and Grand this morning.
(Photos © J. Maus)
The morning after PBOT called it their #1 priority location to receive a bike box, a woman on a bike was hit at NE Couch and Grand. Based on interviews with the victim’s friend and the driver of the truck, the crash was a classic right hook. According to her friend who was at the scene, Jill Michaelree sustained a broken foot and/or shin and will undergo surgery.
Michaelree was traveling westbound in the bike lane on NE Couch approaching Grand. A large United Rentals equipment delivery truck (being driven by a professional commercial operator) was traveling in the same direction in the adjacent traffic lane. At Grand, the truck turned right to go north and struck Ms. Michaelree.
The operator of the truck remained at the scene and was very remorseful about what happened. “We both had the green. I didn’t even see her,” he told me.
Here are a few more photos from the scene:
A man on a bike who appeared to be a messenger stopped at the scene on his way to work. He was upset to see the crash and frustrated about the street design, saying he has told the BTA for months that the intersection was very dangerous. “This is the worst idea to put a bike lane before a major turn. I’m surprised I haven’t seen happen this five more times.”
PBOT opened the new East Burnside Couch couplet in August of 2009. Part of the project was a new routing of the bikeway onto Couch and the addition of a new bike lanes (read our in-depth report about how bikes fit into this project).
In April of this year, we started to hear a lot of concerns from people biking in this area. On May 5th, we reported that former BTA staffer Michael O’Leary was voicing major concerns about the biking conditions. O’Leary wanted PBOT to take a hard look at the s-curve bike lane leading onto the Burnside Bridge as well as addressing right hook issues on NE Couch. A few days later, after someone was hit on the s-curve, PBOT Director Sue Keil issued a statement that acknowledged the safety concerns and said her department would re-stripe the bike lane.
After PBOT made bike safety changes to the Couch bike lanes leading onto the Burnside Bridge, the BTA said they still had concerns. In a blog post on May 17th, BTA advocacy manager Gerik Kransky wrote (emphasis mine), “We are also concerned about the high volume of cars and buses entering and leaving the right travel lane on NE Couch, increasing the likelihood of a right hook crash.”
Last night, PBOT traffic safety specialist Greg Raisman announced 11 new bike box locations throughout the city. He said NE Couch and Grand was on top of their list. “We’ve seen a lot of right turn conflict at this location and we want to see a quick fix.” Raisman said the bike box is paid for, a work order has been written and he expects it to be installed by the end of October.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Ouch ouch ouch. Glad she wasn’t more seriously injured.
Can I suggest a headline omitting “claims another victim”? I hate to see anyone hurt, but I clicked over, heart in throat, thinking another cyclist was dead in Portland.
Speedy recovery to the victim.
Be careful out there folks (automobile and bicycle operators)!
If the bike and the truck both have a green light and are both in motion will the bike box prevent a right hook?
lisa,
nothing will “prevent” right hooks… but the addition of a bike box will help separate traffic modes and will make road users more aware that a potential for conflict exists. but you’re right in some respects…. the bike box does not play as large of a role in green light situations as it does when the light is red.
Oh, so the driver “never saw her”. I guess that guarantees he will get off scot-free.
I appreciate that PBOT is putting the bike box on their “fast track”, which is still a month and a half away, but they were told repeatedly since the initial planning design phase that this was a dangerous layout. The earlier accident(s) since it opened further reinforced that point. How many people have to be injured before they can actually make this a high enough priority to just go out there and do the work? If someone is killed between now and the time the bike box is installed there are going to be some real liability issues.
Also, a bike box will help to prevent right hooks when vehicles and bikes are starting from a complete stop when a light goes from red to green. It will be completely worthless when traffic is flowing along with a green light, which is what this accident is reported to have been.
In other words, their solution will do absolutely nothing to prevent a recurrence of this crash. The only way to make this area safe is to completely redesign the stretch leading up to the intersection and that costs big bucks, so it’s not going to happen.
The takeaway message here is for all bicyclists to ride fully in the traffic lane; do not put your life at risk by riding in the bike lane.
Thanks for posting this so quickly; I was worried about the cyclist after passing by the scene, where just a beat-up bike and police officers remained.
but rrandom,… bike lane use is mandatory, no?
I second Katie’s (#2)comment: the article title leads one to believe there was a fatality. I’m relieved to find out the cyclist is ok…
Rob (and Katie) — Thanks for the feedback on my choice of words in the headline. I’ve changed it. — Jonathan
Speedy recovery Jill. Glad to hear you were not more seriously injured. “( We will miss you at work.
And let me guess:
The PPB is too busy **PORTION OF THIS SENTENCE DELETED** to cite the driver for violation of 811.050?
And the Multnomah DA will again take the position that you only have a duty to yield to a bicyclist in the bike lane if you actually see the bicyclist?
When are people going to start demanding that the PPB and DA do their jobs and enforce laws that protect bicyclists?
Rob (#8), If your definition of “ok” is a “broken foot and/or shin and will undergo surgery,” then you have the strangest definition of “ok” that I have ever heard.
JAT- my understanding is that it is mandatory unless using the bike lane is dangerous; I think it is meant to apply to situations where there is debris or an obstruction in the bike lane, not this kind of danger. There are plenty of people here who can post the applicable vehicle code.
Regardless, I would fight a ticket over this as far and as loudly as possible considering the evidence that the bike lane is dangerous at all times.
Taking the lane through this stretch is safer than the bike lane, but not exactly safe overall. Traffic tends to move at a faster rate than the compromised sight lines allow and it is altogether reasonable to believe a cyclist in the middle of the lane could be hit. But I think it is safer than hunkering in a bike lane hugging the curb with no exit options and hoping for the best.
I guess I am confused with the rage people like Velo and rrandom. It sucks that someone was hit but what were the circumstances. Was the rider in the trucks blind spot? Could she make eye contact with the driver via the side view mirror. If drivers are to assume that there is a cyclist in their blind spot at all times should you, as a cyclist, assume every car is going to right hook you? I personally prefer to ride on the defensive side.
My anger stems from the fact that, *as the story is currently being reported*, the cyclist was doing absolutely nothing wrong- she was traveling in a defined traffic lane, had the right of way, and was struck by a large truck because of the truck driver’s inattention. This sort of incident happens all too frequently. Just a couple of years ago 2 cyclists were killed within just a few months of each other in right hook accidents.
The truck made a turn across a designated traffic lane without yielding the right of way to the vehicle (bike) that was in it. Yes, bikes are harder to see than larger vehicles. Yes, there are blind spots in the mirrors. This all makes it incumbent on the motor vehicle driver to be aware of their surroundings, including the location of other vehicles, and ensure that they are clear before making their turn.
I’m also ticked off because the motor vehicle drivers are rarely punished in these incidents. They really can get off by saying they didn’t see the bike. This incident is essentially the same as if the truck made a right turn from the middle lane across a “full size” vehicle lane and struck a car, seriously injuring the other driver. Somehow I doubt they would be let off if they simply stated that they didn’t see the other car.
Hmmmm … a bike box wouldn’t do anything in this situation. The light was green when the truck and cyclist arrived at the intersection.
Get well soon, Ms. Michaeltree.
1) Truck driver: “I didn’t even see her.”
2) Cyclist was lawfully on the bike lane, the driver’s blind spot.
3) PBOT to install bike box to “solve” bike lane blind spot problem.
Good grief, if you guys are just gonna go round-n-round with more bike lanes, boxes, and other genius whack-a-moles NON-solutions, whydon’tcha simply install roundabouts? Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.
They would only confuse horsepower happy cagjaaas, causing them to SLOW down. That would be soooooooo UN-American.
“Experiments in the Netherlands have shown that running traffic at 30 kilometers (19 mph) per hour, eliminating traffic rules, signals and other controls in urban areas
altogether, encouraging eye contact — and leaving road users to their own devices and to their common-law duties of reasonable care — has cut accidents, delay and congestion, and saved public funds.” “Safer with the lights out.” The Times, UK, July 8, 2002.
If you don’t want to get right hooked, don’t ride through an intersection next to a car, and don’t approach an intersection at a speed higher than a car that is already there. If there’s a car next to you, slow down, get behind it, or speed up and get in front of it before you get to the intersection. Assume it’s turning whether there is a signal or not. If it’s a bus or a large truck, for the love of god, your friends and family, get behind it! You are in the kill box! The large majority of crashes happen at intersections. If you aren’t at high alert in every intersection you pass through, light or no light, sign or no sign, high traffic or low, you are asking for trouble. Here’s another crazy thing to do: Before every intersection, give a quick glance back to see what’s around you in your peripheral vision in case you need to do evasive manuevers as you pass through. There are people that will never be right hooked, and it is in your power to make yourself one of those people.
Bicyclists beware of any rental vehicle! These drivers in box vans, trucks and even rental RVs and trailers, are not professionals and inexperienced in the operation of their machines.
Heal fully and quickly fellow rider.
“I guess I am confused with the rage people”
and i am confused about your confusion about cyclists getting angry when drivers injure a cyclist.
“assume every car is going to right hook you?”
statistically, you are more likely to die of a gunshot. do you also assume every person is going to shoot you.
“I personally prefer to ride on the defensive side.”
do you floss too?
I wish her the best. Just yesterday morning I was lucky enough to avoid a right hook at that same intersection. I was watching the driver of the Subaru wagon and it was obvious he was not going to even look in the bike lane before his right turn. I slowed down and he turned oblivious to me and my bike.
This all points to the fundamental flaw with bikes lanes and intersections.
Where else in road design do you place a lane of traffic that travels through the intersection to the right of a lane that can turn right.
It is a recipe for right hooks.
Jason, #19: “I was lucky enough to avoid a right hook at that same intersection. I was watching the driver of the Subaru wagon and it was obvious he was not going to even look in the bike lane before his right turn. I slowed down and he turned oblivious to me and my bike.”
What does that say about bike lanes?
J.Maus: “the bike box does not play as large of a role in green light situations as it does when the light is red.”
If the “solution” only works 50% of the time, is it really a solution or just an impersonation of a solution?
I hope she heals soon and will be back riding soon.
What I really think this intersection needs is some “Yield to Bicycles” signage like they have going Eastbound on the Hawthorne Bridge where it breaks off to MLK or on Broadway and Williams. Some paint on the bicycle lane across Grand could help as well. There is way too much bicycle traffic not to have something.
Ouch! Broken bones and surgery, that’s pretty serious. Jill, I hope you have a speedy recovery.
Although there are many things about the Couch/Burnside bike facilities that cause me consternation, I actually enjoy using this bike lane to zip past the clog of cars during rush hour here, with the exception of the serious right hook threat we see manifested in Jill’s crash.
It would be nice for the city to consider banning right-turns by autos (at least temporarily) at dangerous intersections like this. I find the bike box doesn’t help me much once traffic is flowing, only when the light is red.
“”assume every car is going to right hook you?”
statistically, you are more likely to die of a gunshot. do you also assume every person is going to shoot you.”
i don’t have stats to back it up, but i have a hunch that if you ride this intersection everyday you are a tad more likely to get hooked than get shot.
i too ride like every driver doesn’t see me. or at least the ones that i can see will turn across my lane. of course, there may have been no turn signal – that’s much harder to predict.
i agree with random that the bike lane here is unsafe. i never use it, and i try to shrug off the shouts from motorists. better than a traumatic brain injury or whatever.
the problem is that any striped bike lane built to AAHSTO standards is going to be treated by the city under 814.420 as presumptively “safe,” and the courts will probably back them up. again, however, a traffic ticket is still better than a traumatic brain injury.
as others have noted, the green box has zero to do with the right hook on the green signal phase, except possibly to raise slightly the motorist’s curiosity whether there might be a cyclist over there.
on the other, other hand, i almost hope they do put a green box in here, because that is as yet a nonstandard treatment, and the city cannot argue mandatory sidepath.
hopefully in the future, a motor vehicle operator will see the green bike box whie in motion, and remind themselves that the intersection is multi-use, and do a quick right mirror check. i think that is how bike boxes can be effective in preventing moving right hooks. This may take a few years.
I ride this section of Couch most days, and never use the bike lane between 6th & Grand because of right-hook risk.
Couch is downhill from 12th to 6th (with no bike lane) so it’s easy ride at the same speed as traffic.
Why not just erase the bike lane between 6th & Grand, and paint sharrows in the right lane from 12th to Grand?
re comment 22. for what it is worth, the green box is coupled with a no right on red. again, this is no help on the green phase. however, i would suggest that if you ban right turns onto grand you will instead get more rights at 7th, 8th, etc. where there does not happen to be a striped bike lane. hmn. so the city striped a bike lane inside the right hook at the one intersection motorists heading north mostly choose. sounds negligent somehow.
good luck with that, comment 26. one might as why there was no pushback on this at last night’s BAC meeting? a green box at couch and grand was at the very top of greg raisman’s list, and all it does is exacerbate a bad situation that PBoT created by striping the lane in the first instance.
I find the argument of “I didn’t even see her” hard to believe. I mean how often do you see a car and cyclist going the same speed with the bike in the blind spot? Even if the cyclist is coming up on the rear of the car going faster, she still would have been visible for a while in the truck’s mirror. Usually the car has just passed the cyclist, and if you can’t see a cyclist you just passed, you should not have a driving license!
Why shouldn’t we be upset about things like this!?!?!
Out of sight, out of mind.
Riding in a bike lane to the right of right-turning traffic is suicidal for cyclists.
Installing bike lanes to the right of right turning traffic borders on criminal negligence.
Bike boxes are not the solution.
Merge zones need to be provided so that cyclists can move to the left of right turning traffic, and vice versa.
Providing merge zones might result in the loss of a few curbside parking spaces.
The city needs to come to grips with this question: which is more important? Curbside parking or cyclist safety?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, as someone who rides this at least 50% of the time for my commute – while both driver and biker defensiveness will solve much of the problem, and a bike box will help, the fact is that the bike lane appears from NOWHERE on that very block. So it’s not like bike lanes that drivers have been next to for awhile and are therefore expecting cyclists on their right- instead, they have been on Couch for 7 blocks without room to pass, so they have been ceding the lane and bikers have been taking the lane.
Then, JUST before a right turn that 33% (or 50% or more in the right hand lane) of the cars are going to be making, a bike lane suddenly appears. While preparing to turn, turning on blinkers (if we’re lucky), looking for traffic from the left, getting into the right lane, etc. most drivers have probably not even noticed that there is now a bike lane for the last 100 feet that wasn’t there before, and suddenly bikers are going to be on their right instead of in front and behind them.
I just don’t use the bike lane on this block. I have been taking the lane for 40 blocks down Sandy, and I’m taking the lane for the previous 5-7 blocks on Couch anyway, so….why get over now? I take the lane and make cars stay behind me because otherwise I experience close-to-right-hooks all the time. Most cars don’t use their right turn blinkers, most cars don’t expect bicyclists passing on their right.
One time a Trimet driver was behind me and started honking since I didn’t get into the bike lane on that block. After crossing Grand, I promptly got into the bike lane between Grand and MLK. At the MLK light, she opened her door and yelled at me for not using the bike lane. I explained that almost all drivers in the right lane turn right, most of them cutting me off and most not using blinkers there, so I wait till the next block. She nodded thoughtfully and went “Ok!” and went off on her merry way. It was a good interaction, but not one that you usually get to have.
I’m usually against any removal of any SIR facilities but in this case….either bring the bike lane back a few blocks (or all the way to the Sandy interchange) so everyone has time to get used to the presence of a bike lane, or get rid of it for this one block and put in sharrows and lots of marking about bikes in roadway.
re comment #30.
Undoubtedly there was no pushback at the BAC because PBOT has succeeded in stacking the BAC with members who all agree with PBOT’s agenda as far as facilities for cyclists are concerned.
Looking at the huge size of that truck, I am so thankful this incident was not more serious than it was.
Look forward to a bike box here very much!!!
Hope one is also coming to NW 14th & Everett (pretty please?)
I fully agree with @davemess
Why are we not discussing the probability that the truck was behind Jill, then passed her and promptly ‘forgot’ that she existed? There’s nothing noted that the truck and Jill were at a red, that Jill came to the red after the truck, etc. (and not that those conditions would be any excuse, either.) I’d call this negligence, at best, on the part of the truck driver.
@ester is correct, too. Cyclists are set up by design to be right-hooked at that intersection.
my experience is that “I didn’t see her” equates to “I didn’t bother looking”.
All too often people still do not ‘think’ that bikes will be there – even if they just drove past one.
Speedy recovery; hopefully it won’t dissuade her from continuing to ride.
A bike lane is just another line in the road. A bright green box will surely help reduce the likelihood of collisions by increasing awareness: watch for bikes.
To me, the most dangerous things on the roads aren’t the cars and trucks. It’s the traffic engineers.
Placing a bike lane to the right of right-turning traffic is the same sort of thing as giving traffic turning right a green light while at the same time, giving pedestrians a walk signal. The streets are dangerous by design.
a few thoughts:
— Bonnie (and others), we aren’t discussing where the two vehicles were prior to the crash because we don’t know that yet. the police report will tell us more.
— Green bike boxes have been proven by several major research studies to improve the perception of safety and yielding behaviors at intersections…. even in green-light situations.
— BURR, I think you should be careful referring to the BAC membership when you have not attended a meeting for quite some time. In fact, last night there was quite a lot of pushback on PBOT’s bike box plans and on other PBOT agenda items.
Take the BIG lane before intersections like this.
Kudos to the truck driver for remaining on the scene and being responsible. Hope that ms. Michaelree heals quickly.
rrandom rider (#12) – ORS 814.420. Unfortunately, it seems the courts have determined that any given bike lane is de facto “safe” based on there being a planning process, so the only way to legally be outside one is due to enivronmental conditions like obstructions, potholes, glass, etc.
rrandom rider (#14) – We don’t know that the driver was inattentive. There are a number of factors that could cause the driver to legitimately not see the cyclist. That said, the driver should still be charged with “failure to yield”, because seeing the cyclist is not a requirement for that statute.
Mindful Cyclist (#23) – I think what the roads really need is LESS signage. The current roads already have far too much.
Steve B (#24) – Part of the bike box treatment is to ban right turns on red. That wouldn’t have helped in this specific case, It’s not practical to ban turns in general at that intersection, as there will be a LOT of traffic turning onto Grand.
With all due respect to the planners, I think this was poorly designed – the bike lane should be to the left of the right turn lane, just as it is at other intersections with MLK / Grand, like Weidler is.
davemess (#31) – You’re assuming they were both traveling in the same direction at the same time before the stop.
BURR (#33) – It’s not suicidal, it’s just hazardous. Installing bike lanes inboard of the turning lane wouldn’t be half the problem it is if ORS 814.420 did not mandate bike lane use.
I agree with Esther (#34) 100% – extend the bike lane or remove it entirely.
Jeff P (#38) – I’ve had that experience too, but in my experience those types of people rarely act remorseful after the collision.
I also take the lane until after crossing Grand. It’s downhill and the lights are timed so the drivers rarely get frustrated.
Still, I assume all cars will turn right in front of me bike lanes or not. Careful out there!
Cue BikeSnobBYC:
“A man on a bike who appeared to be a messenger”. What, was he riding a track bike and have lots of tattoos? Oh yeah, that’s what a lot of people look like!
jonathan. i was certainly there, as you know, and i would not describe any committee response to greg’s presentation on bike boxes as “pushback.” some questions about how the copenhagen box at hawthorne and seventh would work, but even there not “pushback.” and not one word about couch at grand, even though this is very obviously a situation that was created by striping the bike lane to begin with. not a word.
unlike burr, i am not impugning anyone’s motives, but if the role of BAC is to critique PBoT’s planning from the cyclist’s perspective, what the heck was last night about? less than half an hour for the entire presentation, and zero opportunity for anyone not on the committee to feed back. i was biting my tongue.
matt arnold designated three committee members to follow up, but the box on couch at grand and the copenhagen box on seventh at hawthorne are going down in october, done deal.
i came away fully intending to follow up with greg, and rich newlands, and the three committee members designated to the project (alicia crain, mark ginsberg, and ian stude, as i recall), but this incident this morning has gotten me angry. in case it doesn’t show.
thanks are,
i won’t debate the definition of “pushback” but there were concerns raised by BAC members about PBOT’s bike box plans.
i can tell that you are angry and that’s good… because we need more activists like you offering concerns/feedback/constructive criticism and more importantly, following up with those concerns. I hope you’ll keep us posted with your communication about this with the BAC.
last night’s meeting was not perfect. there wasn’t enough time to discuss these bike boxes and it wasn’t clear if PBOT’s list was even open to change.
my only hope is that you put your anger/frustration into action and that you use it to try and improve how our streets work for bikes (which I know you will do).
Ok, I’m at work and didn’t have time to read all of the comments, but I saw nothing in the article stating whether the truck driver was using his turn signal or not. It is against the law to turn with out it. If the signal was used (and I suspect not), then there would be a good chance the cylcist would have seen it and taken evasive action, been on the defensive. This is a very big point. Anyone?
hanmade- While I certainly hope that the truck was using its turn signal as required by traffic code, it wouldn’t necessarily have had much effect on what evasive actions the cyclist could have taken. If the truck driver was well in front of the bike and turned on its signal 100′ before the intersection he would still be guilty of failing to yield the right of way, but the cyclist would have had a better chance of stopping in time to avoid being hit. However, if the turn signal was used under any other circumstances there wouldn’t have been much the cyclist could have done. Part of the problem with being confined to a narrow bike lane abutting the curb is that the options for evasive actions are extremely limited.
matt (#42)- I think we are getting into semantics here, but unless the cyclist did something like pop into the bike lane from the sidewalk just before the collision, I don’t see any way to avoid stating that the truck driver was inattentive. He made a turn across a legal traffic lane. It is incumbent on him to make sure that the lane was clear.
Now, this is all based on the information as it is currently being reported. If we learn circumstances were different, the interpretation of events could change.
charley (#44)- I got a chuckle out of that too. I was thinking he must have been on a fixie and blew through a red light to get there. 😉
Last night go out for a spin, 2 miles in my City 3 right hooks. could have gone way
bad but locked up the back wheel and good loud voice helps. all of them knew I was there after they passed.
Hope she heals well.
Bike Safe all
Joe
Wilsonville rd Nightmare.
I’m so sick of this crap happening to us.
As the victim’s husband (not friend as mentioned in the article, I should have been more clear, Jonathan), I can assure everyone she’s shaken up and in pain, but will hopefully be fine, with only three broken bones in her foot and a few nice lacerations.
Her brand new KHS will need extensive repairs. And one of her socks, a very nice and beloved sock, was also ruined. Miraculously, her shoe was pulled off her foot before the blood started gushing.
The driver was cited for a bike lane violation and the police, in my opinion, did a pretty fair job of handling the case. One was even so kind as to transport the broken bike to the hospital for me, so I could attend to my injured wife.
The driver I found to be apologetic and a nice guy.
But saying that — as a daily bike rider myself who also drives — I’ll also say this to drivers: LOOK IN YOUR MIRRORS BEFORE YOU TAKE A FUCKING RIGHT TURN. especially on Couch.
If everyone did that one, simple, little thing, we wouldn’t have these problems. As for Jill, she did nothing wrong, and had been riding legally in the bike lane.