In response to my post about confused yielding requirements where shared-use paths cross streets, Ryan Reasons has published comments on a recent fatal truck-bicycle crash in the Seattle, Washington area.
The photo below is from the KOMO TV/radio station news photo gallery.
View of crash scene
My response to Ryan’s comments went into enough detail that I have decided to make a post of it. My response follows his comments below.
Ryan’s comments
@John S. Allen
The sort of confusion you describe may have cost Gordon Gray his life last Wednesday after he collided with a cement truck. The sheriff’s department says that Gray, a 70-year-old bicyclist from Washington state, was cycling on a MUP when he ran a stop sign, entered a street running parallel to the MUP and was struck.
King County Sheriff’s Sgt. Stan Seo says the Kenmore man was biking southbound on 65th Avenue Northeast Wednesday morning when he was hit by a cement truck heading west on Northeast 175th Street. Seo said Friday that according to investigators, it appears the cyclist did not stop at a stop sign and was hit in the intersection. He says the cyclist had turned off the Burke-Gilman Trail shortly before the accident.
— The Associated Press, Komonews.com
If one accepts Sgt. Seo’s account of the events leading to the collision, then Gray was cycling on the MUP when he turned onto 65th Avenue to enter Northeast 175th street. (See this Google street map.) [You may click on the link to open the view in Google maps, or click on the image below to enlarge it — John Allen]
Location of Gordon Gray crash
Note that the Google map shows three stop signs of possible relevance. The stop sign on 65th Avenue is located just north of the MUP and crosswalk. The other two stop signs are located on the MUP at opposite ends of the crosswalk.
Once Gray entered 65th Avenue from the MUP and headed south, did Gray have a legal obligation to stop at the stop sign on 65th Avenue? I don’t think so, because after turning south onto 65th Avenue the stop sign was behind Gray and facing north.
Let’s assume Gray committed a traffic violation (running a stop sign) when he turned from the MUP onto 65th Avenue. Does that mean Gray is legally at fault for a collision which occurred on his subsequent turn from 65th Avenue onto Northeast 175th Street?
The account given by local law enforcement suggests Gordon Gray will be blamed for his own death, even if Gray is not fully at fault. That seems like an injustice for Gray, an undeserved vindication for confusing cycling infrastructure, and fuel for more of the ugly jeers that accompany the deaths of cyclists who truly are at fault.
My response:
This is an interesting situation, and especially so as cyclists’ exiting from bikeways into parallel streets becomes more common with the increasing number of sidepaths (or “cycle tracks”, or so-called “protected bike lanes”). The path in question runs parallel to and just north of an east-west street (Northeast 175th Street) and crosses another street (65th Avenue) which Ts into it from the north, with a marked crosswalk. There are stop signs for the path at either end of the crosswalk, and there is a stop sign on 65th Avenue Northeast before the crosswalk, as is usual. So, once Gordon Gray was in the crosswalk, there was no stop sign directing him to stop at Northeast 175th Street.
This is not the same situation I described in the earlier blog post. What I described is the confusion from having stop signs at the ends of a crosswalk. Traffic in the street is supposed to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk but confusion arises because the stop signs indicate that cyclists in the crosswalk must yield to traffic in the street it crosses. These two requirements contradict one another. The confusion manifests itself in drivers on the street stopping and yielding to cyclists, whom the stop signs direct to stop and yield to the drivers in the street. It is unclear who may proceed. In practice, the cyclists usually proceed, and often without coming to a complete stop, but also cyclists are faster than pedestrians, and a motorist’s stopping often requires a cyclist to stop when they would otherwise not have to, because the motor vehicle would have passed before the cyclist reached the crosswalk. There are also the issues which occur at other crosswalks, that the first motorist in one lane may stop, but a motorist in another lane may not, requiring extra caution of cyclists due to their higher speed and longer stopping distance than those of pedestrians.
What you describe appears to be that cyclist Gordon Gray entered the crosswalk, and then entered the parallel street. Indeed, there was no stop sign facing him once he had entered the crosswalk, as he did not pass the stop sign for traffic on 65th Avenue Northeast. The legalities here are somewhat confusing. Probably the stop sign before the crosswalk did not apply to entry onto the parallel street. Was Gray required nonetheless to yield before entering the parallel street? He would have been, if he had passed the stop sign on 65th Avenue Northeast. A T intersection without a stop sign is an uncontrolled intersection, and so he would still be required to prepare to yield, perhaps also to yield: in some states, at least Massachusetts, where I live, stop signs are not posted where one street Ts into another, but yielding is required. A concern for self-preservation would also require being prepared to yield, whatever the legalities.
There are a few things which the news report does not indicate:
- Which way was Gray going? Was he originally westbound on the path? Then he would have had to look behind himself for the truck.
- Was he attempting to head eastbound on Northeast 175th Street (or westbound on the wrong side), and so he was attempting to cross in front of the truck?
- Just what was the truck driver doing, or about to do? There is a large concrete plant with two driveways, across Northeast 175th street from 65th Avenue. Concrete mixer trucks in the same colors as those in the news photo are visible parked there in the Google Maps overhead view. It is possible, for example, that the truck driver was signaling a turn, suggesting to Gray that he would turn left into the driveway east of 65th Street Avenue Northeast, but instead was continuing into the next driveway when his truck struck Gray. The location of the truck in the photo at the top of this post suggests that.
@ John S. Allen
I’ve tried to find more information about the crash but so far I’ve had no luck. I did locate some information about uncontrolled intersections and Washington state traffic laws which you may find interesting.
The truck was on the left of the cyclist. It seems the modification given in subsection (2) applies to an intersection of state highways. I don’t think either of the two streets involved are state highways.
On the other hand…
Based on photos of the crash and statement from the police, I suspect Gray was westbound when he exited the MUP (from the crosswalk on 65th Avenue) to continue riding west on the shoulder of 175th Street. I don’t know this, but it seems the most likely scenario.
It is unlawful in Washington state to drive a motor vehicle on a paved shoulder except in a designated zone or unless the driver is stopping or, having stopped, is reentering the roadway . If Gray exited the “safety” of the MUP crosswalk to enter the paved shoulder of 175th Street where the fog line begins on the far side, does that constitute a “move into the path” of a vehicle which is forbidden from traveling on the shoulder?
Truck drivers are trained to swing right before turning left and vice versa. Moving the wheels closer to the opposite curb at the start of the turn allows a wider approach, which prevents the back wheels from rolling over a curb (or car) at the end of the turn. There is no curb visible on the map near any of the business entrances on the south side of 175th Street, but there might have been another vehicle there at the time, or maybe swinging out was the truck driver’s habit. But admittedly this too is conjecture.
Addressing this sobering comment: “A concern for self-preservation would also require being prepared to yield, whatever the legalities.”
I heartily agree, although in the case of Gordon Gray the legalities are all that’s left. It’s troubling that law enforcement blames Gray for the crash (and probably would regardless of what the law says). The standard ‘scofflaw cyclist’ narrative means that neither a misinformed public nor a confusing intersection will be improved as a result of Gray’s death.
Ryan — thanks for the info.
The truck and the bicycle aren’t even near each other in the photo I posted. One or the other has to have been moved since the crash. The location of the truck — assuming that it wasn’t moved — suggests that Gray was crossing Northeast 175th street. In that case, the truck turned either in an attempt to avoid Gray, or because it was turning into the second driveway of the concrete plant. Note that the truck hadn’t even finished crossing the intersection. On the other hand, the location of the bicycle, assuming that it wasn’t moved, suggests that the truck was overtaking Gray on the shoulder, past the intersection. More information clearly is needed to determine just what happened. There is also a discussion of the crash in the Cyclists are Drivers group on facebook — have a look. Please post additional comments if you find out anything more.
I am Gordon’s sister. It is interesting to read these comments regarding my brother’s accident. We may never know exactly what happened but speaking for my family we hold no blame. Just to clarify a couple things. According to the investigating officer the truck driver saw Gordon going west on the Burke Gilman trail, this would be paralleling the truck driver. Gordon took a left at 65th to cross 175th so that he could go east on 175th towards his home. That is where he met the concrete truck. The truck driver moved his truck after the accident to allow traffic to pass. Someone moved Gordon’s bike to the side of the road. Where you see the truck and the bike in the picture is not indicative of where the truck actually struck Gordon. The trucks right front light was damaged which would indicate impact was immediate after Gordon turned in front of the truck. People can go on about what happened. I am not a biker so am not tuned into all of the biking concerns. I just know that Gordon is gone, it was a horrible accident and it is hard to read all of the conjecturing about what may have happened.
Hi Kathy,
I’m so sorry about your brother Gordon.
I didn’t know him, but hike and bike on the Burke-Gilman Trail a lot. I’ve seen the memorial site for months. The other day I saw the white bike there in his honor. I noticed the newspaper article in the bag got wet and was unreadable. So I reprinted that article along with three other pages of articles and photos. I placed them in waterproof bags and put them there. If you see them and want them to be different in any way, just let me know. I’m easy to find online.
Kelly Patrick Gerling
@John S. Allen
I submitted a request to join the Facebook group on September 13 as you suggested but after two days the status is still listed as “pending”. Do applicants have to jump through any hoops before being admitted? (If you’d rather keep this portion of our exchange private rathe than post it on your blog, my email address is gallupsmirror at gmail. ) Thank you.
@Kathy Montgomery: I extend my condolences over your loss. Thank you very much for providing your explanation, despite how hard this is for you. Your input is helpful in order to understand what happened, and to help prevent similar crashes in the future.