TheWashCycle

Witnesses sought after cyclist seriously injured in Loudoun County June 1 evening

Loudoun County police seek witnesses for cyclist seriously injured Sycolin Road between Shreve Mill Road and the Leesburg Park and Ride. Crash was between a vehicle and bicyclist on Saturday, June 1, at approximately 9:40 pm.

 

Fairfax County cyclist struck by police officer in crosswalk, ticketed like a motor vehicle

Last week a cyclist crossed an intersection against the light, was struck by a police officer and then ticketed. The incident was caught on camera and so got wide reporting. Among other things, it's an example of why vision zero is necessary and difficult. While the cyclist was the only one penalized, he wasn't the only person at fault.

The first mistakes were made in the design of the intersection. The cyclist was riding on a shared-use path on the west side of Route 1. The only way for a path user to cross is to activate the beg button, which then doesn't give much time to cross. And the design of the intersection, with it's rounded corners encourages drivers to speed through the turn. Though not relevant to this incident, once across the intersection, the path has an unnecessary gap just past the curb ramp. So this intersection was designed to move cars quickly and vulnerable users were meant to navigate it with as little impact on drivers (and a rose bush) as they could design. It was a crash waiting to happen.

Next up is the driver. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a police officer to drive safer than the general population. It's not connected to reality, but I think we should expect it. And this police officer didn't. In both videos, the driver starts out well across the Advanced Stop Line. Is that where he stopped when he approached the light? Because if so, he broke the law by stopping too far forward. My sense is that it was, but I'd love more footage to confirm that. I'd also like audio from the dashboard cam, so we could know what the driver was doing at the time. Was he talking on the phone? Did he have his turn signal on? Finally we get the turn itself. Under Virginia law

A. The driver of any vehicle on a highway shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian crossing such highway: 

1. At any clearly marked crosswalk, whether at mid-block or at the end of any block; 

In this case, the cyclist was legally a pedestrian and the driver should have yielded to him.  A driver should not move forward without looking forward. People do it all the time, but they shouldn't. 

The cyclist broke the law, and made a mistake, by crossing against the light. Also, while riding against traffic isn't against the law on the side path, it does require more caution than this cyclist demonstrated as it is more dangerous. 

The ticketing officer, reportedly a supervisor to the officer in the crash, then made two bad decisions. First they chose to ticket the cyclist. The cyclist got hit by a car and went to the hospital. One would think that he's already been punished. Maybe a written warning would suffice? But no, he got a ticket. And then the ticket they gave him was for failure to "pay full time and attention". But here's what the county code says about that:

No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the highways of this County without giving his full time and attention to the operation of the vehicle

But a bicycle is not a motor vehicle, nor was it being operated on the roadway, since he came off the path. I don't want to nitpick, but this was an odd ticket to write when they could have ticketed him for ignoring the traffic control device.  If the police officer had been on the bike, I wonder if the ticketing would have been the same.

Next, the police chief made a whole list of mistakes in his statement.

Fairfax Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr. said “The officer is waiting and checking to make sure the crosswalk is cleared. All of a sudden, the bicyclist makes no attempt to stop and goes right into the crosswalk . . . He’s going the wrong way. He’s going against traffic. He’s going against the red pedestrian signal. Once that bicycle enters the roadway, they’re subject to all the vehicular laws.”

Almost all of that is wrong. If the officer was checking to make sure the crosswalk is cleared, then he did a pretty terrible job of it. The cyclist didn't "suddenly" enter the crosswalk, but approached it at the same speed he crossed it - it's just the driver didn't notice because his full attention was on traffic to his left because he wanted to make a right turn on red.  The cyclist was not going the "wrong way" as a shared-use path is bidirectional. And a bicycle is not subject to vehicular laws when it enters a crosswalk. Again, from Virginia law (emphasis mine)

A person riding a bicycle... on a sidewalk or shared-use path or across a roadway on a crosswalk shall have all the rights and duties of a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

As GGW notes, this is a reason to make Richmond Highway safer, for which a plan exists, and to eliminate right-turn on red. 

Bike crashes down in Arlington from last year, but still high

According to a report by the Arlington Police Department, bike crashes were down from 2018, but 2018 was still higher than in 2014 to 2016.

In 2018 there were 57 crashes in Arlington, down from 80. That's the good news, but that's still higher than the 38 averaged over the prior 3 years. Comparisons to years prior to that are difficult because of different records management systems. Motor vehicle crashes were also down in 2018, by 4.7%.

In most crashes involving cyclists and pedestrians, motor vehicle drivers were found at fault, 52% and 74% respectively. 67% of drivers deemed at fault in a crash with a pedestrian were cited, as were 74% of those with cyclists. Pedestrians were at fault in 19% of their crashes with cars and cyclists in 37% of theirs. Pedestrians were cited 13% of the time they were at-fault, and cyclists 32%. There were 3 bike-ped crashes, with the cyclist at fault in 1 and pedestrians in the other two. 

33% of the bike crashes had no injury, 65% minor injuries and 2% were serious. There were zero fatalities. There was 1 pedestrian fatality. 

In 28% of bike-car crashes, the cyclist was in a bike lane. In 26% they were in a crosswalk. In 12% they were in a crosswalk, going against the signal. 10% of crashes were doorings. 14% involved a car going in or out of a parking lot. 14% involved a car going straight. 12% were right hooks. 

66% of pedestrian crashes happen in the crosswalk. 

More than half of all crashes, 50.6% happened at dusk, at night or when otherwise dark. 

Some other data from the report, there were more crashes during the morning commute and, oddly, on Thursdays.

Crashes by age.

A map of bike crashes shows that many (most?) are in the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor. 

Actually, that's not hit and run

Oh boy, the worst part of this letter to the editor article in the Post today is that it makes multiple claims that a pedestrian was the victim of a hit-and-run without explaining what the law is or that, in fact, they weren't. They were hit and it certainly seems like it was the cyclist's fault, but it's not hit and run. But the letter is bad for other reasons too.

In order:

I’ve come to understand that the timely “On your left!” has become as obsolete as “What tidings, sirrah?”

This has not been my experience. I do think I hear it less than I used to, and that headphones are to blame, but I think it may not be that bad. Regardless, everyone should pass others as though saying "on your left" will do absolutely nothing anyway.

But on this early October morning, I wasn’t on a bike trail. I was walking in a park within sight of the Washington Monument, using a footpath that didn’t seem likely to have many bicycles on it.

Without knowing where he was, I don't know that this wasn't a trail that allows bikes (there aren't any real "bike trails" just multi-use trails). My guess is, this was not pedestrian only space.

I heard a bell behind me and stepped to the right. But instead of slowing down, the biker had already decided to pass me — also on the right.

So this is where the cyclist screwed up. Passing on the right and passing too fast to adjust to the pedestrian's movements. [Credit for ringing the bell, but a lot of good that did]. But I wonder where he was walking on the path. Earlier he said that he was "careful to the point of paranoia about hugging the right side of the path so bicycles and joggers can pass." Perhaps since he thought he was not on a bike path, he didn't think he would be passed. It's more academic since it doesn't matter where he was walking, the cyclist was at fault.

The biker went down too, but with less energy perhaps, having used me as his shock absorber. He was polite enough. He assisted me to a park bench. He asked whether he should call an ambulance, which I declined. Then he went on his way, without offering any contact information. I was shaken up and didn’t think to ask for his information before he left.

If he had been driving a car, that would have been a hit-and-run under Virginia law.

Ok, well first of all, this doesn't sound like it was in Virginia as it was "in a park within sight of the Washington Monument" and since the tie-in to this is WABA's push to make DC safer.  So, Virginia law is irrelevant. 

Under DC law, this does not sound like "hit and run" or "Leaving after colliding" as the cool kids call it. To be guilty, one needs to leave after a collision and

Where another person is injured, call or cause another to call 911 or call or cause another to call for an ambulance or other emergency assistance if necessary, remain on the scene until law enforcement arrives, and provide identifying information to law enforcement and to the injured person;

The pedestrian was injured, but they had scratches. Not the kind of thing where an ambulance is needed. And do we really want people calling the police and getting a report for every crash like this? The cyclist didn't ride off. They helped the victim. They offered to call an ambulance. That's not hit and run. [It can also be hit and run if there is property damage, an injured animal or an unsafe situation created by the crash, none of which apply here]

Also, it wouldn't be "hit and run" in Virginia. Hit and run, or "duty of driver to stop" as the cool kids call it, only applies to the "driver of a vehicle" and 

"driver" means every person who either (i) drives or is in actual physical control of a motor vehicle on a highway or (ii) is exercising control over or steering a vehicle being towed by a motor vehicle.

Which doesn't include bicyclists. That should probably be changed, but the point stands. 

I was forced to take off additional time for work, too, because of my injuries, including an infection from the tire track on my leg that required antibiotics and an ultrasound to make sure I didn’t have blood clots. I was lucky I had good medical insurance and an understanding boss.

Let's not get carried away here. This isn't medical bankruptcy territory.

Then I read WABA’s action plan for traffic safety... Fine...But what about bicycle safety? Shouldn’t we require bicyclists to carry insurance to cover them and potential injuries to pedestrians, or to take a riding test to prove they know how to ride?

No. For several reasons. Being forced to carry insurance doesn't actually reduce crashes (as far as I know). No one really offers that product right now. I don't know of any cases of cyclists being liable for damages and unable to pay, which is why we usually require insurance. That's the problem insurance solves, but if that's not a problem, then this is just "good for the goose" policy. Which is bad policy. 

What about extending hit-and-run laws to cover bicyclists?

Yes. That's a good idea (Virginia). But we should be clear about what is meant by "injury". 

Or annual bicycle inspections and equipment checks?

Having a bicycle in good working order is a good idea, but mandatory checks...no.

How about stricter penalties for riding a bicycle on the sidewalk when there are bike lanes nearby?

How about that's not illegal. And it shouldn't be.

I would at least like to see bicycles have turn signals in addition to other basic safety equipment.

Most cyclists do. The Spanish call them "brazos".

Stricter laws for bicyclists should include better reporting.

I'm not against better reporting on bicycle crashes, but do we want to call the police for EVERY crash? We don't even do that for car crashes. 

Anyway, yeah bicycle-pedestrian safety is part of Vision Zero. About 0.5% of all traffic fatalities in the District result from bicycle-pedestrian crashes, and an unknown - but non-zero - number of serious injuries. But I'm not sure that any of these ideas are going to move the needle. 

Driver in B&A DWI crash sentenced to 18 months

Digging through my unfinished stories I found this one from 2014.

Anne Arundel County police say a driver who hit two bicyclists, seriously injuring one of them, has been arrested on numerous charges, including driving under the influence of alcohol.

Officers say 54-year-old Robin Vera Colbert of Annapolis was arrested Wednesday on 11 charges. The State's Attorney's Office says she was indicted on July 18.

Police say on June 28, Colbert was driving south on Governor Ritchie Highway in Annapolis when she drove onto the right shoulder. Officers say shoulder is marked as the Baltimore & Annapolis Trail.

Investigators say Colbert hit 23-year-old Katie Pohler of Glen Burnie and 27-year-old Todd Green of Severna Park, who were biking on the trail portion.

More

Robin Vera Colbert was driving a grey Nissan along Route 50. She took an exit ramp toward Ritchie Highway but missed and ended up on the Baltimore & Annapolis (“B&A”) Bicycle Trail instead. There she struck two cyclists from behind Katie Pohler and Todd Green. Bystanders called 911 and applied pressure to a bleeding wound to Pohler’s neck. Paramedics arrived quickly and summoned helicopters to transport Pohler and Green to Shock Trauma. Later Pohler would be diagnosed as suffering from a broken fibula, ulna, collarbone, shoulder blade, and vertebrae. She also suffered a lacerated carotid artery and a crushed trachea.

I believe this occurred on this section of the trail. Perhaps some separation is needed here. 

Colbert pleaded guilty to two of the 11 charges late in the year and was sentenced to three years in prison with all but 18 months suspended. She also had to serve five years of supervised probation.

Colbert had also been driving with a 3-year-old relative in the car, prosecutors said, and she had a blood-alcohol level of 0.15 at the time, which is nearly double the legal limit. The 3-year-old was not injured.

So, she should probably not drive again, certainly not without an interlock device. 

Pohler was interviewed two-years later. 

"I had maybe six or seven surgeries overall, the first of which was to save my life,” she said.

Daily reminders of the crash that nearly took her life physically mark her. “I had a broken fibula, a broken left arm and my right hand has plates in it,” she said. Pohler also suffered fractures to her right collarbone, right shoulder blade and spinal cord.

Scars spread across her right shoulder out from under her sleeveless top — evidence of the crash — and there are other scars across her throat. Pohler added, “Something went through to my airway and hit my vocal chords and carotid artery.” She says that injury changed the way she speaks: damage to the vocal chords has given her voice a raspy quality. The plate in her hand restricts her movement somewhat, and Pohler says she doesn’t think her right shoulder will ever return to full function; that’s something frustrating for an athletic young woman who, with her boyfriend, loves to take part in sports.

Colbert got lucky that she hit young healthy people who could survive such a crash or she'd have a murder/manslaughter on her hands.

She appealed on grounds that the breathalyzer test was unconstitutional, but lost.  I assume she has served her time by now and is out of jail.

She was sued by Pohler in 2017, but that case was settled prior to trial. 

New York City bicycle safety report: ridership up, fatalities flat. Cyclists responsible for just 0.4% of pedestrian fatalities

As part of Vision Zero, the New York City Department of Transportation (NYC DOT), the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYC DOHMH), and the New York City Police Department (NYPD) have undertaken the city's first comprehensive analysis of cyclist safety since 2006. I would recommend that anyone interested in safer city cycling look it over.

What they've found is that as their bicycle network has massively expanded,

so has ridership. 

There were an estimated 164 million bicycle trips in 2015, up from nearly 66 million trips in 2006, an increase of 150%.

And, as ridership has increased, the fatality rate has plummeted.

Fatalities per 100 million bicycle trips are down 71% over a 15 year period. The number killed or severely injured (KSI) was down 73%. 

So, what you've always known was true is true. If you want more people to bike and for fewer of them to die, you need to build more and better facilities and add more bikeshare. 

The reasons for the improved safety seem to be tied directly to the bicycle facilities. Fatalities have dropped, in part, because more people are riding and few (11%) of those fatalities are on streets with bicycle facilities. Interestingly,

Cyclist KSI declined by 17% within the bike share zone after one year of operation

While it dropped only 4% outside of it, which indicates that the mere presence of bikeshare makes biking safer. 

Other takeaways:

• The majority of cyclist fatalities (65%) and an even greater percentage of cyclist KSI (89%) occurred at intersections.
• A high percentage of cyclist fatalities (27%) involved trucks, when compared to cyclist KSI (5%)
• KSI was down way more in the summer (28%) than it was in the winter (3%) "This seasonal variation in the reduction of cyclist KSI may provide further support that the safety in numbers dynamic is occurring in New York City. If the growth in cycling has been occurring disproportionately during the warmest months of the year—a reasonable assumption—this may help explain why the greatest drop in cyclist KSI between the two periods occurred in the summer."
• Cyclist KSI is higher in the outer boroughs than in Manhattan

The next one is really interesting, because it shows that in a crash between a cyclist and a pedestrian, the cyclists is about 50% as likely to die as the pedestrian is. I've never seen it quantified before. 

• From 2006 to 2016 of the 1,677 pedestrian traffic fatalities, seven occurred as a result of pedestrian-bicycle collisions, accounting for 0.4% of all pedestrian traffic fatalities in New York City.  During this time period, three cyclists were killed as a result of a crash with a pedestrian. Interestingly, 1.4% of cyclist fatalities (3 out of 214)* were from bike-pedestrian crashes, so pedestrians are a bigger threat to cyclists than cyclists are to pedestrians. (Bike-bike fatalities were 0.5% and single-bike fatalities were 5.1%. The other 93% involved motor vehicles)

Their plan to make things even safer is to build more and better facilities and expand bikeshare (Duh), focus enforcement at high KSI intersections and tailor it to the most dangerous behavior. They also plan education, a possible 3-feet law (like we have in DC), mandatory truck side guards (required in DC) and more data collection. 

* 214 is the number of total bike fatalities, which includes 199 bike-motor vehicle crashes, 11 single-bike fatalities, 3 bike-ped fatalities and 1 bike-bike fatality

Police need to rethink their role in bicycle crash reporting

In the later part of the year, I've seen or received two reports about bicycle crashes and the police reporting/response to them that are similarly troubling. The first was sent to me about a crash on the MVT in which Park Police responded. (Emphasis is mine)

I’ve ridden this trail daily for over 18 years except in the most inclement weather.

On August 5 (2017), I was riding on the trail near Vernon View when a teen hopped off the chin-up bar (an exercise station located approximately 10 feet off the trail) and back-up, arms raised in victory showing off to a watching couple that I assume were his parents.  He backed up – right into me.  Result:  he backed into me, throwing me off the cycle.  Injuries:  broken and separated shoulder, 4 broken ribs, 2 broken vertebrae, and two dislocated fingers.

Ambulance came and carted me off.  First stop – Mount Vernon Hospital ER;  once they diagnosed the extent of injuries, they sent me off to the second stop:  Fairfax Hospital Trauma Center.

It took me from August 5 till Nov 20 to get the National Park Police incident report.  The attending officer wrote no info on the report.  His report claims that he was at the scene from 1518 hours till 1605 hours.  During this time, he never interviewed me.

Well….when I finally got the report and I finally-finally got [the officer] on the phone, I asked him if he had any additional information on:  who hit me, and where my bike was (Specialized Crave Comp 29).

[The officer] told me that the Park Police does not take bikes, and that I should ask the ambulance service (I was in the ambulance with two attendants in the back….there is no room for a bike!) or the Fairfax County Fire Department (called them, and they said they do not take bikes).

How can the Park Police just let a ($1500) bike lay on the ground when the bicyclist is carted off via ambulance?

So, the police report didn't include the names of all the people involved in the crash, and when he was there he didn't take the time to make sure the cyclists bike was taken care of. I recently had a crash that required a hospital trip and the MPD were cool enough to wait with my bike for my wife to pick it up, but I was had the time and faculties to ask them to. What if I had been unconscious? Would they have just left my bike there? Do they normally leave the personal items (a purse for example) of traffic crash victims?

The other incident involves MPD. This is from a listserv

Hello neighbors- on Sunday Oct 1 around 12:30pm - I was riding my bike and struck by a car at 8th/Independence SE. If you witnessed this accident could you please shoot me an email at _______. The police report does not list the people they spoke to. Many thanks.

Again...how can they not write the names down? I did ask the BAC's MPD officer about this, and while he didn't know the specifics, he said that some witnesses don't want their name included. I suppose that's possible, but in those cases, I'd expect the report to note that such as "Witness 1 [Name refused]" or something. I don't think that is what happened here. 

 

Perhaps these are two isolated cases that just happened to occur within a few months of one another, but I'd be surprised if there weren't other similar stories out there. 

 

The police need to get the name of witnesses and other parties to a crash. They need to have a system for securing bikes that have to be left behind. Not doing so is adding insult to injury. It's denying people a chance to recover in court. It's making it harder for them to recover with their insurance companies. It strikes me - as a layman I'll admit - as sloppy work. 

From the archives: Who hasn't been in a profane mood at times

From July 30, 1880

From the Archives: The 1975 DC Bicycle Plan

The first modern bicycle plan for the District of Columbia, "Bicycle transportation plan and program for the District of Columbia",  was written in 1975 (and then revised in 1976 and 1978, I believe) and I feel like I've seen a copy of it, but can't find one online. It had a lot of ambition for the time, but when Jim Sebastian was hired over 15 years ago, the plan was described as "in a drawer for a quarter of a century."

The 1975 plan proposed 75 miles of "bicycle pathways" to existing routes in the District. The 75 miles was to form a continuous citywide system of about 170 miles and cost a little over a million dollars at the time.  The 75 miles would consist of

• 17 miles of exclusive bikeway out of the roadway (MUTs?)
• 22 miles in lanes reserved from motor vehicles either by a physical barrier or by lane markings and signs. (so, bike lanes)
• 35 miles of  signed bike routes

According to a phone survey of residents done in 1974 in preparation of the bike plan, approximately one-fourth of the city's residents owned and used bicycles.

The survey showed that approximately 60 percent of bicycle use is for purposeful trips; 40 percent is recreational. Estimates derived from the survey indicate that 14,000 accidents and 13,700 bicycle thefts occurred in the year preceding the survey.

Both the number of "accidents" and thefts seem very high. 

From the Archives: 1982 Bike Accidents* Study

From an October 1982 copy of the DC Gazette

*Don't get all "crash not accident" on me, I'm just quoting the thing