Advocacy & Safety - Woman killed by bicyclist

From the L.A. Times:

http://tinyurl.com/2c7jlh

Irvine police are investigating the death of a 68-year-old Yorba Linda woman who was the victim of a collision with a bicyclist.

Jung Yun Kim was walking on a trail in Irvine along the San Diego Creek near the intersection of Harvard Avenue and University Drive when she crossed the path of oncoming cyclists at about 8:30 a.m. Monday. She was hit by a 46-year-old bicyclist from Huntington Beach, according to Irvine police Lt. Rick Handfield.

The bicyclist, whose name was not released, was riding with another bicyclist who witnessed the accident. To ensure they have an independent account of what happened, police are asking for other witnesses to come forward, Handfield said, but the agency does not suspect any wrongdoing.

"We don't suspect they weren't paying attention or were negligent or anything," Handfield said. "It's just an unfortunate, very freak event that Mrs. Kim didn't see them coming and then stepped out in front of them."

She was treated at the scene for major head trauma and taken to a hospital, where she was pronounced dead about 5 p.m. Monday.

Anyone with information about the accident is asked to call Det. Jonathan Cherney at (949) 724-7024.

Hard to tell what happened from that account...but damn, that sucks.

R.I.P. Mrs. Kim. :(

[QUOTE=DGirlLA;5171934]From the L.A. Times:

http://tinyurl.com/2c7jlh



"We don't suspect they weren't paying attention or were negligent or anything," Handfield said. "It's just an unfortunate, very freak event that Mrs. Kim didn't see them coming and then stepped out in front of them."
QUOTE]

If the police officer had spent much time riding a bike on an MUP, he would know that pedestrians randomly stepping into the path of an oncoming bicycle is not a freak occurrance at all.

I saw a woman walker on our MUP make a U turn without looking and was smacked by a guy on a bike. Fortunatly the bike was not going that fast. The woman who was using and Ipod with earphones was totally at fault.

A little more info here, but not much more. FYI, the path in this area runs next to the church in the article. There's also a curve in path approaching the church from the northbound direction, but it is hard to tell where on the path the tragedy occurred.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/irvine-walking-handfield-1823001-police-woman

classic for me was..riding along a marked bike path...bike symbols painted on path every 20 feet..
here are 4 women (40ish - 50ish) walking on path line abreast..oblivious to everything around them
completely blocking the path and forcing bikers to ride on the grass to get around them
pointing out to them that is is a bike path had no effect .. and the kicker is... there is a pedestrian
path running parallel to the bike trail ..both trails are separated by a 2ft grass median..

(movie Sixth Sense knock off -- i see stupid people.. they are every where.. and they dont know they're stupid :) )

I saw a woman walker on our MUP make a U turn without looking and was smacked by a guy on a bike. Fortunatly the bike was not going that fast. The woman who was using and Ipod with earphones was totally at fault.

This exact situation happened to me (U-turn, Ipod) on a bridge sidewalk (which bicyclists are forced to take). Luckily, right before I passed her I was anticipating that she might just decide to make a U-turn (I'm so good:D) and I was able to swerve and just bump her, but of course she got pissed off at me.

PRECISELY why i put on the dual tone siren when i hit the bikepaths.

The trails can be quite dangerous- I've seen pedestrians do stupid things on the trail while walking or jogging, but I've also seen bike riders who are behaving recklessly by going way to fast or too many abreast. Sometimes you get that one guy who's always talking to himself walking down the middle of the trail. Nothing like a good conversation I guess.

I actually encounter the dangerous cylists more often than the pedestrians on the local trail I use much of the time. The worst, I've found, are the supposedly "experienced" cyclists who think they know everything about the trail and are more than willing to blaze away at 40 mph in high bike/pedestrian traffic trail zones. There must be something about the feel of spandex as you hurdle towards imminent collision. At least it's more aerodynamic before you crash. But maybe someone will mistake you for a comic book hero as you fly past through the air.

Also dangerous are those people who have unleashed dogs on the trail that seem to wander aimlessly. I've nearly run over a couple of those purse rat dogs (Mexican Hairless variety I think) who get let loose. Hitting one of them could be almost as dangerous as hitting an oak branch that has fallen. It probably would sound the same anyway.

So yeah long story short, the trail can be pretty wild.

classic for me was..riding along a marked bike path...bike symbols painted on path every 20 feet...
(movie Sixth Sense knock off -- i see stupid people.. they are every where.. and they dont know they're stupid :) )

:roflmao::beer:

... but I've also seen bike riders who are behaving recklessly by going way to fast or...

So yeah long story short, the trail can be pretty wild.

I believe that's generally a fallacy. Why? Generally it's not cyclists who are too fast, generally cyclists are relegated or coerced into using itineraries which are too slow. Any fast moving vehicle needs to be with fast moving vehicles, on the road.

Bikes and peds are not a good mix. Differents rules, different rights, different expections: shouldn't be on same pavement.

MUPs where peds are allowed should have 8 MPH speed limits.

Bike highways with separate sections for peds are something else again.

I believe that's generally a fallacy. Why? Generally it's not cyclists who are too fast, generally cyclists are relegated or coerced into using itineraries which are too slow. Any fast moving vehicle needs to be with fast moving vehicles, on the road.

There's also a danger from fast bicycles to slow bicycles on the trail. I generally do about 10-15 mph on the trails as an average speed. It's pretty slow. The high speed bicycles blow by and try to squeeze into passing positions that are a bit close all around. What some of the bad drivers on the road do to bicycles the bad cyclists on the trails do to slower bicycles and pedestrians.

I agree about being on the road though- if you're going to blaze along then the road is the better place. However I think slow cyclists on the trails work out fine since many aren't going much faster, if at all, than a rollerblader or a jogger. I just wouldn't tell bikes per se to stay off the trails. I think some kinds of riders do well on them and are safe.

Bikes and peds are not a good mix. Differents rules, different rights, different expections: shouldn't be on same pavement.

MUPs where peds are allowed should have 8 MPH speed limits.

Bike highways with separate sections for peds are something else again.

Sure, provided the peds actually use the separate sections.

The 56 trail has it well marked, with words, pictures and arrows... yet Tuesday there were three large women walking side by side blocking the whole path... I warned with a "coming up on the left" and they moved and made some smart ***** comment about bikes... meanwhile the walking trail was empty just on the other side of the little fence...

And you don't even want to get into the middle of the path walkers with iPODs that wouldn't hear a train coming... sheesh.

Well, going too fast can only become a problem, but only if you're going too fast for conditions.
I hit a good 30~35km/h sometimes 45+km/h on the MUPs and bike trails here in Toronto, but what I never do is pass unsafely, get myself going too fast when there are too many obstacles or I won't sprint unless I can see that I have a clear path.

I know what some people want to do is what Trinity did on the highway with the Ducati in the Matrix, but that was CG...

Slowing down is a pain, but better than ramming into another person at those speeds.
bladers 2 abreast = slow down, pass when safe
blind corner, peds 4 wide = slow down, pass when safe
children unattended, frolicking = slow down, pass when safe
get my drift?

There's also a danger from fast bicycles to slow bicycles on the trail. I generally do about 10-15 mph on the trails as an average speed. It's pretty slow. The high speed bicycles blow by and try to squeeze into passing positions that are a bit close all around. What some of the bad drivers on the road do to bicycles the bad cyclists on the trails do to slower bicycles and pedestrians.

I agree about being on the road though- if you're going to blaze along then the road is the better place. However I think slow cyclists on the trails work out fine since many aren't going much faster, if at all, than a rollerblader or a jogger. I just wouldn't tell bikes per se to stay off the trails. I think some kinds of riders do well on them and are safe.

Cyclists behaviors around cars are also more dependable, I find away from cars, cyclists often loose all sense of rules and start swerving and stopping and turning without signaling. I trust the streets much more.

Sure, provided the peds actually use the separate sections.

The 56 trail has it well marked, with words, pictures and arrows... yet Tuesday there were three large women walking side by side blocking the whole path... I warned with a "coming up on the left" and they moved and made some smart ***** comment about bikes... meanwhile the walking trail was empty just on the other side of the little fence...

And you don't even want to get into the middle of the path walkers with iPODs that wouldn't hear a train coming... sheesh.
Yes, which is why a road is often preferable for bicycle transportaion than is a MUP.

We have a great trail system in Columbia MO and it connects to the Katy trail that goes through much of our state. This weekend a person I know had a pedestrian accident like described. She was biking along at a moderate pace and a jogger (who had been resting on a bench) got up and stepped directly in to her. She flew over the bike and broke her collarbone and may need surgery. The trails are very hard for pedestrians and cyclists to co-mingle. Last fall I had stopped to watch the running leg of a triathlon my husband was in and I was completely flattened because of a bone-head move by a runner. He ran in to an old woman who then stumbled across the trail, fell in to me and knocked me and my bike down a big embankment. I was just glad it was me and not my 9 yr old daughter who was biking with me. I certainly learned to put both feet down when standing over my bike somewhere like that! People gripe so much about bikers, but the truth is that everyone does stupid stuff and we all have to be careful on the public trails.

MUPs are linear parks, not bike freeways. I do use them (in the same manner in which I use traditional parks), but they are not appropriate for training rides, pace lines, or any activity which involves fast riding. If my sight line is good, and the MUP is empty, I may go up to around twelve MPH. Where there are pedestrians around I toddle along between eight and ten MPH.

If I want to ride hard (which is most of the time) I hit the roads.

Had a run-in with a gaggle of pedestrians the other day, they didn't move over so I was following at a walking pace starting to get irritated from attempting to get them to move over, when one of them made the comment that she was tired of having to move over for bicycles all the time and 'we' should use the roads instead. None of them took it too well when I told them the signs showing the way to the trail showed a bicycle, not a fat lady in jogging shoes.

Agree that they're not bicycle freeways, though they can shave a LOT of time off a trip, simply because for most of them you can maintain a higher average speed, fewer stops and no driveways, one I routinely ride is a mile longer, but takes 5-10 minutes less time than the road, which is a direct line.

Ken.

If the police officer had spent much time riding a bike on an MUP, he would know that pedestrians randomly stepping into the path of an oncoming bicycle is not a freak occurrance at all.

That doesn't mean that Mrs. Kim did.

Cyclists need to be careful. We are responsible for avoiding all obstacles in our way. If something is moving in an unpredictable manner, take evasive action.

Cyclists complain about cars, pedestrians complain about cyclists. Peds and cyclists are in the same boat really.

Is is a MUP, after all. It seems to me the relationship between cyclists & peds on a MUP is similar to the relationship between cars & cyclists on a road.

But, yeah, some peds can be VERY inconsiderate of other users. Kinda like Crit Massers, eh?

But, yeah, some peds can be VERY inconsiderate of other users. Kinda like Crit Massers, eh?

Heh heh... Nooooooooooo!!! :)

... Peds and cyclists are in the same boat really.

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art20257.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking

Both these sites state average walking speed is 3 mph, Cycling, unless pedestrian cycling, you never go less than 10 mph. But on average cyclists are probably nearer 15 mph and some cyclists average near 20 mph and a few more average even faster. Also, pedestrians are usually casual in behavior, you can stop, turn around, smell a flower, look at a bird, stand around and chat, feet pretty much do as they please and are free to do so. Not so in cycling, cyclists will usually go a couple of miles without stopping, smelling, backtracking. A pedestrian turning radius is ONE step, a cyclist's (unless pedestrian cycling) turning radius is nearer that of a small car.

Mostly, cyclists carry forward motion, lots of it, and have inertia to conquer to get back to speed after every single stop. Pedestrians need one step to stop and one step to get going again.

Except for untrained children, cyclists in NOT in the same boat as pedestrians.

Bikes and peds are not a good mix. Differents rules, different rights, different expections: shouldn't be on same pavement.

MUPs where peds are allowed should have 8 MPH speed limits.

Bike highways with separate sections for peds are something else again.

You want that logic applied to roads with a 45 mph speed limit? Don't care about rules and rights because I'd not a pedantic ideologue, but danger, practicality, and traffic density have me commuting on a MUP. I'll take the odd pedestrian over freeway entrance ramps and racing cagers any day.

Besides, if you give the pedestrian enough clearance, they can't cause problems anyway. It's when cyclists pass peds too close that you have problems.

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art20257.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking

Both these sites state average walking speed is 3 mph, Cycling, unless pedestrian cycling, you never go less than 10 mph. But on average cyclists are probably nearer 15 mph and some cyclists average near 20 mph and a few more average even faster. Also, pedestrians are usually casual in behavior, you can stop, turn around, smell a flower, look at a bird, stand around and chat, feet pretty much do as they please and are free to do so. Not so in cycling, cyclists will usually go a couple of miles without stopping, smelling, backtracking. A pedestrian turning radius is ONE step, a cyclist's (unless pedestrian cycling) turning radius is nearer that of a small car.

Mostly, cyclists carry forward motion, lots of it, and have inertia to conquer to get back to speed after every single stop. Pedestrians need one step to stop and one step to get going again.

Except for untrained children, cyclists in NOT in the same boat as pedestrians.

Premises: Cyclists complain about cars, peds complain about cyclists
Conclusion: Cyclists and peds are in the same boat.

In that sense yes. In your sense, no. I'm talking about the courtesy we should extend to one another. If we expect cars to extend us a three foot berth, then we should be understanding and extend pedestrians a berth. It doesn't take much for us to give them the benefit of the doubt. I believe most collisions can be avoided. Mrs. Kim's death may or may not have been avoided. I'm not judging. I'm saying that we should at least understand why pedestrians find us such so annoying.

Premises: Cyclists complain about cars, peds complain about cyclists
Conclusion: Cyclists and peds are in the same boat.

In that sense yes. In your sense, no. I'm talking about the courtesy we should extend to one another. If we expect cars to extend us a three foot berth, then we should be understanding and extend pedestrians a berth. It doesn't take much for us to give them the benefit of the doubt. I believe most collisions can be avoided. Mrs. Kim's death may or may not have been avoided. I'm not judging. I'm saying that we should at least understand why pedestrians find us such so annoying.

Cyclists complain about cars AND pedestrians
Pedestrians complain about cars AND cyclists
Motorists complain about cycles and AND pedestrians

So we're all in the same boat...

I thought motorists mostly complain about other motorists.

I thought motorists mostly complain about other motorists.

Yep, sorry, omitted that one, oh and also cyclists complain about other cyclists!

I saw a woman walker on our MUP make a U turn without looking and was smacked by a guy on a bike. Fortunatly the bike was not going that fast. The woman who was using and Ipod with earphones was totally at fault.
That almost happened to me last month. On the lower end of the Rock Creek Trail. I rang my bell to pass and she u'ed across my path. Luckily I was able to shift to the right and go around her.
Damn ear buds.

That almost happened to me last month. On the lower end of the Rock Creek Trail. I rang my bell to pass and she u'ed across my path. Luckily I was able to shift to the right and go around her.
Damn ear buds.

I agree about the headphones- you get plenty of folks who just veg with the earphones and aren't aware at all. I see them up on the Cap. Cres. Trail in Bethesda and DC a whole lot.

Bikes and peds are not a good mix. Differents rules, different rights, different expections: shouldn't be on same pavement.

MUPs where peds are allowed should have 8 MPH speed limits.

Bike highways with separate sections for peds are something else again.
You want that logic applied to roads with a 45 mph speed limit? Don't care about rules and rights because I'd not a pedantic ideologue, but danger, practicality, and traffic density have me commuting on a MUP. I'll take the odd pedestrian over freeway entrance ramps and racing cagers any day.

That logic does not apply to roads with a 45 mph speed limit with respect to motorist-cyclist interactions.

The reason high speed differentials between peds and cyclists are problematic on MUPs does not apply to high speed differentials between cyclists and motorists on 45 mph limit roads.

The difference has to do with the difference in operational characteristics between pedestrians and vehicles. Vehicles (including bicycles) generally move in straight lines and relatively steady speeds. Pedestrians are much less predictable. They can and do stop or suddenly change course, sometimes with no notice at all. That's why high speed differentials on MUPs are a problem.



Besides, if you give the pedestrian enough clearance, they can't cause problems anyway. It's when cyclists pass peds too close that you have problems.
If the MUP is wide enough to give them enough clearance that's possible, but it's rarely the case, especially if the ped is walking down the middle of the path. Plus even with several feet of clearance, if the cyclist is moving 15 mph or faster, a ped can easily suddenly move into his path and the cyclist is likely going too fast to be able to effectively evade a crash (though he might get lucky, maybe even if a hundreds times in a row).

If you're willing to ride slow enough, then sharing MUPs with peds is fine. But if you're trying to get somewhere at a reasonable speed, and there are a significant number of peds on the MUP, it gets pretty impractical.

Let's compare the odds of a pedestrian getting killed by a car vs. killed by a bike. Not much more to say after that.

Let's compare the odds of a pedestrian getting killed by a car vs. killed by a bike. Not much more to say after that.
Not a fair comparison, considering how many more cars there are than bikes.

Compare the odds of a ped walking along an MUP getting killed by a car vs. a bike...

Not a fair comparison, considering how many more cars there are than bikes.

Compare the odds of a ped walking along an MUP getting killed by a car vs. a bike...Again we agree?!?!?!?! :eek:

Anyone who is riding at excessive speeds near elderly or very young individuals on foot or bicycle while on a MUP is a selfish and reckless fool.

I'm going to be the a55hole here.

Any cyclist mixing with pedestrians has the responsibility to slow to a walking pace near them, or be far enough away to avoid sudden moves.

Yes, it was a tragedy. But when cyclists are anywhere near peds, it's their responsibility to avoid a collision.


Anyone who is riding at excessive speeds near elderly or very young individuals on foot or bicycle while on a MUP is a selfish and reckless fool.

Oops, I guess someone beat me at being an a55hole! :D

I'm going to be the a55hole here.
Any cyclist mixing with pedestrians has the responsibility to slow to a walking pace near them, or be far enough away to avoid sudden moves.
Yes, it was a tragedy. But when cyclists are anywhere near peds, it's their responsibility to avoid a collision.
Oops, I guess someone beat me at being an a55hole! :D

I have commuted regularly on an MUP for a year and a half (bow valley trail in Calgary), and regularly ride the waterfront trails in Toronto. Often they are very quiet, but at certain times of day - Lunch in Cgy and late afternoon in Toronto they get very crowded, with multiple users - roller bladers, other bikes, pedestrians, dog walkers, children tootling on bikes and so on.

When the road or path is crowded, prudence dictates that one should go slower.

Whether you like it or not - joggers, dogs (especially dogs) and small kids are likely not to be paying attention to you and are liable to randomly walk into your path.

As far as I am concerned, there is no need to get angry about these things - it's a normal predictable occurance, and one should ride accordingly (if you really hate it, avoid the path at these times, for example).

Subway riders, pedestrians, and motorists have to deal with slowness and crowding at 'rush hour' - why do cyclists feel that they deserve different treatment?

I realise that it is frustrating when clueless people step in front of you - but they will whether you like it or not - I have learned to deal with it (ride slower & avoid).

Anyone who is riding at excessive speeds near elderly or very young individuals on foot or bicycle while on a MUP is a selfish and reckless fool.


Ain't it the truth- and you'd think it would be common sense for all the trail riders out there. You just have to slow down when the hazard is there- but that would make too much sense I guess.

This is why MUPs that are truly multi-use, are not very practical for use as bicycle transportation.

And only a fool would expect peds to adhere to signs and stripes directing them to stay within designated "ped" areas and out of designated "bike" areas.

This is why MUPs that are truly multi-use, are not very practical for use as bicycle transportation.


I would rephrase that:

MUP's of that sort are not very practical to you for bicycle transportation.

:)


And only a fool would expect peds to adhere to signs and stripes directing them to stay within designated "ped" areas and out of designated "bike" areas.
:lol:

Yes, I have to admit I myself don't pay much attention to those silly stripes, the funny "bicycle man" stencil on this side of the path, and the "stick man" pedestrian stencil on the other side in certain places.

(What's up with that? :D )

This is why MUPs that are truly multi-use, are not very practical for use as bicycle transportation.

You are idiotic. I use a MUP to commute and access other services in NOC and it is very practical. In fact, my daugter and I attended the Angels game in Anaheim last night, using a MUP to travel to and from the game and it was the MOST practical route for us. Your (wet) blanket statements are truly ridiculous, ridiculous meaning worthy of ridicule in case you didn't get that too.

And only a fool would expect peds to adhere to signs and stripes directing them to stay within designated "ped" areas and out of designated "bike" areas.

And only a fool would expect motorists to adhere to signs and stripes directing them to stay within designated "lanes".


Your implication that the road is a safe and orderly procession of law-abiding citizens and the MUP a lawless danger zone is strongly at odds with my experience.

The difference has to do with the difference in operational characteristics between pedestrians and vehicles. Vehicles (including bicycles) generally move in straight lines and relatively steady speeds. Pedestrians are much less predictable. They can and do stop or suddenly change course, sometimes with no notice at all. That's why high speed differentials on MUPs are a problem.




Part of the reason for this is the way that bicycles produce very little in the way of detectable sensation (i.e. noise, ground tremors) as they approach. With a motor vehicle even a hearing, and/or visually impaired person can detect it's approach quite easily. And a person with a portable music player won't hear any aural warning device either.

But when cyclists are anywhere near peds, it's their responsibility to avoid a collision.
:D

I don't know that I'd agree 100% with being responsible for every conceivable thing another person could do. Of course I agree that any responsible person would be ethically obliged to do all they could to avoid injuring another person, but I just balk slightly at taking 100% of the blame whatever happens. Just semantics really, because I agree with the general concept.

You are idiotic. I use a MUP to commute and access other services in NOC and it is very practical. In fact, my daugter and I attended the Angels game in Anaheim last night, using a MUP to travel to and from the game and it was the MOST practical route for us. Your (wet) blanket statements are truly ridiculous, ridiculous meaning worthy of ridicule in case you didn't get that too.Is this MUP truly multi-use? That is, is it also used by significant numbers of joggers, dog walkers, roller bladers, baby stroller walkers, and plain peds?

Cyclists complain about cars AND pedestrians
Pedestrians complain about cars AND cyclists
Motorists complain about cycles and AND pedestrians

So we're all in the same boat...

Hahah! Yes and depending on who we choose to be on that day we'll pick 2/3 to complain about. :)

This reminds me of a woman complaining to me about having to dodge bikes on the bike path.

This reminds me of a woman complaining to me about having to dodge bikes on the bike path.

That's EXACTLY why I stick to the streets. Cars drive in a very straight line until they NEED to turn. As that turn is mostly at DESIGNATED points in my trajectory I am able to prepare for them.

However cycling among Multi-users is a completely unpredictable environment for me, on MUPs, cyclists tend to behave somewhere between cycling and pedestrian-cycling and that makes them just as unpredictable as pedestrians. I personally dislike having to slow and detour for all forms of users, no thank, you, I'll stick to the street.

And I can't really complain about the fundamental rights of pedestrians to let their feet move as they will please, as it's their "god-given" right to move about on this most elemental of means of transportation.

I let pedestrians be, I stay away from them.