home

Woman dies after collision with 18-wheeler on SW Madison

Posted by on May 16th, 2012 at 9:35 pm

Emergency crews at work.
(Photo: JoniPhoto.com)

The Portland Police Bureau have just released information about a very serious collision that happened downtown less than one hour ago.

It occurred at the intersection of SW 3rd and Madison at around 8:30 pm tonight. Police say it appears that the woman — now identified as 28-year-old Kathryn Leah Rickson — was riding her bike eastbound on Madison and the truck was attempting to make a right-hand turn from Madison onto SW 3rd. There is a green colored bike box and a bike lane at this location (as seen in the photo at right). It might also be worth noting that this intersection is just one block from City Hall and Madison is on a slight decline at this location.

The police say the woman’s injuries “may be life threatening” have confirmed that the woman died last night.

Kathryn Rickson on May 3rd.
(Photo: Facebook profile)

Kristin Tufte was walking south on 3rd and came upon the collision right as it happened. She told me via phone a minutes ago that the truck was a large delivery truck and that it was, “half-way through its turn” when the collision occurred. The woman’s body, said Tufte, came to rest between the cab and the rear of the truck. She also added that, “The truck driver was totally distraught.”

I will keep you posted with developments as they come in. I’m sure all the local TV news stations will also have more details and live reports at 11:00 pm. Let’s hope for the best.

UPDATE: I just got this eyewitness account from a reader via email:

“I was riding my bike home from a meeting when I came upon the accident just after it had happened. I came down S.W. Madison and saw the truck stopped part way through a right turn. When I got closer I saw the wrecked bike and then saw that the rider was down. The rear tires of the semi’s cab were pinning one of her legs. Another cyclist stopped around the same time, and indicated he was a paramedic. We had the driver move the truck slowly back, and I got the young woman’s leg out from under the truck tire. But there is no doubt she was severely injured. The bike frame was crushed, seemingly indicating the truck had rolled over it, and she was still on the bike.

The accident occurred right next to the Justice Center, but it seemed like an eternity before emergency services arrived. I’m sure it was only a couple of minutes, but for a few moments it wasn’t clear if the victim was still alive.

As the news has reported, the truck driver was extremely distraught. For all the people at OLive [OregonLive] crowing about who “wins” when a truck hits a bicyclist, the obvious answer is ‘no one.’”

UPDATE, 5/17 at 9:20 am:
A source at the Portland Police Bureau told me via telephone this morning that the woman died late last night. Her name has not been released yet. The PPB is currently investigating the collision; but they did tell me that it was a green light situation and that both vehicle operators were in motion when the collision occurred (thus rendering the bike box — which is designed to help in a red light situation — relatively moot).

The truck was a 43-foot, 18-wheeler (see photos of it just moments after the collision, here). The PPB says the truck had its signal on and that the woman was struck by the front portion of the cab. This is significant, because, according to the PPB, most right hook collisions involve the trailer and rear of the of the truck rolling over the victim. The PPB suspects that the cab of the truck likely moved to the left just prior to making the right (to go south on 3rd). “We’re trying to ascertain why the driver of the truck didn’t see the cyclist and why the cyclist didn’t see the truck,” said my source. The PPB are interviewing witnesses.

As is standard procedure, a citation has not been issued in this collision. The PPB will hand over the investigation to the District Attorney and the DA will decide if criminal charges are appropriate. The PPB has yet to release an update with the woman’s name. Stay tuned.

UPDATE, 5/17 at 10:23 AM: The woman has been identified as 28-year-old Kathryn Leah Rickson. According to her Facebook profile, Rickson grew up in Rhode Island, when to art school in New York, attended both Oxford and Portland State University. She was employed by Madison House, a pregnancy resource and support center in Southeast Portland.


Here are a few photos I took at the scene this morning:

Approaching SW 3rd on Madison…

Scene of fatal collision at SW 3rd - Madison-1
Scene of fatal collision at SW 3rd - Madison-2

The corner (orange paint marks the tires rear tires of the truck):

Scene of fatal collision at SW 3rd - Madison-4
Scene of fatal collision at SW 3rd - Madison-3

This is still looking eastbound. The whitish area in the center of the crosswalk is where the woman’s body came to rest:

Scene of fatal collision at SW 3rd - Madison-6

For images from the scene just moments after it happened, see this blog post.

Email This Post Email This Post


Gravatars make better comments... Get yours here.
Please notify the publisher about offensive comments.
Comments
  • Joel May 16, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    I saw the intersection taped off during my ride home at around 9:00pm. The truck was stopped about half-way through its turn onto SW 3rd. In other words, it was well through the bike box and across the bike lane. If anyone has further information on how the collision occurred, please post.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • daisy May 16, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    The Oregonian has some coverage here: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/05/police_female_bicyclist_injure.html

    It’s truly disgusting how quickly the comments get posted assuming this cyclist was at fault.

    Recommended Thumb up 17

    • jim May 16, 2012 at 11:19 pm

      It is fault by design. If you are driving a truck through an intersection and are watching the traffic coming from left and right then back left again, also watching the crosswalks, checking the mirrors for bikes, left right again… and you go not seeing that bike that wasn’t there just a moment ago. It would be so much safer if bikes were not allowed to pass cars at an intersection.

      Recommended Thumb up 21

      • joel May 17, 2012 at 6:25 am

        actually, it would be so much safer if long vehicles such as semi trailers werent allowed to drive in downtown areas without special dispensation – the tight turns and close quarters arent designed with them in mind, and they arent designed to operate in such conditions.

        Recommended Thumb up 51

        • Chris I May 17, 2012 at 7:24 am

          Exactly. You don’t see these types of trucks in urban cores in Europe. They use delivery trucks like this:
          http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/appl6en/img/monoprix.png

          Vehicles with articulating trailers should not be allowed in the urban core, with the exception of fire trucks.

          Recommended Thumb up 30

          • Scott May 17, 2012 at 9:41 am

            Also notice that the truck pictured has the bumpers on it that cost next to nothing to put on and keep pedestrians and cyclists from going under the rear tires of the trailers. I believe these are mandatory in some countries.

            They might have saved the life of my friend Kristine Ann Okins, as well as the person in this story.

            Recommended Thumb up 13

            • Chris Daniel May 17, 2012 at 11:15 am

              Hey, those are a great idea!

              Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Scott May 17, 2012 at 12:43 pm

                They have been around for decades.

                Recommended Thumb up 3

            • Dabby May 17, 2012 at 5:09 pm

              I loved Kristine….. She was so great!

              Recommended Thumb up 1

              • Adam May 17, 2012 at 6:18 pm

                I think we should also not forget blind spot mirrors. Every single vehicle needs to be equipped with these. Why they don’t come as standard on trucks is baffling.

                Recommended Thumb up 1

          • SamK May 18, 2012 at 1:32 pm

            A few years ago in downtown Seattle, days away from, I believe Thanksgiving, a young mother was killed by a dump truck with trailer. Pedestrians waiting to cross a street are not familiar with dump trucks pulling trailers. She bolted across as soon as the truck passed, caught by surprise I’m sure by the trailer. I’m sure the truck driver saw this potential, didn’t do the neighborly thing by slowing to a crawl. The result is a dead mom trying to get last minute groceries before Thanksgiving.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

    • naess May 17, 2012 at 8:50 am

      almost as sad as how fast the comments around here like to assume it was the motorized vehicle’s fault.

      Recommended Thumb up 12

      • Byron May 17, 2012 at 8:58 am

        Sorry, but I find it very hard to imagine a scenario that would lead to this accident where it is not the vehicle’s fault. By putting bikes in a bike lane it puts the responsibility for turning right safely on the driver, the bicyclist has the right of way. So unless you can think of a way that the bicyclist did something wrong, the driver is the one that caused this.

        Recommended Thumb up 16

        • Mike May 17, 2012 at 9:45 am

          But it is possible, so maybe we should reserve judgement before condemning either party (not saying you are, but others sure seem to be).

          Recommended Thumb up 4

      • Schrauf May 17, 2012 at 10:09 am

        Have you read all the comments? There are more people blaming the victim. Although that is human nature when you realize how easy it is to be in the same situation (passing vehicles about to turn) yourself when in a bike lane, even if you think you are perfect and everyone who does otherwise is stupid.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

      • Todd Boulanger May 17, 2012 at 1:27 pm

        A more appropriate way to think about the discussions of vehicle design and operation are less about “blame” as to safety designs that aid in reducing the chance of the crash or reducing the severity of crashes once occurred.

        Recommended Thumb up 7

      • Peri May 17, 2012 at 3:21 pm

        And vice versa…sometimes mistakes happen. Portland doesn’t exactly have the best infrastructure for the the number of cyclists and unfortunately, these accidents are inevitable until a time when we adopt safer systems.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

  • naomi May 16, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    incredibly sad to hear :(

    yet another reason to remember:

    a) in downtown, always take the lane. doesn’t matter if there is a bike lane, always take the lane. some have told me this is illegal, i’ve done it for the last four years and have never had an officer stop me or even warn me.

    b) bike boxes do absolutely nothing. yes, im sure there are studies that say otherwise, but there are also studies that show you have a lower chance of getting hit if you’re not wearing a helmet. tyler durden (fight club) summed it up perfectly: the illusion of safety. do not feel emboldened to blaze through a green simply because you are either in a bike lane or you see a bike box – if anything these things seem to almost invite accidents.

    Recommended Thumb up 40

    • spare_wheel May 17, 2012 at 7:07 am

      i don’t know how many times I have seen motorists ignnore the bike box and take a quick right.

      PS: F the mandatory sidepath law.

      Recommended Thumb up 17

    • Chris I May 17, 2012 at 7:29 am

      Bike boxes actually help quite a bit. I use one every day at 57th and Sandy. It’s a great way for me to move up to the front of the pack of cars, and I am now visible for the leading car without having o block the crosswalk. It also prevents cars from turning right one the red light, blocking my safe position.

      However, if I come up to this bike box and traffic is flowing on a green light, I find a slot between two cars and stay there. I do not trust any driver to see me once they are moving, bike box or not.

      Recommended Thumb up 17

      • El Biciclero May 17, 2012 at 9:43 am

        They only help if you come upon a red light and get to stop in the box. If you cruise through an intersection on a green, they do nothing for you.

        Recommended Thumb up 9

      • allison May 17, 2012 at 9:44 am

        I think Bike Boxes work well for stationary vehicle traffic and moving bikes but during a green phase, I don’t know that they do much at all. I’d like to see the studies get more specific about what kind of interactions they improve. I could see getting bikes past right turners who are behind in the queue of one or two through vehicles and preventing those problems but I think it does make you think you’re safe from a car in the through lane on the green phase when you’re not. A big ole truck can’t see that well.

        Recommended Thumb up 5

        • Joseph May 17, 2012 at 9:58 am

          I don’t believe bike boxes are intended to serve any purpose during the green or yellow phases of a traffic signal. They are located in front of the stop line, which is only relevant when the light is (or is changing to) red. It is a queuing area for people on cycles when the light is red, allowing them to enter and clear the intersection before general purpose traffic behind them. They have no function when traffic is moving.

          Recommended Thumb up 6

          • Straybike May 17, 2012 at 6:52 pm

            Agreed the boxes are very good for stopped traffic and are a great improvement over nothing. . They serve as a reminder to car traffic that there is bike traffic on this road, but its fully up to the responsibility of the driver to check and double check when manuevering in these intersections. The wide swing of the right turn to clear the corner with the trailer is decieving. There is nothing a cyclist can do in this situation. My prayers to the family and friends of Kathryn.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

    • was carless May 17, 2012 at 10:28 am

      SE Madison is a special kind of hell.

      Recommended Thumb up 3

  • GlowBoy May 16, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    Wow, very sad to hear. Like Joel, I rode through there just after 9pm and wondered what was going on.

    That is a particularly bad intersection for right hooks. Maybe it’s the distractions of being downtown and having to be more careful to watch for pedestrians or something, but drivers at that corner seem particularly prone to turning right without looking for bikes — despite it having some of the highest bike traffic of any intersection in the city. Drivers also seem to have especially low compliance for not stopping for the bike box there. It seems like more often than not, the driver who ends up first at that light acts as if the bike box doesn’t exist at all.

    I’m pretty convinced that green-painted bike lanes help reduce conflict, but this intersection has made me to continue to wonder about the effectiveness of the bike boxes. I like using them, but driver compliance seems spotty at best.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • GlowBoy May 16, 2012 at 11:48 pm

    Just to clarify, I do NOT agree with the above comment that these intersections seem to invite conflicts and collisions. SW 3rd/Madison has always been bad. It certainly doesn’t seem worse than it was before they laid down the bike box.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • naomi May 17, 2012 at 12:01 am

      try out the bike box on e couch by the bridge if you’d like another example. technically you can use the excuse that the intersection was bad even before the bike box since that’s where bike boxes are placed, dangerous intersections. all they do is confuse drivers – it seems bizarre that it would confuse them seeing as bike boxes make perfect sense to us cyclists but to the average driver who doesn’t ride, they promote confusion. i wish they didn’t, but they do.

      also, the car-lane sized bike lanes downtown are even worse than the typical bike lanes.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

  • Sunny May 17, 2012 at 1:18 am

    This appears to be a version of the right hook where the person on a bike assumed the semi was proceeding straight through as, by necessity of a large turning radius, the semi pulled forward into the intersection and began his turn further into the intersection into the far lane. From an enlarged photo on oregonlive there appears to be a long scratch,perhaps caused by the upright style handlebars of the bike, above the right headlight. KATU shows an up close shot of the helmet cracked on the rear. So the conclusion is she was hit by the front right of the semi and thrown about 10 feet into the crosswalk on 3rd, and after slamming the back of her helmeted head into the pavement, came to rest between the cab and rear wheels, possibly having been run over as indicated by large scuff marks on the tread and sidewall of the front right tire.

    Recommended Thumb up 6

    • wsbob May 17, 2012 at 11:44 am

      “This appears to be a version of the right hook where the person on a bike assumed the semi was proceeding straight through as, by necessity of a large turning radius, the semi pulled forward into the intersection and began his turn further into the intersection into the far lane. …” Sunny

      That could be a likely scenario. I’ll say ‘may’ have assumed. For months, heavy construction has been going on at the building on the southeast corner of the intersection…the federal building, I think. That building may have been the truck’s destination, to off-load materials.

      Trying to visualize, but I’m not sure about this: on some of the long trucks, turn signals mid-span along the truck and trailer’s length may not be very visible. I’m thinking some truck-trailers may not have mid-span turn signals. Right or wrong? So if the turn signals of the truck and trailer are activated just after a road user passes the back end of the truck-trailer proceeding to the front of the truck-trailer, they may not see the truck-trailers turn signals until it has started its’ turn radius.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Dan Christensen May 17, 2012 at 2:28 am

    I knew when I saw the where the truck was stopped what had happened. I drive a Trimet bus and I don’t mind following bikes, The danger is of a right side contact is life and death serious and is magnified by speed differential. Most cyclist understand this but there are times when it seem, like in cars, everyone gets carried away with speed. Reaction times don’t change with speed and though I don’t know what happened here my heart goes out to both drivers.

    Remember just because you can speed by traffic, keep in mind the what if factor and your reaction time. Every person, regardless of right away needs to do a little more than the basics, just incase the other person screws up.

    Lets all of us, hope for the best.

    Drive smart, stay alive, that is the secret.

    Recommended Thumb up 31

    • Opus the Poet May 17, 2012 at 4:40 pm

      Except in this case they would have made no difference as the cyclist was hit by the front of the truck. I’m not an expert on this but I recall from my truck driving days there is a large blind spot to the right front of trucks like these and even the smaller delivery vans based on the same cabs with longer chassis.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Livellie May 17, 2012 at 7:11 am

    My heart goes out to both the rider and the driver. How sad to hear of another right hand turn accident. I’m concerned that the current design of bike lanes create a false sense of safety…especially around the issue of vehicles turning right. These accidents strengthen my belief that I’m safer taking the lane when riding downtown. Every once in a while I get honked at or passed aggressively but so far no one’s decided to run me over…knock on wood!

    Recommended Thumb up 11

  • Jim F. May 17, 2012 at 7:36 am

    Never ever ride next to a truck or bus while it is going through an intersection. That is just crazy.

    Not saying that is what happened here at all — we don’t know yet. Also nothing you can do if a truck or bus chooses to pass you in an intersection, but at least then they are coming up from behind you (not the other way around) and are more apt to see you.

    Recommended Thumb up 10

  • DK May 17, 2012 at 8:00 am

    Get well soon!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • basketlover May 17, 2012 at 8:15 am

    In my city tractor trailer combos have restricted hours of operation in the downtown core.

    Recommended Thumb up 6

    • q`Tzal May 17, 2012 at 9:01 am

      Does that mean than cyclists would have restricted hours of operation as well to accommodate the increased load of large trucks coming in off hours?
      We might call it a “bike cerfew”.

      Your best bet is to completely limit large trucks and require combo truck cargo (which still has to to GET IN to the city) to be offloaded on to larger van type delivery vehicles like these Dodge sprinter type vans. You may notice that this the type of compromise that occurs in Europe, not by choice but because of historically small roads.

      If repeated evidence shows that these large vehicles can not be safely driven in this sort of space then they need to be completely restricted.

      I drive OTR now and and terrified of this exact sort of scenario.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • allison May 17, 2012 at 9:50 am

        Probably not necessary, you’d lower the rates of shared time and thus the rates of collisions and if there was a known time that trucks are around, a cyclist would have the chance to be extra special cautious. I think we’re extra special cautious at night, anyway.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Byron May 17, 2012 at 8:25 am

    I have had a number of close calls where a driver passes me and thinks that they can turn before I get there. As soon as I see someone pass I get ready to slam on my brakes. One solution to this problem is to stop right turns where there are bike lanes. Either that or get rid of bike lanes and just take the lane. It would be much safer, even if it makes drivers upset.

    Recommended Thumb up 9

    • allison May 17, 2012 at 10:05 am

      I haven’t driven much since I got rid of my car October before last. I had forgotten how hard it is to judge speed rates when they vary so much. Of course, I err on the side of caution and get honked at by the people behind me….

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Pete May 17, 2012 at 11:14 am

      True dat. In California bicyclists are expected to merge with right-turning traffic, and I’ve found the best way to do it is to signal and actually merge as if I were in a (very skinny) car. Yes I’ve had people say “use the bike lane!” when I take the lane, but they’re often just ticked because I know they’re turning right and I’ve moved over to prevent them from right-hooking me and they actually had to slow down when they were in the process of speeding up to beat me. Most people though are thankful because you end up letting them take a right on red instead of corking the shared space. OR was looking into changing the law to this way but there was outcry that said it was less safe (which I no longer believe after riding in both places/manners). The bike lane markings are even different in CA to denote the merges (they are solid in OR).

      (The applicable CA law doing this is VC 21202, exception #4, which I had just looked up to settle a disagreement with a friend I ride with who said it was illegal to get out of the bike lane – yes, he’s from OR).

      It sounds like she was already inside of the truck during the turn, and I’ve been there too, sometimes it’s just timing. My heart goes out to her family here, we’ve lost one of our friends.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

  • Joe May 17, 2012 at 8:44 am

    Makes me so upset how cars can just run fokes down these days. slow down! look in side mirrors. GET WELL SOON!

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Jake May 17, 2012 at 8:44 am

    Assume every vehicle is going to turn right and you will almost never have this problem.

    Recommended Thumb up 8

  • Richard May 17, 2012 at 8:54 am

    If you are riding in a bike lane and you are approaching an intersection, you just have to assume that someone is going to make a right turn in front of you. You should never roll through a busy intersection in the bike lane faster than you can stop. I agree with those who say to take the lane–at least until you are through the intersection. Its the only way to keep those right turning cars behind you.

    Recommended Thumb up 9

    • steve scarich May 17, 2012 at 9:44 am

      I agree that this is a crucial strategy to avoiding right hooks…never arrive to the right of a vehicle that ‘might’ be turning at the moment they ‘might’ turn…I have a question about the grade at the subject intersection…is the cyclist going uphill, downhill or level?

      Recommended Thumb up 2

      • Scott May 17, 2012 at 12:51 pm

        Downhill.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Phil Kulak May 17, 2012 at 9:34 am

    If there was any situation where I found myself to the right of a stopped, articulated truck I’d pee myself a little bit and move my bike onto the sidewalk. I hate to say it, but if she got there first, she should have been in the bike box. If the truck was there first, DO NOT STOP TO THE RIGHT OF IT! I’m not judging, or laying blame, but we should all take a lesson from this. Be scared shitless if you ever find yourself stopped to the right of a truck. This seems to be how 80% of all accidents happen. What’s really sad is that it takes some experience as a cyclist to figure all these little things out. It’s tricky to ride a bike safely in congested areas and if you screw up, your get seriously injured or die. I don’t know what to do about it, but it’s a real shame.

    Recommended Thumb up 11

    • Granpa May 17, 2012 at 9:44 am

      I have to agree with Phil. the truck driver may have been wrong and may have performed an illegal maneuver, still the cyclist put herself in a vulnerable situation.

      Lots of cyclists are not very experienced and it is easy to be ignorant of the perils of right hooks or other common driver errors.

      I am the “bike guy” my office and in the bi-weekly office news letter I have a column. This sad event has inspired me to diagram the right hook and inform company cyclists of the danger.

      Recommended Thumb up 5

    • Schrauf May 17, 2012 at 10:04 am

      The vehicles were not stopped prior to collision.

      So the only thing the bike box does in this situaion is to alert the driver of a high bike traffic area, and I suppose remind the cyclist to watch for right hooks, although maybe all it does is provide a false sense of security.

      Recommended Thumb up 3

    • Chris I May 17, 2012 at 10:28 am

      Last week I came up on a large truck like this that was stopped at a red light, with no signal on. Right as I moved up to about his car door, he threw on the turn signal and started moving, but I was able to hop up onto the curb in time. This morning I had a truck indicating a turn in front of me, so I held back and signaled him to turn so I could follow.

      Be very careful around these trucks, because they will kill you. It’s unfortunate that you have to be an experienced cyclist to not get killed by trucks in our city.

      Recommended Thumb up 10

  • Travis May 17, 2012 at 9:45 am

    I will never understand a law not allowing cyclist to take the lane. Bike lanes offer a shield to mediate the difference in speed between cars and bikes. When the speed is nearly the same and on short city blocks they are death traps to cyclist with too much faith. Passing on the right is simply dangerous, mirrors or not.

    Along with signs posting fines for burning through crosswalks, maybe the city / state should do a campaign to educate both motorist and cyclist to the dangers of right-hooks: PSAs and warning signs. Every Tri-Met bus downtown should have the back ad space used to educate –Tri-Met probably owes it to cyclist and pedestrians.

    At the end of it all, one person is at fault, but neither the truck driver or the cyclist were aware of each other. Without blaming the cyclist, why was she not practicing defensive cycling? Answering that question tells the story of how we learn to navigate our commutes on bikes. Its a very different story than how drivers learn to drive. Not all of us have been riding the school of close-calls for ten-twenty years. Some of us are nicked (very) hard the first month out.

    Recommended Thumb up 9

    • Dabby May 18, 2012 at 5:21 pm

      Actually, in this case, the truck would be considered a hazard and therefor allow for a legal abandonment of the bike lane.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Rob May 17, 2012 at 9:46 am

    Ride like you’re invisible and assume that they are gonna turn…

    Recommended Thumb up 11

  • Dave May 17, 2012 at 9:53 am

    For all the people at OLive [OregonLive] crowing about who “wins” when a truck hits a bicyclist, the obvious answer is ‘no one.’

    Exactly. This is what society at large really needs to get their heads around. Nobody wins when our citizens are dying on the roads. This should be instigation for EVERYONE to push road safety, because not only are everyone’s lives at risk (regardless of vehicle), but death on the roads doesn’t just effect the person who dies.

    Law, infrastructure, education – we need to improve all of them quite a bit.

    Recommended Thumb up 15

    • Richard Allan May 17, 2012 at 10:15 am

      I was the one who reported to Jonathan last night about the aftermath of the accident, and trying to get the cyclist’s leg out from under one of the wheels of the truck. I’m heartsick but not surprised that the young woman died. I ache for her family, and for the occupants of the truck (driver and another person).

      I know what they are going through. My oldest sister died in Berkeley in 1978, crushed by a truck in a “right hook” accident while riding her bike. She was 27. The hole in my family was permanent. I’ve thought many times about that driver — he wanted to attend the memorial service for my sister, though my family thought it better that he not come. No one “wins.”

      Recommended Thumb up 13

  • K'Tesh May 17, 2012 at 10:00 am

    My Thoughts and Prayers go out to the families of those involved.

    Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 17, 2012 at 10:04 am

    Just want everyone who’s following this story via the comments, that I’ve posted several updates and photos on this story. Scroll to the end of the post for the latest.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • cara May 17, 2012 at 10:08 am

    Silenced on the night of the Ride of Silence. Comfort and condolences to everyone hurting.

    Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Esther May 17, 2012 at 10:09 am

    What a horrific tragedy. When I ride away from the Portland Building (my partner works there) I always assume every car in front of or next to me is going to turn right there, and act accordingly. Unfortunately that safety measure only works for those who know to use it. We need roads that are designed to actively prevent accidents like these.

    Recommended Thumb up 5

  • Frank May 17, 2012 at 10:10 am

    I hope that the City of Portland is sued and finally stops the bloodbath that occurs becaise of their faulty “bike lane tothe right of a right turn lane” design. Literally, every other traffic professional realizes this is an awful design. Portland clings to it.

    Recommended Thumb up 10

    • Spiffy May 17, 2012 at 10:51 am

      although that wouldn’t matter in this case because the truck wasn’t in a right-turn only lane… and in the cases where the bike lane is to the right of a right-turn only lane (like Broadway west across Williams) then bicycles can legally take the forward motor vehicle lane instead…

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • was carless May 17, 2012 at 10:30 am

    Another tragic victim during the daily Cat-6 race.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • pabstslut May 17, 2012 at 10:47 am

      WTF? This is not an appropriate situation for snide comments. You are implying that her ill advised commuter ‘racing’ is what killed her? Regardless of the exact circumstances she is dead. Have a little respect.

      Recommended Thumb up 17

    • spare_wheel May 17, 2012 at 11:01 am

      what a heartless comment.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/21/women-cyclists-most-accidents

      more cautious riders (and especially women) are at higher risk of being killed by a truck (lorry).

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • q`Tzal May 17, 2012 at 10:01 pm

      Yet another comment showing the need for NEGATIVE votes on comments

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 12:01 pm

        that was pretty crappy comment to throw out there .

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • RH May 17, 2012 at 10:41 am

    There’s probably going to be more semi’s rolling through downtown once Target opens there.
    Very tragic event that has no doubt touched many peoples lives.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • John I. May 17, 2012 at 10:47 am

    A good reminder to sometimes assume that while riding that you are not seen. Just because we have right of way or are in our legal spots doesn’t mean human error wont happen. There have been a number of times when driving its just been hard to see bikes coming. Specially when the sun is low in the sky and your driving towards it, or someone is riding at a fast speed in the daylight with plain clothes on. That concerns me because I ride and feel hyper aware of possible bike traffic. Very sad to hear about this accident. :(

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Kristi Finney-Dunn May 17, 2012 at 10:55 am

    Hearing this just sickens me. More families torn apart. And not just by the crash itself, but by the comments of self-righteous people who just can’t keep their callous and insensitive opinions to themselves or at least confined to their probably like-minded friends. (I’m talking about comments throughout all the media). Kathryn was somebody’s daughter and possibly wife, mother; the driver is somebody’s son, maybe husband and father; and the devastation also impacts other family members/friends, witnesses, responders.

    I don’t know who is to “blame” here for the crash. But I believe that each and every person not seeing this as a tragedy of two human beings, each person spouting off about the scofflaw bike riders or the careless drivers or especially the cars/trucks always win in a conflict with bikes (this doesn’t even take into account any human involvement) is to blame for making a bad situation worse. Don’t the victims in this have enough to deal with? I remember after Dustin’s death being told to not read the comments; of course I ignored that (wise) advice and as a consequence felt even more hurt and angry than I already was. But I was motivated, so I guess that’s something.

    The Ride of Silence was last night. Now there is another name to add to the list of human beings killed while riding bikes. So very sad.

    Please, every single person, just remember that people riding bikes, people driving cars, people walking, are somebody’s relative and somebody’s friend and we must all, individually and together, do the very best WE can on the road to prevent hurting or killing somebody else, no matter who’s “right.”

    Recommended Thumb up 43

    • Schrauf May 17, 2012 at 12:07 pm

      Thank you Kristi.

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • jram May 17, 2012 at 3:12 pm

      Thank you for saying this…

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Aaron May 17, 2012 at 10:58 am

    This is horrible and terribly sad. A tragedy. My thoughts and prayers are with the family of the bicyclist.

    I bike commute daily and I ASSUME that every single car and truck could HIT ME at anytime or point of my ride. I don’t rely on a bike lane, bike box, green light, or any other device that provides “safety” for me while bicycling. I’m glad that these devices exist, but they are not “bumpers” that guarantee my safety.

    Until we start designing/building complete BIKE STREETS (dedicated to bicycling) we’ll continue to read about fellow bicyclist being injured/killed. Seriously, how many people must die before we figure this out?

    Recommended Thumb up 3

  • todd May 17, 2012 at 11:03 am

    rest in peace, kathryn. i didn’t know you, but still feel such loss. https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/77_504119927807_34601124_30673780_5238_n.jpg

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Kirk May 17, 2012 at 11:08 am

    DEAR CITY OF PORTLAND,

    Paint looks pretty, it works most of the time, but there is NOTHING that will stop a multi-ton vehicle from crossing over a painted line. NOTHING. Please, start getting serious with safety on our roads. Physical separation is key……..lives are literally at stake. Other cities in the United States are realizing this, we should and can do better!

    Recommended Thumb up 8

  • Joe May 17, 2012 at 11:16 am

    we have the right to the full lane when needed! cars/trucks need to slow down and use some logic. I’m human not some robot pushing a gas pedal.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Scott May 17, 2012 at 11:17 am

    I’m not in any way placing blame on either party because I don’t know what happened and am not going to speculate.
    I ride through this intersection everyday. I have always wondered how to define who has the right of way at this type of intersection. As I understand it, the right turning vehicle is crossing another lane of traffic (the bike lane) and has to yield to a cyclist.
    If a vehicle is at the intersection with a right turn signal on and I am traveling in the bike lane, how far behind the vehicle does my right of way extend? For example, if we are next each other, I clearly have the right of way. However, what if I am 50′ back? 100′? 200′? a block? Obviously my speed has an affect on this equation.
    I have never seen this question addressed with a legal opinion.
    Practically, if a vehicle is ahead of me and has a turn signal on (or is giving any suggestion that they might turn right), I am not going to pass them until I am sure that they are yielding to me.

    Recommended Thumb up 3

    • Spiffy May 17, 2012 at 11:39 am

      it’s the responsibility of the person changing direction to ensure that their maneuver is safe… this means that they need to account for bikes in the right lane and ensure that that have time to turn in front of the bike and get out of their way, otherwise they need to wait until bike traffic clears and then turn behind them…

      Recommended Thumb up 2

      • Psyfalcon May 17, 2012 at 12:17 pm

        Yes, but those big trucks turns very slowly on tight streets. It is possible there was no cyclist on the entire block when the turn was started. That is a fairly steep slope and bikes can and do go very fast down it.

        Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Aimee May 17, 2012 at 11:25 am

    I recognize that truck from the blog post. It parks *IN* the crosswalk by Starbucks in the South Park blocks every night at 7PM. Totally dangerous.

    Recommended Thumb up 4

    • Chris I May 17, 2012 at 11:36 am

      Action needs to be taken. They need to learn to not create these hazardous situations, one way or another…

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Andyc May 17, 2012 at 11:33 am

    My god. Sheesh. Condolences to everybody involved. Such a tragedy. Can we start protesting, like weekly or something? Careful out there folks.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Spiffy May 17, 2012 at 11:36 am

    “We’re trying to ascertain … why the cyclist didn’t see the truck,” said my source.

    why? what a stupid thing to say…

    there was no obligation on the part of the person on the bike to see the truck… the bike was in its own lane and proceeding straight through with a green light…

    all of the responsibility is on the truck driver to see where they’re turning and not on the bike rider to see where everybody else on the road is going… sure, it’s nice to see things coming at you so you can avoid death by motor vehicle, but language like that can be inflammatory…

    the focus should be on why the truck didn’t see the bicycle and getting the driver permanently off the road… sorry, no mercy for killers…

    Recommended Thumb up 8

    • John May 17, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      As a former truck driver, and life long cyclist I have to say that it’s the drivers fault even if it isn’t. That’s the standard that drivers are held to by their safety departments. Drivers are supposed to have a 6th sense and avoid accidents. Typically it’s the 4 wheelers that don’t respect trucks and cause problems.
      That being said, the right side of the truck, next to the cab and the front of the trailer is a hard spot to see into. Mirrors are adjusted to see the back of the trailer, and unless there are extra mirrors to help look down next to the cab there is no way to see an object there. My truck had the extra mirrors and is was still difficult to see cars in that spot.
      So it’s the drivers fault for not seeing the cyclist enter his blind spot and not keeping track of her as she left (the blind spot).
      We all need to do our part to remain visible and help drivers do their jobs.

      Recommended Thumb up 14

      • Caleb May 17, 2012 at 1:07 pm

        Who actually has a “6th sense”? Perhaps humanity could wise up and stop expecting such things of anybody…including those who expect it of themselves. And maybe we could wise up and stop using laws that simplify conventions to the point where there’s commonly a lack of awareness (whether it occurs intentionally or not) in any individual involved in any group incident.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

        • Joseph May 17, 2012 at 1:28 pm

          Actually, I hold myself to that standard. I spend a ton of energy while driving predicting what people are going to do – or may do – and then acting appropriately. It didn’t take me even ten years of paying attention while driving to get very, very good at this. Now I just consider this part of defensive driving, which is a standard to which we should hold all drivers of all vehicles – or they can just catch a bus if it’s too much trouble to pay attention.

          Recommended Thumb up 7

    • Caleb May 17, 2012 at 1:02 pm

      Spiffy, the police also said they’re trying to ascertain why the trucker didn’t see the cyclist, so I think you might be making a hasty conclusion in considering their words inflammatory.

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • wsbob May 17, 2012 at 1:15 pm

      “…there was no obligation on the part of the person on the bike to see the truck…” Spiffy

      So everyone on the road should just travel about with blinders on? Everyone using the road is obliged to be aware of their surroundings and take precautions accordingly.

      Road users intending to turn right across a lane of traffic do have an obligation to be certain the lane they’re preparing to cross over is clear before commencing their turn; whether or not this is something that happened in this particular collision is a question that remains to be answered.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

      • El Biciclero May 17, 2012 at 2:50 pm

        “So everyone on the road should just travel about with blinders on? Everyone using the road is obliged to be aware of their surroundings and take precautions accordingly.”

        Here again, there is a difference between legal obligation and self-preservation “obligation”. If we were all going to forget about legal obligations, then we’d be stopping at every green light just to make sure that somebody in cross traffic–who had a legal obligation to stop–wasn’t going to run their red light. Cyclists would stop at green lights to make sure that traffic behind them had a big enough gap so they could cross before anybody overtook and turned right in front of them. Pedestrians would never cross the street. Traffic would turn into a lurching mess of hand-waving and uncertainty–collisions would likely increase because nobody (or everybody) assumed the right-of-way and proceeded when it was their “turn”.

        We all assume at various points in our travels (by whatever mode) that others are going to follow the same established rules we are, else very little traffic would ever move for fear that somebody was going to suddenly run into/over them. At what point does the assumption that others are going to follow the rules change from rational to foolish? When somebody breaks the rules and somebody else gets hurt, who is to blame: the rule-breaker, or the one they hurt or killed by their rule-breaking?

        There is a distinction that we must make between these two different types of responsibility. Failure to make that very important distinction is what has resulted in our society at large having a propensity to blame the victims of incidents like this, while at the same time sympathizing with and exonerating the perpetrators.

        Recommended Thumb up 4

        • wsbob May 17, 2012 at 7:45 pm

          El Biciclero, if you’ve drawn conclusions or have made a point with regards to this particular collision and a general obligation all road users have to be aware of their surroundings and take precautions accordingly, in your comment, it’s difficult to make out what that might be.

          In your parting remarks, you speak of perpetrators and victims. Information available at this point, suggests only the latter were involved in this particular collision.

          Being aware of surroundings and taking precautions accordingly is like a basic rule of using the road, but while doing so has got to help, it can’t completely guarantee that collisions will not occur.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • El Biciclero May 22, 2012 at 10:02 am

            Point 1: Truck driver broke the law by not yielding (even if unknowingly); Ms. Rickson, while not breaking any laws, died as a result.

            Point 2: People continue to say, “I would have been more aware.” “I always stay out of the way of trucks.” “She should have been paying more attention.” “She should have never passed to the right of a truck.” “Big trucks have blind spots.” “The driver probably couldn’t see her.”… and on and on. Comments like this make it sound like she got herself run over, and the truck driver couldn’t help it.

            Point 3: We should not confuse the legal obligation of the truck driver to a) make sure his vehicle was suitable for use downtown, and b) follow the law by yielding to a rider in a bicycle lane, with the self-preservation instinct of a cyclist that would, when coupled with enough knowledge and experience, serve to avoid collisions that might otherwise happen as a result of the carelessness of someone else.

            Recommended Thumb up 2

    • was carless May 17, 2012 at 1:36 pm

      This is so tragic. Yet another victim…

      Biking around big rigs is super scary. Everyone, be very careful – slow down, watch the vehicle’s front tires to see if and where he is turning, and don’t even both to make eye contact – you should be caring if the vehicle is moving across your lane, not if the driver is looking in your general direction (they can always miss you while staring right at you).

      Remember, those paint stripes aren’t Jersey barriers. Make sure your brakes are in good working order (clean them, replace the pads) – they can save your life.

      Another bit of advice from defensive driving class – try to keep an “out” in case of an emergency. Like if a vehicle is going to crash into you, can you jump the curb? Can you stop in time? Can you change lanes to avoid a collision?

      Recommended Thumb up 4

    • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 12:09 pm

      Sorry Spiffy, but your logic is a bit askew on this one, IMO. I am surprised a bit, seeing how most of the time you seem to have a sweet outlook. It is my belief, that BOTH parties involved in this made HUGE mistakes. Although I was mad as hell that the 11 yr old in Vancouver has struck and killed, I would never call the bus driver a “killer”. Emotions run high around this type of event, but I find your call to judgement rash.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Sunny May 17, 2012 at 11:39 am

    Airzound. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x56igBIJHX8 http://www.cyclociel.com/pieces_detachees/photos-accessoires/airzound_1.jpg
    Awesome and cheap (around 20 bux). Refilled by bike pump. Lightweight. City riding feels much safer.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Perry May 17, 2012 at 2:40 pm

      Be prepared for very negative response from drivers and from other people in the immediate area where you use it. Peoples first reaction to being shocked is often anger…

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • Sunny May 17, 2012 at 6:54 pm

        That’s never been my experience — in fact some have expressed appreciation or are apologetic. I don’t know how you can doubt an air horn when drivers are cocooned in the luxury of their sound deadening glass and steel cages with no way for bicycles to alert of their presence. There’s a reason some states require auditory devices on bicycles and why all states require a functioning car horn. This all assumes one isn’t blasting the horn out of anger and being an ass-hat but is using it as a tool for communication between road users, as intended.

        Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Donna May 17, 2012 at 9:06 pm

      I’ve avoided 2 right hooks with mine.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 12:24 pm

      It is ILLEGAL to honk in the MAJOR METROPOLIS known as Paris, France ! And to the best of my knowledge, they have one of the LOWEST cycling fatality rates in the world. What is it with American cyclists with 900,000 lumen LED blinding lights, and other unregulated tawdry gew gaw’s that do nothing but annoy other’s and ad so little to actual safety ? Germany has very strict laws on the design element of cycling light’s and for good reason. Have fun with your air horn! If you have to use it, it is probably too late.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Sunny May 18, 2012 at 1:41 pm

        Paris is much denser so drivers compensate with more awareness. I’d wager the truck driver would have been more aware had it been rush hour with a horde of bikes riding down Madison. As it was, he was making restaurant deliveries after hours to avoid heavy downtown traffic.

        Lights are aimed incorrectly if they’re blinding oncoming traffic. Car lights can also be aimed improperly.

        A bicycle horn can be preemptively tapped twice to signal its presence when other vehicles have obstructed vision, such as happened here. Bike bells are an alternative but are too quiet in many instances.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Zaphod May 17, 2012 at 11:48 am

    There’s a time/place to discuss how this sort of tragedy can be avoided in the future. For me, at this moment, I’m simply feeling sad for her death.

    Recommended Thumb up 25

    • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 17, 2012 at 11:51 am

      I absolutely agree Zaphod. We’ll have plenty of time to discuss policies, preventions/solutions/fault/details…. for now let’s just let it sink in.

      Recommended Thumb up 6

    • Opus the Poet May 17, 2012 at 10:27 pm

      True for me as well. I think the most fitting memorial would be to devise a way to prevent this from ever happening again.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Steve B May 17, 2012 at 11:49 am

    A horrific tragedy and a life taken too soon. My heart is with Kathryn’s family and friends right now.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Joe May 17, 2012 at 11:54 am

    Stick together help eachother when out there. I’m just so sad today its really hard to just let it go. I have lost many friends.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • TonyH May 17, 2012 at 11:56 am

    So, after reading SHIFT mail, we meet at the intersection tomorrow, friday afternoon, 5:30?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Roberta May 17, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    I’m 62 and a seasoned bike rider. In my youth I rode Hwy 101 through Malibu and Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach. The highway and city streets were wide. But I knew how risky it was. Mostly I rode my bike for fun along Venice Beach. I always crossed a street walking my bike. Yet I never wore a helmet. When I moved to Portland I hung up my bike. That was 1973. The streets are too narrow. The streets are unsafe.

    My bike is still hanging in my garage.

    To “Spiffy” – attacking the truck driver is unfair. Why can’t you put yourself in his shoes? He’s not a “killer”.

    I think the current bike trend is dangerous, reckless, and influencing young people to put their lives at risk. This trend also divides Portland between “us” and “them.” I’m tired of it.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

    • Dave May 17, 2012 at 1:06 pm

      I would say rather that the current use of automobiles is un-safe and endangering the life of all the citizens of our city (both ones who are driving, and those riding bicycles or walking).

      Recommended Thumb up 12

    • Dave May 17, 2012 at 1:09 pm

      And it’s primarily the media creating the us vs. them battle, not the people riding the bicycles.

      Recommended Thumb up 9

      • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 12:32 pm

        Sorry Dave, but that sword cuts both ways. There are some very vehement cyclist around, some of them being my close friends and perhaps your neighbor.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 12:36 pm

          … and btw… Lets just show up Friday afternoon in support of this lovely life our community has lost.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dave May 18, 2012 at 12:38 pm

          I agree, there are people who ride bicycles causing problems, but in terms of culture as a whole, I think the media does much more to create the bikes vs. cars controversy than most people who are riding bicycles.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 1:40 pm

            True, I wont argue that with ya, I’m just sayin’ when people hear this type of stuff, especially if it arrives off of a springboard such as this blog, assumptions will fester.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

    • spare_wheel May 17, 2012 at 1:28 pm

      i worry more about my significant others highway commute than she worries about my bike commute.

      just sayin’

      Recommended Thumb up 6

    • wsbob May 17, 2012 at 1:45 pm

      Roberta…get your bike down off the hooks and start riding again. Please. You’ve got some good riding years to go. In addition, you’d be setting an inspiring example for generations following yours. Seasoned senior people on bikes are part of building a healthy biking environment.

      As an element for constructive change, seniors have a voice and a strength in numbers and resources that smart politicians and bureaucrats likely would generally agree, is not wise to ignore.

      Whether senior people in greater numbers, regularly traveling the streets on bikes would have had a bearing on this particular collision, I couldn’t say. No doubt though, their presence on the road in greater numbers on bikes would inevitably bring pressure to bear on leaders to push for infrastructure that would allow safer travel by bike on streets and roads.

      Recommended Thumb up 8

  • CK May 17, 2012 at 1:05 pm

    I’d like to see a police sting at this (and other intersections) looking specifically for failure to signal when making a turn. I ride through this intersection almost every day and despite precautions I take I’ve nearly been hooked by drivers who fail to signal prior to turning (signaling while you turn because you see that you just about hooked a cyclist does not count as signaling).

    I’ve begun videotaping my bike rides specifically because of intersections like this one and drivers inability to signal when turning. It’s not a courtesy, it’s legally required.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Joe May 17, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    I will not give up on riding, it will feel like I’m giving up on the youth and future, human power!

    Recommended Thumb up 4

  • Jamie May 17, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Take a look at the immediately-after photos on Joni’s blog. In the top picture it looks like the driver of the truck is the obviously distraught man with the yellow vest squatting with his head in his hand with a woman consoling him. I think the other bigger guy in front of him is his passenger/co-worker because the two men are wearing similar clothes and, if you look in the cab of the truck, there’s a another yello vest draped over the passenger seat. If that’s the case, I wonder if the passenger didn’t notice her coming alongside. Tragic. :(

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Richard Allan May 17, 2012 at 1:48 pm

      Yes, that’s the driver being consoled and his co-worker standing. The man kneeling next to Kathryn (in the background) called 911 and stayed on while emergency services were on their way. I’d just arrived down SW Madison on my bike (I didn’t see the accident occur) and another cyclist (a paramedic) arrived seconds later. He knew what to do, but I don’t think anything could have saved her. Just horrible.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Michael O'Leary May 17, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    From Pedal Power: A legal Guide for Oregon Bicyclists 6th Edition (2008) p. 59

    http://www.stc-law.com/bicycle.html

    ORS 811.050 Failure to yield to rider on bicycle lane; penalty:

    (1) A person commits the offense of failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane if their person is operating a motor vehicle and the person does not yield the right of way to a person on a bicycle, electric assisted bicycle, electric assistive mobility device, moped, motor assisted scooter or motorized wheelchair upon a bicycle lane.

    (2) This section does not require a person operating a moped to yield the right of way to a bicycle or motor assisted scooter if the moped is operated on a bicycle lane in the manner provided under ORS 811.440.

    (3) The offense described in this section, failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane, is a Class B traffic violation.”

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 17, 2012 at 1:41 pm

      Mike,

      It’s great to have that law, but a law is only as powerful as the enforcement and — more importantly — its interpretation in court. As we saw with Tracey Sparling, a judge found that the man in the truck couldn’t have seen her, therefore there was no bicycle to yield to .. and therefore the truck operator was not found liable.

      Recommended Thumb up 12

  • Rob May 17, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    This is so sad. Great condolence to her family and friends.

    It is time to make a formal agreement with the City of Portland in code to maintain permanent ghost bike memorials including downtown, where some individuals and businesses may be uncomfortable seeing them. They are a good reminder for us all.

    Recommended Thumb up 4

  • esther c May 17, 2012 at 2:48 pm

    I think the comment about not allowing these behemoths in our urban cores is really the only solution. Either smaller trucks for final destination delivery or special early morning exceptions for these trucks. Between the hours of 5 and 7 am or something.

    Not only was this poor woman crushed to death but the drivers life as most likely been ruined. He was sent out on an impossible assignment by his employer, to drive a semi trailer safely in an urban environment.

    Recommended Thumb up 7

  • Jackie May 17, 2012 at 2:49 pm

    My heart aches for Kathryn and those she loved and who loved her. Let’s do what we can to keep each other safe.

    Recommended Thumb up 5

  • Henry Underwood May 17, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    I was involved in an accident at the same turn about 6 months ago. I got a right hook from a pickup. Fortunately, I was not seriously injured but it was extremely traumatic. Hearing this has been giving me the chills. Hopefully there will be a good turnout tomorrow to bring some attention to this dangerous intersection.

    Recommended Thumb up 3

  • JRB May 17, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    I have been unable to get Kathryn Rickson off my mind for most of the day. My deepest sympathies to her friends and family. My spirits were lifted some when I left my office to ride to my weekly lunchtime ultimate game and saw many people on bikes downtown. My thanks to Jonathan and others for their tireless efforts to make cycling safer and more accessible in Portland.

    Kathryn’s death shows how far we have to go, but I am heartened because when I look around me and see more and more people out on bicycles every year (I’ve been a bike commuter since ’93), I know this is a struggle that we must and will win.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Chris May 17, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    Not a scratch but rather a seam between two panels used to form the shape of the hood.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • FBW May 17, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    I found the following curious, “As is standard procedure, a citation has not been issued in this collision. The PPB will hand over the investigation to the District Attorney and the DA will decide if criminal charges are appropriate.” Is this because the victim died?

    A few months ago my husband was in a very serious life threatening accident at SW Madison & SW 2nd, a block from where the woman died. The cops delivered a citation to his room in ICU (where I found it). They told me it was standard procedure to issue a citation right away in cases where someone is hurt. In my husband’s case the only witnesses seem to have been a cop and the vehicle involved so perhaps it was easy for them to determine who was at fault right away, we are not sure, because of course my husband doesn’t remember the accident. (note: I was told by the investigating officer over the phone there were two “very reliable” witnesses whose interviews were notably absent from the accident report.)

    I don’t want to detract from this young lady’s tragedy, but based on my family’s experience I’m confused by the Police Bureau’s decision to not issue a citation.

    Recommended Thumb up 5

    • Schrauf May 17, 2012 at 9:41 pm

      A citation is issued as soon as fault is determined. Sometimes that is on the scene, sometimes that is days or weeks later. A citation is not issued on the scene if the investigation is not complete because a premature citation can make it difficult to make a later charge stick. But I’m not an attorney, I just play one on BikePortland.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • dan May 17, 2012 at 5:33 pm

    Condolences to Kathryn’s family and friends, may she rest in peace. Why do we tolerate infrastructure that creates these accidents?

    Recommended Thumb up 2

    • spare_wheel May 17, 2012 at 10:18 pm

      its not just infrastructure its also the lack of legal liability.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • jim May 17, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    This is a sad time for everybody involved.
    For what it’s worth- Truck drivers are the best drivers on the road, many drive a million miles with no incidents. I would put cab drivers on the other end of the spectrum. There are times when we all are too complacent and don’t mind our suroundings. I think when it’s our time, things happen.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Sarah May 17, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    The issue here is not the “bike box.” Like people have said, those are intended to help bikes stay safe when they reach a red light.

    The issue is that there is a BIKE LANE on this street, that had a bicyclist traveling in it, and a truck driver failed to yield to the bike when making a right turn.

    Oregon law is very clear that vehicular traffic must yield to bicycles in a bicycle lane when making a right turn. http://www.stc-law.com/bike_right_turn.html

    The fact that it was a large truck with potential “blind spots” does not excuse not knowing what is in your path when turning. Before turning right drivers must check their mirrors for the proper length of time to make sure no bikes have cruised into their blind spot while they were looking left.

    All said, it is terribly sad for everyone involved & it is a mistake I could have made as either the driver or the cyclist. There are potentially dozens of times a day in our commutes when we might get distracted or rushed to make a turn. Or when as a bicyclist we might misjudge a motorist’s next move and continue through an intersection on our bikes when in fact the driver didn’t see us.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Jeff Butts May 18, 2012 at 2:13 am

    I hope they paint the bike white and put it on the corner. That’s what they do in Missoula, MT and it’s a great remembrance and reminder. This is so very sad. My heart goes out the family.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • GlowBoy May 18, 2012 at 10:21 am

      We often do that here in Portland too. I hope that we do create some sort of memorial here.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Supercourse May 18, 2012 at 7:04 am

    Both driver and cyclist could have avoided this ever happening……….You have this same choice every time you go out there. I seldom see other cyclist looking for blinkers, or trying to contact a driver in some way. A drew drop slips into the shinning sea. So sad.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • esther c May 18, 2012 at 10:26 am

    The cyclist could have avoided this if she stopped at every corner to see if someone was turning right. It really wasn’t her duty to stop and yield the right of way in case someone wanted to turn right in front of her.

    But imagine the scene. The truck, making a tight turn like that would have to have pull over the the left then come to nearly a complete stop. First when it pulled over to the left she would have thought the driver saw her and was giving her more room in the bike lane. Then as it came to an almost complete stop she would think the driver was waiting his turn, after she had cleared the intersection as the law requires. She would have no reason to think he was getting ready to mow her down.

    What is of interest, did the driver see her and not know it was his duty to stop or did he not see her. Perhaps that is what they’re waiting on for the citation. Perhaps they want to interview him and if he says “I didn’t see her” they’ll let him off. You know how we cyclists just keeping popping up out of nowhere, and drivers have no choice but to mow us down.

    Anytime there is a fatality the driver is tested for drugs and alcohol so they may also be waiting for those results before final charges are pressed just as a formality.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • BURR May 18, 2012 at 11:29 am

    A ghost bike is present at that intersection as of this morning.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Tasha May 18, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    I feel so sad for both the family of the cyclist and the truck driver. The pic of him kneeling shows how distraught he is. As much as we want to place fault one way or the other, I am hesitant. Life is not so black and white and I doubt this situation was either. All we can give is compassion towards those who are suffering…

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • SamK May 18, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    It’s sad that the cyclist did not walk away from this death trap.

    I’m not saying this is what happened to this cyclist, but as a cyclist, I see other cyclist willingly position themselves in death traps at intersections. If I’m stopped at an intersection but intend to cycle straight through the intersection, I’ll position myself either on the left side of the lane if I’m first in line, or behind the left side of the vehicle if I’m not first to the stop bar.

    Even when I’m behind the vehicle, other cyclist will move to the stop bar, totally in the blind spot of the motorist – not a worry in the world – and totally in the way of the first vehicle from making a safe right turn on red.

    In my opinion, I do not see consistent defensive cycling skills displayed by cyclists.

    To Kristen’s family, great sorrow at this time.

    And to the semi driver, there needs to be a better way to complete that turn without assuming everyone understands your veer to the left will be followed by a quick right turn. No one should die because of a large truck making a right turn. How about stopping for a few seconds once you are in a position to look at your right side mirror? You will probably find motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians in your blind spot, caught by surprise by your tricky maneuver.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 5:01 am

    Just a couple thoughts —

    When the city installed green Bike Boxes in 2008, it was in response to right hook fatalities.

    Bike Boxes, however, were designed to allow bicyclists to queue up at the front of a line of cars. They were never designed to prevent right hooks.

    I was always a bit unclear as to why they were promoted as a safety improvement for right hooks — the only right hook that it prevents is a “sweep” hook when the bicyclist is stopped and a vehicle sweeps them down as it makes a right turn. Sure, that’s an improvement, but it’s no protection against the conventional right hook like this one, when bicycle and vehicle are both moving.

    Ted Buehler

    Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 5:02 am

    I haven’t scrolled through the other comments, but here is an Oregonian graphic that visually shows the difference between Oregon traffic code and other states.

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/multimedia/2007/10/right_of_way_animation.html

    It allows bikes to move much more freely through downtown, but it sets bicyclists up for more dangerous right hook crashes.

    Ted Buehler

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • spare_wheel May 22, 2012 at 7:22 am

      Thanks for posting this. Oregon’s traffic code is clearly flawed.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 12:47 pm

        I’m a fan of “The Oregon Procedure”.

        While it creates “extra work” for motorists to check another spot before turning, it lets bike traffic move freely and smoothly through downtown.

        Without it bikes would be darting in and out of the bike lane as right turning cars wait for pedestrians to clear. And have cars cutting them off moving into the bike lane. I suspect that there would be just as many serious crashes with cars occupying bike lanes, and it would be hard to make good time on a bike. Imagine riding from Burnside to Market on SW Broadway if every car making a right turn used the bike lane?

        A huge safety improvement can be gained by having bicyclists turn on their flashing headlight during daytime riding.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • are May 22, 2012 at 1:24 pm

          or bikes would be merging into the travel lane as they approach the intersection, which is what you should be doing anyway, and are clearly permitted to do if there is no striped bike lane.

          Recommended Thumb up 1

          • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 2:54 pm

            are — it’s hard to merge into stopped traffic, though.

            In the SW Broadway case, a bike can make better time through the corridor than a car because it’s not in gridlock.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

    • wsbob May 22, 2012 at 2:27 pm

      As an accurate depiction of how the California procedure for right turns across bike lanes should work, that animation has a lot to be desired. Car comes too close to the bike. There was reference to the Cali procedure in a bikeforums thread yesterday. Word is that Cali law allows road users to merge into the bike lane 200′-400′ in advance of the turn.

      The animation’s depiction of the Oregon procedure is fair, I suppose, although, from a technical perspective, the animation is moving too fast, perhaps giving people that watch it, a wrong impression about the correct way to make the turn.

      If it does, how the Cali procedure offers a safer turn than Oregon’s procedure, isn’t clear. Potential for right hooks exist in both. In the Cali procedure, the potential for the right hook exists along a much greater distance in advance of the eventual turn.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • El Biciclero May 22, 2012 at 3:59 pm

        Heh–well there’s a reason to love “door zone” bike lanes; I doubt any driver would want to merge into one 200′ prior to a turn–it’s too scary (yet they are somehow OK for cyclists to use…). Also, aren’t Portland’s blocks only about 250′? In places like downtown, with low speeds, it would seem that adopting the “California Rule” would be almost exactly equivalent to replacing all bike lanes with sharrows (or nothing), while continuing to allow bikes to pass on the right “when safe to do so”.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • are May 22, 2012 at 4:20 pm

          which is kinda how i already ride

          Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 5:12 am

    “The PPB suspects that the cab of the truck likely moved to the left just prior to making the right (to go south on 3rd).”

    This is the improper way for the truck driver to make this turn. It appear that he killed the bicyclist because he made a “Jug Handle Turn” rather than a “Buttonhook Turn”.

    See page 6-3, figure 6.4 in the Oregon Commercial Driver Manual
    http://www.odot.state.or.us/forms/dmv/36.pdf

    This would be part of Truck Driving 101, I would imagine…

    One way to potentially make the roads safer is if you see trucks making Jug Handle Turns, especially downtown, see if you can get the “Hows My Driving” phone # off them and give them a call… Another way would be to ask city officials to educate truck drivers.

    Ted Buehler

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • wsbob May 22, 2012 at 1:56 pm

      “The PPB suspects that the cab of the truck likely moved to the left just prior to making the right (to go south on 3rd).” maus/bikeportland ?

      “…It appear that he killed the bicyclist because he made a “Jug Handle Turn” rather than a “Buttonhook Turn”. …” Ted Buehler

      Are you sure that quote…I think it’s maus’s from his bikeportland story…contains enough information to make a distinction as to whether the driver of the truck made a jug handle or a button hook turn? At the moment, I’m not able to download the entire Oregon Commercial Driver’s Manual to see the page you’re referring to.

      Even if the button hook turn method doesn’t involve a move to the left prior to the turn, I expect that in both types of turn maneuvers, which in this case would have been to make a right turn…if the driver was proceeding according to required procedure, he would have had his turn signals activated before beginning whichever of the two turn types he had selected to use for his turn.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 4:31 pm

        wsbob — moving to the left before turning right is the definition of a “Jug Handle Turn”

        A scanned and posted the relevant info from the Oregon Commercial Driver Manual to my flickr page.

        http://www.flickr.com/photos/11599639@N03/7252294246/in/photostream

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • wsbob May 23, 2012 at 12:33 am

          Ted…thanks for posting the page of the two types of turns from the Oregon Commercial Driver Manual. Much easier for some of us to view than by having to download the entire manual.

          “…It appear that he killed the bicyclist because he made a “Jug Handle Turn” rather than a “Buttonhook Turn”. …” Ted Buehler

          I’ve got to say I think that kind of statement, which seems to want to reduce the sequence of events that led to this collision, to a type of turn, is a big obstacle to efforts needing to be made to determine reasons why the collision occurred and to determine practical ways to avoid this kind of collision in future.

          There’s much I’d like to know about that sequence of events. Also, how much and what types of investigation have or will be conducted to try determine how the collision occurred, and what the findings of the investigations are.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Ted Buehler May 23, 2012 at 1:37 pm

            wsbob wrote
            “I’ve got to say I think that kind of statement… is a big obstacle to efforts”

            Fair enough. I wrote it on the run, my main point was to introduce the instructions given by ODOT into the crash analysis.

            So, to restate,
            * the driver, as per an unofficial PPB statement, veered left before turning right. According to ODOT, this is an improper turn technique that has a family of safety risks, one of which is sending incorrect information to vehicles who may be passing on the right as to your future directional movements.
            From the Oregon Commercial Driver Manual
            Single page:
            http://www.flickr.com/photos/11599639@N03/7252294246/in/photostream
            Whole document
            http://www.odot.state.or.us/forms/dmv/36.pdf

            * the driver, evidently, failed to check his right mirror for bicyclists overtaking on the right. This is a failure of situational awareness as directed in the Oregon Driver Manual. You are always required to check for bicyclists overtaking on the right when making a right turn through a bike lane.
            From the Oregon Driver Manual, p. 38-39
            Single page
            http://www.flickr.com/photos/11599639@N03/4946027041/
            Whole document
            http://www.odot.state.or.us/forms/dmv/37.pdf

            How is this? Does this meet your guidance for contributing information to the discussion but not jumping to conclusions?

            Ted Buehler

            Recommended Thumb up 1

            • wsbob May 23, 2012 at 6:32 pm

              “…the driver, as per an unofficial PPB statement, veered left before turning right. According to ODOT, this is an improper turn technique that has a family of safety risks, one of which is sending incorrect information to vehicles who may be passing on the right as to your future directional movements. …”

              I would agree that the veering left part of the jug handle type turn has the potential to send incorrect information to vehicles…”. Although, I think it’s important to keep in mind that other details, depending on the circumstances of road users in traffic, could counter incorrect information arising from the left veer of the jug handle; for example, activated turn signals and the fact that the vehicle veering is a very long truck and trailer.

              “…the driver, evidently, failed to check his right mirror for bicyclists overtaking on the right. …” Ted Buehler

              This appears to be an unfounded conclusion. Whether the driver checked his right mirror or not…whether he checked the right mirror at the period of time or moment when Kathryn Rickson on her bike was visible in the right mirror or other mirrors, out of whatever blind spots the vehicle may have…whether the driver’s helper…(unofficial word is he had one.) adequately appraised him of the presence of Kathryn on her bike regarding her proximity to the truck…these are just a few of the many questions raised by this collision to which answers haven’t been provided to this weblog.

              Investigators will consider all of those types of questions and more, I expect. At least, I hope they will. Collision reconstruction scenarios too.

              Ted…thanks for the effort at clarification. I don’t know that you’ve rushed to assume something without knowing for certain its true. Maybe a bit more care in phrasing observations is what I tend to look for.

              One last thing:

              “…but the logic presented in the OCDM on turns states that jug handle turns result in this type of crash. …” Ted Buehler

              I don’t have the OCDM right before me to check, but I’ve got a feeling it doesn’t, or I hope it doesn’t say what you’ve paraphrased. More accurate might be something such as: ‘…jug handle turns can contribute to this type of crash.’.

              Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Ted Buehler May 22, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    wsbob — yes, I may have overstated my case that the bicyclist wouldn’t have been killed had the driver done a buttonhook turn, but the logic presented in the OCDM on turns states that jug handle turns result in this type of crash.

    Of course, since its in municipal code that bicyclists have the right of way in the bike lane, and right turning vehicles need to yield, then the cause-effect isn’t quite as clear. But it’s an obvious breach of conventional “body language communication” to move your vehicle to the left and then turn right.

    See also, though ODOT’s instructions on making a right turn — always look for bicycles overtaking you on the right.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/11599639@N03/4946027041/

    Ted Buehler

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • El Biciclero May 23, 2012 at 9:37 am

      “Of course, since its in municipal code that bicyclists have the right of way in the bike lane, and right turning vehicles need to yield…”

      That’s in ORS, not just Portland municipal code. Bicyclists in Salem and Eugene and anywhere in Oregon have the right of way in a bike lane.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Ted Buehler May 23, 2012 at 1:37 pm

        El B — thanks for the clarification.

        Ted Buehler

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • John May 24, 2012 at 8:43 am

    I’ve been over to the intersection twice to try and understand what happened. Something I’ve not seen mentioned in the dialog is that the bike lane on 3rd is a “suicide lane”. It’s not against the curb but left of the right turn lane. A bicyclist turning off of Madison has to swing out wide to get into the bike lane on 3rd. I think the layout of the bike lanes in this intersection puts bicyclists in a very dangerous position with respect to right turning vehicles.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • tony October 1, 2012 at 8:24 am

    First this is a very Very tragic event. The best that can happen now is lessons learned. It seems the cyclist was Initially travelling in the right lane of traffic(based on traffic video) when the truck turned right . The witnesses in a car behind the truck said the cyclist passed them “at a good clip” in the bike lane the truck was already making the right turn.
    Seems The cyclist used the car lane and Moved to the bike lane To pass slow traffic And overlooked the wide turn the truck was making until it was too late.. The event was tragic but the truck driver was not at fault.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

- Daily bike news since 2005 -
BikePortland.org is a production of
PedalTown Media Inc.
321 SW 4th Ave, Ste. 401
Portland, OR 97204

Powered by WordPress. Theme by Clemens Orth.
Subscribe to RSS feed


Original images and content owned by Pedaltown Media, Inc. - Not to be used without permission.