livedarklions

I think they should just change the name of this forum to "The Pimple's Court".

hotbike

My thoughts exactly. Get a rear view mirror and stay to the middle of the lane whenever there’s no traffic.
The guy was going way too fast in a door zone.

63rickert

Moving traffic is an interesting concept. I see a traffic lane in the video. There does not appear to be a loading zone. In that neighborhood there might not be an unobstructed loading zone or legal parking spot within half a mile. Of course the passenger is not going to tolerate the driver cruising around half an hour searching for legality.

So what happens to moving traffic and traffic flow when any driver at any time gets to declare a loading zone. What happens when double parking is de facto the norm?

Go ahead and get lawyers involved. By precedent in City of Chicago it is entirely legal to drive drunk and to be arrested repeatedly for drunk driving. You can keep driving and keep getting arrested. It is entirely legal to kill cyclists with blood alcohol three times past the limit. All you need is good lawyers.

City of Chicago putting e-bikes on the street for anyone to use is about like vending machines for loaded guns. From what I can see in the vid the driver is wrong, the passenger is wrong and the cyclist is wrong. That unfortunate events will occur is expected. To ride a bike at all in that location you had better be good. Anyone good enough to be there avoids situations trickier than the one in the video continuously. And knows that it is still a roll of the dice.

There is no excuse ever for leaving the scene. My car, while legally parked, with me fifty feet away, has been rear-ended by a texting cyclist. I did not leave the scene. Cyclist blamed me for the incident, leaving the scene could have caused endless problems. Never leave the scene. Judge, jury, your own lawyers will not be sympathetic with leaving the scene.

kingston 

Just saw on the that more people on ebikes is leading to a significant increase in cycling related fatalities in the Netherlands.
Some Dutch neurologists are advocating compulsory helmets.

I-Like-To-Bike

For whom are "some Dutch neurologists" advocating compulsory helmets? For ebike riders only or any body not on 4 wheels? What percentage of Dutch neurologists have not made any such advocacy?

kingston 

How the heck am I supposed to know? I just said I saw it on the GCN Show. Feel free to look it up and report back.

I-Like-To-Bike

In other news, "some" doctors advocate for all sorts of stuff, including recommendations for products for which they have no more expertise about its actual effectiveness than the general public.

kingston 

The interesting and relevant data point is that cycling fatalities in the Netherlands are the highest in 25 years and 1 in 3 was on an ebike. I agree the helmet advocacy is a big nothing-burger.

I-Like-To-Bike

CliffordK

I'm not sure we've confirmed that the bike in the incident was an E-Bike. I think I suggested it looked like one to me when viewing the video. I do think the rider can be seen pedaling, but everything happens so quickly in the small frame.

It also looks like a bike share bike to me.

The bike share business would be a unique business to hit with helmet regulations. Or at least for them to strongly encourage helmets.

I don't think sharing helmets would be appropriate, so a rider would have to bring their own helmet with them.

Time to bring back the "Hair Nets"?



There are a number of modern foldable and collapsible helmets that are hitting the market today. And, perhaps that should be a push for at least some casual bike share users.

kingston 

25 year-old men don't buy step-throughs with skirt guards, he was coasting at high speed, regular divvy bikes are bright blue and this one was black. It's a divvy ebike. No question about it.

It will be interesting to see how many people get maimed on those things before the city does anything about it. I've never used one of the divvy ebikes, but I used the regular ones a lot pre-pandemic. I wouldn't use them at all if I had to remember to bring a helmet downtown.

livedarklions

That's interesting because it is a regulatory question--what is the coasting speed of one of those ebikes? Lowering it on the ride share bikes is a pretty easy technical fix.

I think you've brought up the only two things really worth discussing in this thread--that the ride share drivers are regularly dropping from traffic lanes in this neighborhood and the speed of the ride share bikes. Those are actually issues where something could be done at a policy level. The individual responsibility of this rider is really a side issue that completely swamped this thread. I look at it like the possible fault of the passenger--there's next to nothing that could be done to affect those kinds of choices by riders and passengers, but speed reg of the rideshare ebikes and liability for the rideshare companies are actually changes that could be effective.

This thread is a really good example of why A&S is the useless forum, its priorities are upside down. Pretty much everyone wants to focus on nitpicking a "case" out of the sketchy publicly available materials of individual incidents to tell us who they think is to "blame". No one seems to want to actually discuss advocacy and what it is we should be advocating for.

I-Like-To-Bike claimed that my concerns with the safety implications of ride-share companies business arrangements is a "political" question that should be brought to P&R. If that's the case, then we should definitely change the name of this forum because there simply is no way to discuss safety advocacy or bicycle advocacy of any kind without implicating some political issues. Seriously, by that standard, "should states enact the Idaho stop?" is a question for P&R. And all due respect, most of the bike vs. motor vehicle casualties are occurring in cities, and it's really impossible to consider significant changes to city traffic issues without considering gig economy drivers or, for that matter, delivery guys that are working for Uber-eats and the like, or the subcontractors of Amazon, whose primary function is to shield Amazon from liability.. I get that from the vantage point of Burlington, Iowa, that might seem peripheral to bicycle safety, but it's pretty central in a major city like Boston, New York, or Chicago.

kingston 

According to specs, the pedal assist cuts out at 18 mph. They're cadence sensors like most cheap American ebikes, so all you have to do is turn the pedals and they'll hit top speed with just the motor. The accident was right after one of our big six-corner intersections on Lincoln Ave, which is one of the major arteries running through Lincoln Park, so it's safe to assume he was carrying near the top speed in the video.

prj71

Because when a car pulls into a bike lane and comes to a complete stop that's kind of a red flag that YOU as a cyclist need to be hyper-alert when riding in the door zone and slow down or stop. That guy riding his bike was flying and made no reasonable attempt at slowing down or stopping. Much like when driving a car when you are always in defense mode...you need to do the same when cycling.

Slowing down or stopping in these types of situations is a preemptive move that could save a cyclist from serious harm.

livedarklions

I'm going to assume nothing about him because it's of no importance to me. I'm interested in your direct observations of the area, though--do you see a lot of riders running these too fast in the Lincoln Park area? I'd say I've seen a lot of crazy ride share e-scooter use, but I really haven't seen it much with the ride share bikes.

kingston 

In my observation, the divvy ebikes aren't super common yet so I haven't seen that many. The ones I have seen I would generalize as inattentive not crazy.

63rickert

From the traffic lane is where all drop offs happen in that neighborhood. There are normally zero open parking spots, designated loading zones will be private property and guarded. For example the beer truck pulls up to the tavern. Tavern has no loading zone. Tavern has been there since 1880s. Politicians and celebrities drink at that bar. The beer truck needs half an hour to deliver. So two lanes plus parking for traffic volume that would justify four traffic lanes becomes intermittent one way in both directions with no one directing traffic. And this is normal. This is frequent. The beer truck is hardly the only one making deliveries.

The upshot for cyclists is that it is genuinely difficult to ride there. The choices are be slow and careful or have just lots of skill and lots of street smarts and still expect to be delayed, to be frustrated, to have many close calls. E-bikes that do 20mph piloted by devil may care riders are part of the mix. So are electric skateboards, those monowheel rigs, scooters, anything. They are all packed into a tight space and there are no rules. This is a neighborhood that by tradition breaks all rules.

There is no way to make that place safe for cyclists. Non possible. Not happening.

In response to various other posters, yes, traffic in Chicago will at times proceed down the wrong side of the road. Vehicles are seen with plywood windshields and you will see same vehicle repeatedly, do not expect that police get that vehicle off the street. Yes, black cars drive around with no functional lights at night. Possibly the prize, or at least weirdest I can recall quickly, goes to the car with no window glass, layers of fogged thick plastic sheeting wrapped around top of car, driving 40mph on a residential street at dusk, steering by bouncing off parked cars on either side of street. Saw the same car next morning at 6 a.m., four miles south, pointed in other direction. Fire department had just finished extinguishing it.

There are some who pay no attention and just sail on. Good for them. When you see someone passing while you are riding 20mph and they are on a brakeless fixie and texting it’s a tossup do you admire their skill or do you decide the whole world is mad.

I-Like-To-Bike

Rider inattention to an obvious (and all too common) hazardous traffic scenario occurring right in front of him and his apparent lack of appropriate response is what this thread is (or should be) all about. The rider in the OP appeared to be oblivious of the high risk situation he was putting himself in and appeared to take no evasive or precautionary action prior to riding right into the door. Whether it was a rented ebike or his own bicycle is irrelevant.

Others may want to bring up their favorite irrelevant agenda such as helmet wear, bike lane use, or social issues or whatever else is on their mind. A lawyer or two may wish to make it a rideshare issue for their own reasons, regardless that the same type of hazard happens everyday in every city where drivers of all types, taxi and non commercial vehicles alike, drop off passengers without the benefit of an off street parking lots or passenger loading/discharge zone.

It appears that some A&S posters choose to ignore the actual hazard that was shown in the OP and choose to not even consider what could possibly be learned from this rider's misfortune.

prj71

This thread reminds me why I will never live in a big city. There is zero upside to living in a big city.

I did a 26 mile ride last night on mix of gravel and pavement...saw 3 cars, 8 deer and 3 turkey.

The concrete jungle blows.

livedarklions

I must have missed the memo where you were designated "The Guy Who Decides What Threads Are About." If we decide that particular rider was careless, so what? You really think we learned anything from that?


It's exactly the fact that the rideshare issues are pretty much common to all US cities that makes it worth talking about. Maybe it makes no difference in Chicago, but why it wouldn't work is a hell of a lot more interesting topic than "is that guy going 15 mph or 18?"

livedarklions

So can we put yous guys down for the "sharrows aren't gonna fix everything"?

OK, that's two of you telling me Chicago is a cyclist hellscape. I'm going to defer to the local knowledge.

kingston 

The city calls them bike lanes. Thanks Lori Lightfoot for keeping us safe!

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?

livedarklions

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.

prj71

Yes. Defensive cycling. Just like when you drive...defensive driving.

I would not have hit the door on that car, because I have the common sense to realize that if a car is stopped in front of me, I better slow down and pay attention to see if someone is going open the door and get out.