading the same ground anyway.
Sorry Val, though you're right, these seem to be issues that just needed a major situation to occur to bring them forward. These emotions have been bubbling under the surface of Toronto for quite a while. I hope our society can figure this one out quickly, but I don't hold those hopes very high.
"Running along the south edge of the road were Take the Tooker's handmade bike lanes, the same strips that they had used on almost the same stretch of Bloor a year and a half ago, "
That's all the info given. Well, as long as the piece of paper was removed after the gathering, then I'm fine with it. If it was left, then my comments stand. Messing with the street like this is as dangerous as putting a bag over a stop sign.
Interesting concept by Rosanne Keen in the article. Why is it does she suppose, that no one would vote for someone who banned all cars whom you think are superfluous from downtown Toronto? Is it maybe because it is the dumbest idea ....ever?
When motorists repeatedly get into accidents we usually say they're bad drivers. There's only so much "bad luck" one person can have. Just saying...
I wonder how many of the Bryant-Sheppard stories today were "helped" by Mr. Bryant's new friends at Navigator?
If all he has is one PR firm on his side against all those folks in the photos, willing to crucify him without a fair trial, it seems he is still out gunned.
I find these comments very interesting and eye-opening--for some reason I had thought that most commenters would be writing in support of the bicycle advocates, so I'm pleased to have been mistaken.
I agree that the roads should be a shared space, but in order for that to happen, and happen safely, there must be some sort of system in place which qualifies bike riders, ensures they have a basic knowledge of the rules of the road, and penalizes them if they fail to comply. That would put them on an equal footing with car drivers, and possibly provide a level of safety through technical expertise that many of them are lacking today, at least as evidenced by their cavalier approach to recognizing red lights, stop signs and the existence of cars and pedestrians.
Regarding the untimely death of Mr. Sheppard, could things have been done differently by both parties? Of course they could, with the result that they might both have continued with their lives untouched.
What impresses me is the way that every negative facet of Mr. Sheppard's life has been brought to light in less than 48 hours since his death. He's been portrayed variously as a drunk, transient junkie with a string of kids by different mothers, a brother in jail and 61 outstanding warrants for his arrest. I'm sure all of this is true--there's probably no need to fictionalize anything.
I’m amazed at the speed with which this information has been disseminated to the general public. I can recall no other time when the personal life of a victim of an accident, homicide or any other tragedy has been so microscopically exposed so quickly.
To put it in perspective, on August 8th a 56 year-old female pedestrian was struck by a cyclist and later died of her injuries. Try googling the accident today, less than a month later, and the best you’ll come up with is a Toronto Sun cover shot saying “Bike Victim Had Big Heart”. That’s about it.
So what makes Mr. Sheppard fair game for the type of scrutiny being applied? Could it be that the political spin machine is doing its best to control the damage done to Mr. Bryant, by Mr. Bryant? Could it be that at trial he will be found innocent because this very bad man who ended up dead made Mr. Bryant fear for his life and act irrationally?
Perhaps I’m just being cynical, but I’m starting to suspect this to be the case. I guess time will tell.
My personal take on this situation is that a hot-headed and somewhat out of control Sheppard crossed paths with an arrogant, "better-than-the-common-people" Bryant (sorry, but that's the impression I get of him from the coverage of this story and what I've read in the past)with the result that neither one was willing to back away thus forcing the outcome.
So are you telling me that if I staple my driver's licence to my helmet when I ride, you'll accept that I am qualified and have basic knowledge of rules of the road? Is having gone through the same testing procedures as every other driver in the province enough to put me "on an equal footing with car drivers"?
And with my licence on display, you and all of the other drivers will treat me with the same respect you would if I was in a car, right? You know, by accepting that the lane belongs to me and that you must change lanes to pass me, for example.
I suggest that the city should require bike licenses for commercial bike users, like ... let's say ... bike couriers. Maybe in that case, couriers will be required to ride like civilized human beings or risk losing their license (and hence job).
I don't recall mentioning that the licence should be displayed, but if you feel like it, go right ahead.
My main point is that it's fairly simple to master the physical act of riding a bicycle, but much more difficult to master the intellectual act of doing so in a safe manner.
As far as respect goes, I believe that I treat everyone (on or off the road) with respect, until they do something to lose that privelege.
And just to clarify a final point, cars are not obliged to change lanes when overtaking bicycles. Here's an excerpt from the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, which is the rulebook for how we conduct ourselves on the road.
Vehicles meeting bicycles
(4) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting a person travelling on a bicycle shall allow the cyclist sufficient room on the roadway to pass. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 148 (4).
Vehicles or equestrians overtaking others
(5) Every person in charge of a vehicle or on horseback on a highway who is overtaking another vehicle or equestrian shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision with the vehicle or equestrian overtaken, and the person overtaken is not required to leave more than one-half of the roadway free. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 148 (5).
Bicycles overtaken
(6) Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 148 (6).
And my point is that I already meet all of your criteria to put me on an "equal footing" with motorists. Many cyclists have the same level of driver education—or more—as most motorists. We haven't simply wobbled our way onto the road fresh from the womb, never having encountered a traffic light.
I appreciate your condescension. I am familiar with the HTA's status as a "rulebook." Hell, I've even read the whole thing, including a number of the regulations that go with it. So yes, I know that cars don't necessarily have to change lanes to pass bikes. My point was that if bikes are to be on an "equal footing" with cars, drivers should treat cyclists by the same rules—codified or not—they follow for other drivers; i.e., changing lanes to pass them, for starters. I can't recall the last time an overtaking vehicle brushed my elbow while I was sitting in a car; drivers should pay me the same courtesy when I'm on a bike.
Val,
I'm sure you do meet the level of proficiency required, as do many of your co-riders, but I don't think you could argue against my point that a lot of riders out there have either never learned, or choose to ignore the traffic laws, and thereby put themselves and others in danger.
In no way am I saying that drivers are all saints, merely that it is up to each road user to ensure they have the skills required to survive.
I'm not sure where I was condescending--apologies if I was, but if it was because I quoted the HTA, without knowing you personally how would I know you are familiar with the Act? Merely correcting an incorrect statement is not an act of condescension, but again, my apologies if that is how you perceived it.
I agree that many riders don't know (or care about) the rules of the road. However, it's not at all clear that the percentage of cyclists who don't know/care is any different than the percentage of drivers with the same lack of knowledge/care; riding a bike or driving a car doesn't make a person more or less likely to obey the rules of the road.
The difference is that an idiot on a bike primarily puts himself at risk. An idiot in a car primarily puts everyone but himself at risk. For example, if I'm riding down the street and cut in front of a moving car, I'm the one who's going to end up in the hospital. On the other hand, if I'm riding down the street and someone in a car cuts in front of me, I'm still the one who's going to end up in the hospital.
That's not to say that cyclists can't injure or kill pedestrians, and it's not to say that a driver can't put himself in peril. But people who maintain that cyclists are the real menace on the road need to take a serious look at the number of people killed or injured by cars and bikes each year and redirect their energies appropriately.
For the record, I find that the vast majority of drivers are courteous and my interactions with them on the road are almost always safe and uneventful. I also find the same thing with cyclists, even when I'm driving a car. Indeed, with pedestrians, skaters, and skateboarders, too. As I said earlier, we're all just trying to get where we're going. No one should be vilified just because they're in a car, on a bike, or hopping on a pogo stick. People are people no matter how they're getting from A to B. We'd all do well to remember that.
The condescension came across not in quoting the HTA, but in the superfluous explanation that it's "the rulebook for how we conduct ourselves on the road." You're implying not only that I haven't read it, but that I have no concept of what it is.
Bryant's lawyers don't even really have to mount a defense, their main job here is to introduce Reasonable Doubt, and clearly that process is already well under way. Part of it being engineered by his PR firm, part if it done by the media and their training to equally weigh both sides of an argument no matter how unbalanced they may be.
As for following the rules of the road, I've seen no mention of the fact that police have the authority to issue tickets to cyclists and do so with some frequency. We are not somehow immune to the law just because we are not licensed. Although it is correct that as a group we get away with countless minor infractions a day, I can't imagine it's any greater than how often drivers flout the speed limit, for example.
"One woman's small handwritten sign read 'Justice for Al.'"
I smell a Metallica lawsuit!!!
http://skewedview.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/a-dead-cyclist-and-a-dose-of-disappointment/
Yeah, this makes sense. Why don't all pedestrians start blocking cyclists on the sidewalks because a cyclist killed a pedestrian? Anyone remember that? Happened only this summer...
I think that's a great idea. Cyclists shouldn't be on the sidewalk and I think that pedestrians should make a point of telling them to ride on the road.
I don't think that encouraging more confrontation is going to reduce the anger and rhetoric at all.
I usually DO block bicyclists on the sidewalk. They aren't legally supposed to be there (usually on the wrong side of the road to boot!) and they're usually completely oblivious or ignorant of the pedestrians they zip by. I'm all for the city installing more bike lanes...if only to get them off the damn sidewalks!
Unusually weak trolling in this thread.
I DO hate to rise to this sort of bait, but these spewings of righteousness about how these sorts of accidents are all due to the various shortcomings of cyclists in general, and in particular the attacks on Sheppard's character, make me nostalgic for a time when the furious and intellectually-challenged had to type and mail letters to the editors to get their grievances off their chests, sparing the rest of us their pea-brained opinions.
Okay, I guess I just did it too.
But what I really want to say is that a moment of silence was planned last night that seemed to get lost due to the huge turnout. However, it was even more fitting that it was replaced by a moment of wild rage when protesters hauled their bikes up over their heads and hollered. For a brief moment we were unified in our grief and rage - an appropriate tribute to this tragic death.
I'm a street cyclist but I'm not particularly outraged by this turn of events. It's tragic, to be sure, but the whole blocking traffic thing seems unnecessary and a bit silly.
And I'm sorry if this has been mentioned already, but if Darcy were wearing a helmet, I can't help but think this could've turned out quite differently.
Helmets are good for stopping head injuries, but they don't do much when a car drives over you or slams you into street furniture.
You're right a helmet probably wouldn't have helped since it doesn't do anything to stop someone from riding drunk or being so blinded by road rage they chase down and hang onto a moving car in spite of the obvious danger. The reason I find this story so sad is that its such a senseless pointless death, it was hardly an accident since Sheppard deliberately put himself in harms way to what, make a point? express his anger? get back at Bryant? we'll never know because he died in the process of whatever he was trying to accomplish. I don't see how it was worth his life whatever it was he was trying to accomplish by hanging onto a moving car. I'm not really surprised by how many people assume cyclists always good and innocent while car drivers are always evil and guilty despite the fact that both can be guilty or innocent depending on the particular case. Keep in mind Sheppard wasn't killed when hit by a car while riding his bike, he was killed when he hit street furniture while hanging onto the side of a moving car he wouldn't let go of in an apparent road rage incident, that's something very different than a bike car collision. Sheppard had his own life in his hands that night, if he had chosen to let go he would have lived to tell his tale instead he held on and died. Trying to portray him as an innocent victim of a cruel car diver doesn't change the facts. btw I'm a cyclist myself, I don't drive a car nor do I have any fondness for cars and do think there should be more bike lanes in this city but trying to make this case about something it isn't doesn't help the cause of bike safety one bit, it has far more to do with the dangers of road rage than it does the lack of bike lanes or education on the part of cyclists and drivers. There are more than enough cases of bike car collisions resulting in death to rally around to make the point instead of grabbing on to this case just because of the high profile of the car driver involved.
This is not the first place I've heard that he was not wearing a helmet -- common, it seems, from couriers. It made me also not just how few helmets were in view at the memorial/protest ride.
pedestrian bike > (pedestrian) and car > (pedestrian or bike)
Regardless of your mode of transportation, you should ALWAYS yield to the lesser. There is no excuse otherwise.