Watch the video above taken from my dashcam yesterday around noon at the corner of F and 2nd Streets in Davis. It’s barely a stone’s throw from the Vanguard’s downtown office. In the just over three years we have been there, I have driven through that intersection and probably a dozen like it in Davis Downtown and seen dozens of near misses.
I’ll be honest, I’m less amazed that I finally saw an accident involving a bike and a car – I’m amazed it has taken this long to witness one. One of the police officials I talked to after I witnessed this agreed.
In this case, there is no doubt the rainy conditions contributed to it. The truck is at fault here. The bicyclist kind of stumbled out of the gate and ended up trailing the car that moved through the intersection just before it, but the bike was clearly in the intersection before the truck started moving.
He’s quite fortunate that he ended up hitting the truck rather than the truck hitting him. It would have been ugly had that occurred, although the truck may have seen him in time.
I flagged down the bicyclist, who appeared to be a UC Davis student, and I told him I had the thing on video. He was unsure whose fault it was. His bike was badly damaged, at least on the wheel, but he was otherwise all right. I wasn’t going to argue with him and I wasn’t sure whose fault it was until I saw it on video.
As I have argued many times before, while Davis is a bike-friendly town, it is not well set up for bicyclists. Downtown, in particular, is a gauntlet. And I feel that way not just driving my car, but walking around downtown.
The problem is that we have set up every intersection as a four-way stop. Think about this – when I got to the intersection here, I am the second car headed southbound on F. I had already waited for two or three other cars in my direction to go through.
There is a car and truck to my left, a car in the northbound direction straight ahead, a truck on the right and probably someone behind him that we can’t see yet. A bicyclist had just come through on the other side of the street, and the bike that’s about to be hit is to my right. At this particular time there do not appear to be pedestrians, but they are the x-factor.
Pedestrians get the right of way on intersections, which means cars pausing to wait for people to cross the street, and often you start turning and someone jumps off the sidewalk almost in front of you.
My point is that it’s chaotic, cars will most of the time defer to pedestrians as they should, but sometimes they get impatient – and understandably so. Sometimes they try to jump their turn or push ahead of pedestrians.
As I said, I’m frankly amazed that we do not have more collisions – and some of that is due to the fact that people are stopped. Still, I will hear a few car-on-car collisions from my office each year.
At some point, though, a car and a bike are going to meet and it’s going to be a fatality and then we will be forced to look at the set up.
The thing about what happened yesterday is that the bicyclist obeyed the traffic laws – he didn’t run the stop sign. He tried to move out with the car alongside him, but he stumbled slightly and the truck never saw that he was coming across the street.
It is not that the truck did anything egregious, he just didn’t make sure the intersection was clear when he started to move.
But here’s the thing, it’s easy to do. You lose track of whose turn it is. I almost did it myself because I was focused on trying to intercept the bicyclist to let him know I had the crash on my dashcam. It’s really easy to miss pedestrians crossing from the left on the far corner. It’s really easy to miss pedestrians as you are focused on turning and whose turn it is with the car.
Now, most of the time, as long as you start slowly, you can stop before something happens. But this is a recipe for disaster. We pride ourselves on being a bike town, but our downtown is not well suited for bicyclists.
I always found it quite interesting during the Fifth Street debate, where those opposed to the redesign would often suggest bicyclists avoid Fifth and come down to Third. The problem is, you are asking bicyclists to navigate four-way stops from C Street through G Street.
Not only does the starting and stopping take a toll on the bicyclists and encourage them to run stop signs, but it’s not like Third Street is safe.
We need to re-think our downtown, not just from a bicycle safety standpoint, but also if we want it to be an entertainment destination regionally.
The parking issue remains a problem during peak times. I met a friend for dinner on Thursday night and he told me that he often ends up circling for ten to fifteen minutes during peak times, trying to find parking.
Driving through downtown is not a pleasant experience, especially during peak times.
I’ve often suggested we create parking on the periphery of the downtown and get people out of their cars. That could be a solution. Blocking off some streets to cars might work. I think they’ve tried one-way traffic which would at least reduce the intersections from four-way (times three with cars, bikes, and pedestrians) to two-way.
We had a parking task force, but we’ve not had similar focus on safety and multi-modal transportation downtown. It’s probably time to look at this issue more seriously.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Sincerely hope the truck owner does the decent thing and buys the student a new, better bike. The least he could do in this situation. So happy the student was not seriously hurt. So impressed with his lack of road rage here after the incident. This actually renewed my hope for mankind.
My new hometown has many fluorescent green, wide bike lanes. I just love them.
“Now most of the time, as long as you start slowly…”
It’s easy to fix bike lanes and possibly having a core downtown area with no cars. It’s harder to fix modern day society and citizens that feel a need to rush everywhere they are going.
I would have liked to have seen him a bit less conciliatory, particularly after viewing the video where it was clear that the truck was in the wrong.
“I would have liked to have seen him a bit less conciliatory.”
Well, you have no audio, and the bicyclist was gesticulating quite a bit. Wonder if a finger was extended, and wonder what words were spoken. There pretty obviously were words spoken. I’ll bet a good lunch that those words (particularly from the bicyclist) were far from “conciliatory” and probably closed the door to any thought of making the bicyclist “whole”. But I/we can only speculate.
I talked to him afterwards, he said that he was not sure whose fault it was, I offered to show him the video, but he wanted to let it go.
Sisterhood wrote:
> Sincerely hope the truck owner does the decent
>thing and buys the student a new, better bike.
If one of my kids rides his bike in to the side of your car will you buy them a new bike?
P.S. To David:
1. Did the Davis PD give a ticket to anyone?
2. Why do you have a dashcam?
Police never arrived on the scene, I sent the video to someone in the DPD to get their thoughts after the fact.
Second question is more interesting. The basic answer is I always see stuff when I’m driving that I find interesting so when I saw last fall, a dashcam, very good quality for only $60, I said what the heck. Less than a week later I get hit by a car at Montgomery dropping off my kids. Car backed into me in the parking lot. While the cam did not show the actually impact, it showed the I had stopped moving backwards (out of my space) for a second and a half prior to being hit and that was the deciding factor in getting a settlement from the other insurance company. So my $60 dashcam got me a $3000 settlement that I’ll use at some point to get a new car. But that aside, I’ve already used the cam for a few stories and there’s always useful things that use it for.
Would have thought insurance payment/settlement was to repair damage, not to parley into a new set of wheels. Whatever, that’s done a lot. Had a roommate in college who had a car worth only ~ $800. He kept it out in “harms way” on Anderson. Managed to have it hit 3 times in a year. Never repaired it, just raked in the “settlements”, amounting to over 4 times what he paid for the vehicle. Slick.
If I impatiently drove my car into an intersection and caused a kid to run into my car, you can believe I would buy him a very expensive bike
Maybe a new front wheel and tune-up, but a “new, better bicycle” seems a tad disproportionate. There were at least two individuals who had an opportunity to avoid the collision, based on the video. Bicycle’s brakes may have been impaired by the wet conditions. Yet doesn’t appear (but can’t tell) if the bicyclist tried to brake. Pretty easy as not a lot of speed/momentum was achieved after they entered the intersection.
Sadly, a typical example of the skills and judgement I see exercised by drivers and bicyclists, when I visit Davis. Driver awareness seems to be a factor as does a sense of entitlement on the parts of some cyclists. I think the greater risks to cyclists and pedestrians is outside of “downtown,” however, on the longer, less restricted streets, where I find most drivers are prone to drive well over the posted limits, “Stop” signs are viewed as advisory and texting/talking on cell phones is common. A couple of weeks ago, I witnessed a non-injury bike Vs. Prius on Oak. Both the rider and driver were apparently engaged in conversations on Bluetooth headsets at the time they collided.(yeah, I laughed.)
;>)/
In this case, the bicyclist was operating within traffic laws, the truck failed to make sure the intersection was clear before proceeding. I believe the elements but also the traffic set up played a role.
OK… on the video it was obviously a dreary day and raining enough that the wipers were going. Which, for a few years now, means car headlights were supposed to be on. Bicyclist was wearing dark clothing. Was there a light on the bike and, if so, was it on? Could the crash been avoided if the bicyclist and his vehicle was more visible?
It’s tough to engineer around ill-considered actions.
If the bicyclist made any mistake–I am not sure he did because it is a bit hard to see where he is looking from behind–it might be that, when he entered the intersection, he did not keep an eye on the traffic around him, including the truck.
An important lesson–it applies to cars, too, but especially bikes and pedestrians, because they are so much more likely to be hurt badly by cars–is to keep your head on a swivel. Look for cars that don’t seem to see you. Look out for cars suddenly backing up out of diagonal parking spots. And god forbid, if you are on foot, don’t ever look down at the ground when you are walking through a crosswalk. I see this all the time with pedestrians in Davis. They will have ear buds in and their eyes down, and they don’t look both ways to make sure that no bikes or cars are coming through. While they do have the right of way, it is just dumb to be so careless and so unaware of your surroundings.
In this case, 100% of the legal fault was with the truck. The driver obviously did not look to his left to see that traffic had moved in advance of him. If he looked at all, it was to his right. He is just very lucky the bicyclist was not killed.
The video starts with the bike n/b through the intersection. The white truck crosses the limit line and enters the intersection as the car to your left makes a right turn and then the car opposite to you cuts the line and enters the intersection. The white truck which had the right of way stops and the car in front of you crosses and the bike then stops at the limit line and then proceeds to enter the intersection. The white truck that was past the limit line well before the car in front of David entered the intersection and the bike stopped at the limit line. The white truck had the right of way when both the car in front of David and the bike entered the intersection. Two cars and a bike all cut in front of the white truck. The white truck was the most cautious driver at the intersection and probably did not see the bike assuming the bike had no light. The bike also stopped at the limit line after the car in front of David started to proceed through the intersection. It appears that the truck saw the car in front of David move forward and then the bike stops at the limit line. The driver probably expected the bike to stay put while it finished moving through the intersection. I am still not sure how the bike ran into the truck instead of stopping.
Often collisions (agree with Darrell’s distinction between ‘collision’ and ‘accident’) are due to a basic mechanical problem. In this case I suspect a screw and/or nut was loose behind both the handlebars and the steering wheel. The basic law is, despite assigned right of way, everyone is expected to do avoid a collision, if they have a reasonable chance to.
Pretty sure it wasn’t, but the crash almost looked staged. Key words being “almost looked”.’
I’ll have to admit that this thought crossed my mind, although I agree I don’t think it was the case. It did remind me of this video though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ
You have my agreement on this post, hpierce!
Only thing I’ll add about where the attention of the cyclist was – he may well have been focussed on some other potential danger to his left – for example the enormous Budget truck that was inching into the intersection. That would have gained some of my attention as well.
Cyclist begins to roll. White truck is stopped on right. Budget truck is inching into the intersection from the left. It is just kinda ugly no matter how you slice it.
why shouldn’t a cyclist feel entitled? It is a public road. Cyclists are entitled to use it.
David, your frank amazement on the frequency of “near misses” is an observation I’ve had for the entire time I’ve lived in Davis. I find myself cringing most every time I travel the core area, and deliberately avoid going there on bike when possible. This remarks come from a cyclist of a near half-century duration, and tens of thousands of miles experience in heavy urban traffic.
With only occasional exceptions, motorists and pedestrians are uncommonly aware of cyclists in the core area. They are also exceptionally courteous towards cyclists, yielding the right-of-way even when they have it. I think Davis is better described as being “Bicycle Tolerant,” rather than, “Bike Friendly,” a remark that rankles some of my cycling colleagues.
Solution? Not every problem has a solution, but intuitively I feel compatibility among the three forms of transportation in the Core Area is possible. The three transportation sources have historically been combative towards each other, invariably resulting in delay, failure, and frustration. Local commerce in the Core Area needs to take a greater participatory role as well.
Remedies have been achieved and hailed, including color-coding of streets. But like all remedy efforts, the basic problem remains, and grows. Following the concept of the “critical mass” requirement before public policy becomes effective, it may, sadly, just require the loss of a human life to bring all vested parties together and become meaningful problem solvers.
A solution that works well in other towns similar to Davis’ downtown is to install traffic lights at each intersection in the downtown area. Everyone takes their turn, no more pedestrians jumping off the curbs into moving traffic. No need to guess who is going next into the intersection.
Expense aside — something on the order of $150k per light, as I recall — I sure wouldn’t want to go to signalized intersections downtown. Getting rid of the light at 3rd & F was a blessing, and I find the 4-way stops very workable, whether I’m on foot, on a bike or in a car.
I agree with the statement that pedestrians are the “x” factor. Pedestrians have the right of way. This is no way means that we use that right judiciously. As someone who walks downtown almost everyday I am as guilty as anyone talking on their cell or bluetooth device, not when walking alone when I am apt to be very vigilant, but when I am walking with my partner or in a group when conversation tends to be distracting. There have been a number of occasions in which I have stepped off a curb without paying attention to the entire intersection which of course is critical for everyone’s safety where there are bikes, cars, and other pedestrians all trying to assess when it is “their turn” and frequently not signaling where it is they intend to go.
I am fully in favor of David’s suggestion for a safety and multi modal task force for this area preferably before we have a tragedy.
The truck didn’t wait his turn. The big truck to the left should have been next and then him. Cars are supposed to proceed in a counter-clockwise fashion around the intersection. This is a huge problem at every 4-way stop in town. There is no order, so accidents are bound to happen.
I beg to differ, Ryan. The white truck initiated his movement concurrently with the Mercedes exactly as the white truck should have. The big truck was stopped BEHIND the Mercedes, i.e. the big truck was a full rotation away from being next to move into the intersection.
The proper rotation was Mercedes AND white truck both moving east/west. Next up were north/south sedans AND bicycle. Then the west bound big truck. Then south bound David.
-Michael
It’s not clear to me who caused the incident. But it’s clear to me that David’s presentation of the facts is not in alignment with the video. The video shows a northbound bicyclists on F Street clearing the intersection. The two vehicles on 2nd Street, including the white truck, then rightfully begin their movements with the Mercedes successfully completing its right turn. With the with truck already across the limit line and entering the intersection, the northbound sedan on F Street then jumps it’s turn followed by the southbound sedan, the white truck has to stop to avoid hitting the southbound sedan then begins moving forward again after the southbound sedan has cleared his bumper. The bicyclists then enters the intersection. There’s obviously no way of knowing whether the white truck driver ever saw the bicyclist. Or maybe the white truck driver did, proceeded regardless, thinking the bicyclists would notice that the truck was already in the intersection and slowdown or halt. Again, I have no way of knowing, but why doesn’t the bicyclists stop? Does the bicyclists not see the white truck in front of him? Or not care thinking the white truck driver will halt yet again? Further exacerbating the issue is the bicyclists wearing all black with no lights in fairly dark conditions. Again, I’m not assigning blame. I’m merely pointing out that a number of actors were no exercising best judgement and it’s not at all clear what they were seeing or thinking as they were acting.
PS: In my view, the Budget truck driver is the worst offender circling around the fallen bicyclists to avoid driving over him. Talk about being oblivious!
-Michael
What this back and forth about who had the greater culpability points out to me is that even when sitting at home viewing the events dispassionately and repeatedly if the posters so desired, there is not universal agreement on who had the right of way. How much more likely there is to be disagreement, confusion and at times even conflict over this in real time on the road.
For me, this is a safety issue, not an issue of convenience in finding the best parking place. That alone should be enough to prompt a serious attempt whether by a commission or city staff to come up with an attempt to design a safer multimodal approach.
Tia, you missed my point entirely. A parked car is NOT creating congestion and is NOT in conflict with other modes of transportation; whereas, a car circling for parking is doing exactly that. So yes, safety is intertwined with convenient parking. This is a fundamental principal that the DPTF recognized and was reflected in its proposed comprehensive parking management plan.
-Michael
This was my first thought when I watched the video. (I’m not suggesting that the truck had the right of way or that legally the bicyclist was at fault, but I don’t understand why for the sake of self-preservation he didn’t stop before hitting the truck).
This was my second thought.