Highway Safety Email

Show Emails Show Mailing Addresses Email Some
Note that your postal code may not always return your correct riding, MLA, MP and candidates. Contact Elections BC to verify your riding and candidates. Thanks to OpenNorth for the representative and candidate database.
Write the Minister regarding cycling safety and increased speed limits on Provincial Highways
Please relate your experiences regarding safety problems and speed on BC roads highlighting sections that are really  hazardous.


Showing 22 reactions

  • commented 2017-01-06 19:41:36 -0800
    This is a test letter.
  • commented 2015-10-10 22:50:50 -0700
  • commented 2015-10-10 22:34:25 -0700
  • commented 2015-08-04 17:23:00 -0700
    I live in Whistler & regularly road ride out & back to Callaghan Valley Rd so I am riding on the Sea to Sky hwy. I am very disappointed that the speed limit has increased to 100km on this stretch of the hwy. On my return rides from the Callaghan Rd to Function Junction….between the noise of the vehicles & the speed of the heavy traffic, it feels as if I’m on a speedway with very little road allowance. I find it hard to understand that increasing the speed limit to 100km on the Sea to Sky hwy makes it safer. I have ridden this road many times over the years & it certainly feels much more risky now. With this speed limit in place I think this very popular cycling route should have a wider cycling lane (at the very least). Thank you, Judi Spence
  • commented 2015-08-04 17:19:34 -0700
    I live in Whistler & regularly road ride out & back to Callaghan Valley Rd so I am riding on the Sea to Sky hwy. I am very disappointed that the speed limit has increased to 100km on this stretch of the hwy. On my return rides from the Callaghan Rd to Function Junction….between the noise of the vehicles & the speed of the heavy traffic, it feels as if I’m on a speedway with very little road allowance. I find it hard to understand that increasing the speed limit to 100km on the Sea to Sky hwy makes it safer. I have ridden this road many times over the years & it certainly feels much more risky now. With this speed limit in place I think this very popular cycling route should have a wider cycling lane (at the very least). Thank you, Judi Spence
  • commented 2015-07-10 18:55:40 -0700
    Re: changes to MVA regarding cyclists:


    It is fundamentally important that the MVA recognize basic differences in the physics involved in cycling versus those required for driving. Here are a few: 1. cyclists are self-propelled and take up less physical space than motor vehicles, meaning they can both pass on the right and left of cars, and be passed on the right and left; this also implies that as long as it is safe to do so, there is no physical reason why cyclists should not advance at three-way stops ahead of vehicles, and be allowed rolling right-hand turns at stops as long as they stay as close to the right as is safe to do; 2. cyclists often require both hands to brake, and to accelerate from standing — this means it is not always practical to signal effectively; cyclists’ momentum on steep downhills, particularly in wet conditions, often makes it nearly impossible to stop, and rolling right hand turns should be allowed; 3. cyclists come in all ranges of abilities — some can only maintain 10km/h, while pro or quasi pro cyclists can frequently travel as fast as motor vehicles on city roads — motorists should be trained to recognize the differences in the speeds of cyclists; 4. cyclists travel in groups not only for social reasons but also for energy savings benefits of drafting; this means that cyclists frequently change positions from front to back — not only should cycling two-abreast should be allowed, particularly on rural and less-travelled arteries, but groups of cyclists within a group should be considered a single unit, like a semi-truck – the first cyclist is the head of the group and like the front bumper of the truck, and the last in the group is like the rear bumper — this consideration should apply when groups are proceeding through yellow lights. This also means there should be recognition for the fluid nature of cycling group; i.e. that when cyclists change positions they are sometimes more than two-abreast. Overall, the MVA must be very clear that the sheer realities of physics mean that the laws SHOULD NOT be the same for cyclists and motor vehicle. There is a common belief that the laws apply and ought to apply equally to cyclists and motorists — this is dangerous, and simply unfounded in light of the differences in physical realities between motor vehicles and cyclists.


    Hugh Trenchard

    Victoria BC
  • commented 2015-05-08 21:43:49 -0700
    I am a resident of Victoria, BC. My husband, myself, and our fox terrier are daily accosted and threatened by cyclists here in Victoria, particularly on the Galloping Goose Trail, next to our home, but not limited to that area as we also find driving with the “maniacal cyclists” as we have dubbed them, to be equally unsafe. We no longer feel safe in our home environs and in this community. They ride far too fast, many speak on their cell phones while operating their moving vehicles (prohibited to drivers of motor vehicles), purposefully ride too close to you (when they have a wide birth of available space) for the specific intent of intimidation, and are regularly, verbally abusive to pedestrians who shout out in fear or education (“the sign says yield to pedestrians”). What is this government’s plan to protect pedestrians and their little 12 year old dogs, because, Sir, the current status quo is not working. All we hear about is “the rights of cyclists”. Well…,We, say, what about our rights as pedestrians?" We are currently considering a blockade on the Galloping Goose Trail to engage the awareness of our cyclist friends to observe the basic rule of yielding to pedestrians.


    Kind Regards,


    Molly Petroff
  • commented 2014-11-21 18:55:05 -0800
    test
  • commented 2014-11-08 19:28:21 -0800
    This is a test
  • commented 2014-10-26 14:04:27 -0700
  • commented 2014-10-25 22:41:12 -0700
  • commented 2014-10-07 13:28:01 -0700
  • commented 2014-09-28 11:57:23 -0700
    I know that you don’t really care about people who ride bikes or those that drive the speed limit no matter what it is (i.e. rule followers), hence the increase in speed limits, but I thought I would write anyways and tell you that my family cares. They care if their mom, wife and grandma makes it home in one piece. My workplace cares also and I care as well. I ride a bike to lose weight and stay healthy and not be a burden to our health system. I don’t want to die because a distracted driver going too fast hits me. Perhaps money would be better spent on overhead radar/speed detectors and cell phone companies using GPS to stop phones from being used for texting and/or talking until the vehicle is in park? The old saying “speed kills” is still true. Just because a road is newer or a car “can handle it”, doesn’t mean the driver can. I’m sure you think you’re right, but I ride a bike to commute, shop, etc., and I know you’re wrong. I’m surprised you didn’t think about people that don’t drive cars. Shame on you. Until people are no longer distracted, have taken a course how to drive fast under all road and/or weather conditions – why give them the right to use their car as a potential weapon? Also, I do drive, I do have a license and have a perfect record of 40 years. How many can say that? Why? Because I follow the rules. I may not like all of them, but I know they’re there for a reason and really, who cares about someone who slept in, didn’t leave on time and is in a rush to “fly” there? You need to think about all of the people, not just the ones with lead feet and fancy cars. Our lives depend on you representing ALL OF THE PEOPLE, which you don’t.
  • commented 2014-08-24 02:53:38 -0700
    This is a test
  • commented 2014-08-24 02:50:43 -0700
    This is a test share
  • commented 2014-08-16 17:53:55 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-16 05:37:40 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-16 05:17:33 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-16 05:07:54 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-16 00:10:51 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-15 23:36:59 -0700
  • commented 2014-08-15 23:31:33 -0700

A Billion for Bikes - Cycling for Everyone Petition

I call upon the Government of BC to enable everyone in BC to cycle & walk in safety as part of their daily lives by implementing an Active Transportation Strategy that includes:

  • Investing $1 billion over the next ten years to:
    • Upgrade cycling & walking facilities on provincial roads & bridges
    • Complete cycling & walking networks in communities across BC
    • Provide safe routes to school for children
    • Build trails & routes for cycling & walking tourism
  • Ensuring that paths & protected bike lanes can be safely shared by people using wheelchairs, skateboards & in-line skates
  • Enhancing cycling education for children & adults
  • Promoting cycling & walking
  • Encouraging electric bike use by eliminating the PST & providing rebates
5,202 SUPPORTERS
798 needed to reach 6,000

Will you sign?

or Text SIGN to +16046704421 to sign

Support Our Cycling & Walking for Everyone Campaign

Cycling For Everyone

Your generous contribution will help us mobilize the support needed to convince the Provincial and Federal Governments to make bold investments in cycling & walking through:

  • Outreach to organizations and businesses 
  • Petitioning to show the government that a lot of people support better cycling
  • Meeting with politicians and staff
  • Press releases and op-eds

Please support our efforts by making an on-going contribution of $5, $10, $15 or $20 per month or a one-time donation.

Share

Help show lots of people in BC support cycling and walking for everyone.

Please share. Encourage your friends and family to sign the petition!

Liquid error: Unknown operator ontains
Sign the Petition

Our Members

Become an Organizational Member