Originally Posted by
LittleBigMan
Following the adoption of the national RTOR policy, significant increases in bicycle crashes at
signalized intersections were reported (Preusser et al., 1982; Zador, 1984). The effects were
more pronounced in urban and suburban areas than in rural areas that have fewer signalized
intersections (Preusser et al., 1982). Preusser et al. (1982) also reported that in most cases
bicyclists were approaching from the driver’s right side and drivers frequently claimed they
were looking to the left searching for a gap in traffic and never saw the bicyclists.
However, a cyclist approaching a driver from the right who is making a right turn on red would have to be riding against traffic, or on the sidewalk, to be in conflict with the driver's turn. A cyclist in proper lane position will not conflict with the ROTR driver from the "blind" side. I wonder why this factor (riding a bicycle against traffic) was not mentioned as a contributory factor in bicycle/car crashes involving ROTR's.
Nope. There are two ways this can happen legally.
1. The cyclist is traveling parallel to the turning vehicle in a bike lane.
2. The cyclist is on a sidepath style bike path, traveling with the flow of traffic.
I suspect you're right, and riding against traffic is the most common cause. But it isn't the only option. I have never run into the first personally, and I hope I never do. I treat any car that even *looks* like they're thinking of turning as a danger, and I stop well to the rear of them. The second is a standard encounter if you ride a sidepath style bike path, even with a pedestrian/path only signal.