Originally Posted by
Korina
Down in the comments, someone familiar with the area said that trucks take that nice wide corner fast. I can see a scenario where she was in the crosswalk and the truck turned behind her and just swung wide. But we won't know until the police release the report.
Such things could happen there, but the witness report strongly suggests that's not what happened this time, but that the collision was with the side of the truck.
Typically such has the cyclist's own speed as the cause of ultimate closure. Though there is also the case where a cyclist or pedestrian realizes they are moving into the inside of a turn and stops, but doesn't anticipate the sideways movement of a truck trailer in a turn. A cyclist or older pedestrian may be less able to retreat back from that subtle danger than someone spry on their feet.
If you look at the photo, that is a
very badly designed intersection; the wide corners invite drivers to take them at speed, and there's no kind of pedestrian refuge, just six lanes of cars waiting to run you over.
It also makes intended usage of the crosswalk look quite visible if it is entered at pedestrian speeds such that volnerable users are in driver's forward vision rather than to the side or overtaking from the rear and side.
IMHO the problem is that this intersection works for walking, or for through vehicular traffic in the lane correct for such intention.
But it does not really work for cycling as a vehicular type of movement which would take place in a fundamentally wrong position relative to the turn lane.
I'd either relocate the crossing to be its own light at the midpoint of the loop road, or give traffic savy cyclists an earlier opportunity to merge off the trail into an appropriate through lane position, and then really drive home with a series of multiple signs preceding the intersection that the trail crossing is intended for pedestrian equivalent movement only.