PDA

View Full Version : PDOT Bicycle Safety Report


Coyote
10-27-2007, 06:55 AM
The PDOT safety report on Commissioner Adam’s web site lists “Cyclist Merged in to Travel Lane” as the most common fatal crash, with 7 fatalities from 1995 to 2006. However, the report fails to examine this type of accident at all. I am having trouble figuring out what this type of accident is, and I do not understand why it was not examined. Are these crashes, cyclists moving left without looking?

http://www.commissionersam.com/files/Improving%20Bicycle%20Safety%20in%20Portland%20102 607.pdf

Attornatus_Oregonensis
10-27-2007, 10:05 AM
You're right: You can't tell from the report. But my guess is the same as yours. Note that the un-numbered figure on p. 6 states that "2 were merging from sidewalk," which seems to support this interpretation.

I can see why they wouldn't discuss in depth potential measures to address the problem, as there is not much that can be done -- but they do discuss measures to prevent running stop signs (education & engineering), which is also not easy to prevent.

Interesting that, for all the talk you hear about cyclists running stop signs, that was the cause of 18 of 221 (8.1%) of investigated crashes and motorists running stop signs was the cause of 15 of 221 (6.8%) of investigated crashes. With a three-crash difference over five years of data, it seems like both groups have a problem with running stop signs.

donnambr
10-27-2007, 10:17 AM
I don't know where her figures came from, but I was recently at a bike safety presentation where a BTA staffer said 20% of motor vehicle drivers make complete, legal stops at stop signs, and 12% of bicyclists do the same. I'd like to know how those numbers were arrived at, as they seemed very interesting to me.

Attornatus_Oregonensis
10-27-2007, 03:42 PM
I don't know where her figures came from, but I was recently at a bike safety presentation where a BTA staffer said 20% of motor vehicle drivers make complete, legal stops at stop signs, and 12% of bicyclists do the same. I'd like to know how those numbers were arrived at, as they seemed very interesting to me.

I live at the corner of SE Fifteenth Ave and Umatilla St, on the on-street section of the Springwater through Sellwood. This intersection is a school zone, with the Sellwood Middle School on the SE corner. I occasionally sit outside and count stops by cyclists and automobiles. Those numbers sound about right to me.

I'm sure they arrived at these numbers through counts as well.

Coyote
10-28-2007, 07:46 AM
I wonder how PDOT differentiated Cyclist Merged into Traffic lane from Motorist Overtaking Cyclist? It would seem that both of these categories could be combined into a single category Cyclist Rear-Ended. I don’t think that the difference is merely semantic. The first category implies that the cyclist was at fault, the second implies that the motorist was at fault. My limited knowledge of who is at fault in a traffic accident is that if you hit a vehicle from behind, you are at fault.

BTW, I disagree that little can be done about these types of accidents. Community education and outreach will yield results that engineering and enforcement will not.

Attornatus_Oregonensis
10-28-2007, 07:55 AM
I wonder how PDOT differentiated Cyclist Merged into Traffic lane from Motorist Overtaking Cyclist? It would seem that both of these categories could be combined into a single category Cyclist Rear-Ended. I don’t think that the difference is merely semantic. The first category implies that the cyclist was at fault, the second implies that the motorist was at fault. My limited knowledge of who is at fault in a traffic accident is that if you hit a vehicle from behind, you are at fault.

BTW, I disagree that little can be done about these types of accidents. Community education and outreach will yield results that engineering and enforcement will not.

I do agree that education could be effective, I just meant that there are a dearth of specific engineering solutions that can be applied to ameliorate these collisions.

Also, I don't think it's safe to assume that in either category the cyclist was necessarily hit from behind. My guess (again, a guess) is that the differentiation between categories comes from the investigator's determination as to which vehicle was changing lanes. If it's all happening in the same lane, then it probably turns on a determination of fault.

You should ask the people at PDOT this question. I've found them pretty responsive.