Originally Posted by
CliffordK
Several of us came to the independent conclusion that the accident could have been avoided had the cyclist slowed down when the vehicle stopped, and not tried to through a door zone buffer.
Both ride shares and bike shares present unique issues, and this event appears to be bike share (or e-bike share) meets ride share.
If it had been a bright yellow taxi, would the cyclist have chosen to cut curbside?
Earlier in the thread, I had suggested looking for better ways to mark ride share vehicles, although I can't think of anything that would be failsafe other than painting them bright yellow with little black checkers.
Perhaps a brightly colored rear hatch magnetic sign?
Flashing lights? Magnetic roof placard?
Yes, a bunch of people said that if things had occurred differently, there would have been a different outcome. I wouldn't say that exhibits any kind of "learning.". I also think people are missing the significance of the fact that the driver felt he could drive off with impunity, which really is revealing of a systematic problem that people seem to think is outside the scope of the forum. He drove away from an injured cyclist as a ride share driver, and we don't think that's revealing of a likely corporate attitude towards us?
One thing I think is clear from this i Chicago is doing a really poor job of telling people what a sharrow is supposed to mean. Calling a shared lane a " bike lane" is really confusing the issue, and if the intention is to confine cyclists to taking the lane rather than passing on the right, then that needs to get communicated.