Dad Hits Cyclist in Crosswalk

[tvhwy]

Originally Posted by ME 2

However, given the location it is still unclear to me whether she had a legal right to cross as a cyclist there. It is right on the border. Can anyone clarify whether a cyclist can legally ride on a cross walk if they are crossing Naito from Waterfront Park?

Per Portland Ordinance 16.70.320E, the southern border of the prohibition on sidewalk riding is at Jefferson Street. Clay is south of Jefferson, so the cyclist would have been in her right to be on the sidewalk there.

[scdurs]

Originally Posted by hydrogeek

Sounds like everything has worked out in the end but what really bothers me is the angry mob mentality that seems to be reported around every bike vs. auto crash recently. People need to help first and reserve their judgment of guilt. You are only making matters worse by being combative.

I totally agree with you on that point. The angry mob mentality does nothing to further relations between bicyclists and motorists. Both parties apparently were treating each other with respect, so why did uninvolved passers-by need to stir up trouble? If you want to make another front page story, then that's how you do it, but it doesn't do the cycling community any good.

Steve

[Haven_kd7yct]

Man, I had a huge long post all typed up about the mob mentality of the uninvolved passerbys, but the intertubes ate it.

Thank goodness, though, because it would have riled up a bunch of people.

So I'll be brief: uninvolved people, don't call 911 and get the fire, police, and medical teams on their way unless you KNOW that they are needed. Hey, here's a thought: ASK if 911 needs to be called. ASK if the people involved need assistance.

Sounds like this was a really low-speed incident, and that injuries would have been way less than, say, K'tesh's injuries. Let's compare apples to apples, and pine nuts to pine nuts, eh?

[K'Tesh]

Originally Posted by Haven_kd7yct

Sounds like this was a really low-speed incident, and that injuries would have been way less than, say, K'tesh's injuries. Let's compare apples to apples, and pine nuts to pine nuts, eh?

The guy who hit me went from dead stop to me on hood in less than 20 feet... I wasn't going fast at all either..

I'd say that was a really low-speed incident.

[wsbob]

Beelnite, you did a great job recounting your Dad's experience.

I frequently notice that when people pull their cars up to intersections like that for a right turn...they'll stop, first look right for any pedestrians, then turn their head left as they look for a break in the stream of cars coming towards them.

That's all fine, but once they do get a break in the traffic, it's not uncommon for them to put the car in motion and begin their right turn before looking again to the right to see if anyone has shown up since they first looked to the right (with long signal changes, if you're trying to turn on the red, you could be whipping you're head back and forth quite a few times before you get a break in traffic...road users get fatigued, and they don't always do that like they should...my personal theory on that). Also, when traffic is really intense, looking away for a couple seconds could mean the driver misses their slot in the traffic, another probable reason they don't always do that.

If people would look to the right again, immediately before beginning the right turn, they'd probably see whoever was in front of them in the crosswalk. Being in traffic can be hard work.

This morning, I remembered one additional thought I had forgotten to include in my comment above from yesterday. It has to do with the relative difference in reasonable speed characterized by people using the crosswalk. I believe people walk an average of about 3-4 mph. A person on a bike might be inclined to ride a little faster, say maybe about 5-6 mph. I don't think that speed for a person on a bike on a crosswalk is particularly unreasonable, but here's what I see that represents a potential problem: If a motorist, pulling up to an intersection like the one we're discussing, makes that initial check to the right, and sees only pedestrians approaching on foot, they might calculate their right side clearance to turn based on the what they estimate the speed of those pedestrians to be...3 mph.

If a person on a bike, not visible during the initial check, enters the crosswalk at 5-6 mph, that's still a quite a low speed, but almost twice as fast as the person on foot. That speed differentiation would entirely throw off the calculation of the person trying to make the turn, unless they have been sufficiently trained to remember that other, somewhat faster modes of traffic are using the sidewalk. It's not just people on bikes that meet that description; there are runners, skaters, and people in motorized wheelchairs (some of you might know just how fast they can be), that may be slightly faster than the average pedestrian on the sidewalk.

[beelnite]

Rock on gang - good discussion! I am glad I was able to bring a driver mentality to the whole situation and sorta represent his thoughts - while maintaining my "cyclist perspective."

Dad probably did something pretty close to what WSBob describes and I've come to the conclusion (clarified now, but long before this) that we do have a responsibility to give these folks a break-- never assume their intent and though it may hurt our pride - giving up our right of way can save a front tire... and our lives!

So to reference a certain OTHER THREAD -- that's our role for self-preservation -- but it's still debatable if we need someone like AO for example to represent proper cycling ettiquette and embark on a personal education mission while riding.

Whew... there... this is what I think I think after thinking about what I think you all think... ouch. My head hurts a little.