Redondo Beach Cyclist Fatality and Misaligned Curb Cuts
Gary Cziko
Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)
John Forester
There is not sufficient information to be clear on the movements.
However, the information presented says that the cyclist was
traveling eastbound on the north sidewalk of her street. She came
to an intersection, which had a single curb ramp and a traffic
signal. There was a bus coming southbound in the curb lane of that
street. The cyclist did not stop and was killed in the collision.
Presumption: the bus was traveling on a green signal; nobody
suggests otherwise. Conclusions: Cyclist was riding eastbound on
the north side sidewalk, which is a dangerous activity. Cyclist
failed to stop or yield when entering the cross street, which is
unlawful. Cyclist ran the red signal, which is unlawful.
I see no reason to consider whether the alignment of the ramp had
an effect about the cause of the collision. The causes were all
associated with the cyclist's dangerous movements.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-- John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer 7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945 619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com
John Cinatl
John Forester
I see now that Gary has offered a rather different scenario than
I had done. Both scenarios start with the cyclist eastbound on the
north sidewalk. Gary now suggests that the cyclist was intent on
turning right at the next intersection, and tried to do so when
coming down the sidewalk ramp. In that case, she made a right turn
on red without stopping or yielding, and her speed projected her
into the curb lane of the cross street. Her initial path,
eastbound on the north sidewalk, was dangerous. Her failure to
stop and yield when making a right turn on red was dangerous. It
is of course questionable whether or not the right-turn-on-red law
applies to cyclists using sidewalks, but the act is clearly
dangerous. Her actions, in this scenario, are dangerous. I see no
reason to make additional accusations about the design of the
ramp.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Gary Cziko
1. Does anyone have knowledge of similar bike-motor vehicle crashes involving sidewalk cyclists wandering into an active travel lane while attempting to enter a crosswalk?2. Centered, "shared" curb cuts which serve crosswalks 90 degrees apart (but neither very well) seem to me the most common design in California, or at least in L.A. County (below is a corner in my neighborhood of Playa del Rey). Are these designs in conformance with CA design guidelines or requirements?
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-- John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer 7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945 619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
John Forester
There is another scenario that has not been presented in any way.
Here it is. The cyclist is traveling southbound on the west
sidewalk of her street, approaching an intersection at which there
is a single ramp off the sidewalk and a traffic signal. The
cyclist approaches the intersection on a green traffic signal,
with a bus paralleling her path in its curb lane. As the cyclist
reaches the ramp, the bus is just behind her. As the cyclist
descends the ramp, intending to go straight, the shape of the ramp
directs the cyclist into the curb traffic lane which is occupied
by the bus. A collision results. The cyclist cannot ride close to
the curb of the sidewalk, because that space is occupied by
newspaper stands and the column for the traffic signal. Traveling
on the path she must take, she must then swerve somewhat
leftwards, toward the street, to properly approach the ramp.
However the swerve is not much, and it would have the cyclist
descend the ramp by a smooth path without entering the traffic
lane. That maneuver would not bother me. But maybe it is likely to
bother the incompetent cyclists for whom the sidewalk cycling
system is intended.
Paul Nevins
John Forester
Buehler. Both the facts and the conclusions are wrong, and the authors
ought to know enough to recognize that. The paper refers to the
Vancouver and Montreal studies of streets with sidepaths. Both of those
studies have been shown to be based on incorrect statements about the
physical facts of the facilities studied. The statistical part of the
paper gives statistics for cyclist casualty rates and miles of bikeway,
that show a declining cyclist casualty rate with increasing bikeway
miles. There's no need to have bothered to inquire whether or not these
claims are accurate, for the logic is defective. Nobody has ever shown
the mechanism by which bikeways reduce car-bike collisions. But those
who suffer from the cyclist-inferiority phobia, as Pucher and Buehler
presumably do, believe as an article of faith that bikeways greatly
reduce car-bike collisions, even though nobody has ever shown how they
do that.
Car-bike collision statistics, traffic movement analysis, human factors,
and standard traffic engineering knowledge demonstrate that urban
sidepaths make cycling more dangerous, contrary to the claims of people
such as Pucher. When Pucher spoke in San Diego some years ago, I
challenged him on this point. Pucher's reply, in this public discussion,
was that he paid no attention to engineering but just did what people
wanted.
Yet Pucher's papers, and others by other authors, get published
regularly in respected journals. But note this; while the subject under
discussion is traffic engineering, such papers are never published in
traffic-engineering journals. The editors and referees of such journals
would know enough to reject such papers. Instead, these papers get
published in journals whose editors and referees have no expert
knowledge of traffic engineering, and, probably, believe the almost
universal cyclist-inferiority superstition, while the journals often
have an anti-motoring agenda. The result is that papers that appear to
be entirely respectable are actually scientific lies.
On 5/12/2017 5:27 PM, Paul Nevins wrote:
> https://www.treehugger.com/bikes/new-american-study-confirms-physically-separated-bike-lanes-are-crucial-safety.html