The azcentral.com news story was very detailed as to location, E McDowell Rd & N Granite Reef Rd (which is a.k.a. N 84th St), and direction of the bicyclist, “eastbound on the north side of McDowell Road” , and motorist, “turning right from southbound Granite Reef Road onto westbound McDowell”.
I was under the mistaken impression that : So the bicyclist was riding on the sidewalk counter-flow (not recommended, but not illegal). Unmentioned in the news story was this is a signal-controlled intersection. SOMEONE VIOLATED (or attempted to violate) THE SIGNAL. So, oddly, that relevant fact is omitted. Also the conclusion “No citations were issued to the driver” is sort of unusual; generally speaking the answer always is something to the effect of the incident remains under investigation. I realized I just made that, the part about being on the sidewalk, up. I read something into the story that was not there.
Scottdale PD clarified to me that “the bicyclist was at fault as she was riding eastbound against westbound traffic in the roadway.” This doesn’t really sit well with me; it seems much more likely she would be riding counter-flow on the sidewalk, and then entered the crosswalk… but there you have it.
ACR and ASDM
I do not have the ACR. I forget what the story is with how to get crash reports from Scottsdale. The database ASDM 2712556 more or less corroborates the newspaper account and the clarification I got from Scottsdale PIO, the only irregularities are why were there so many “OTHER” codings:
NonMotoristLocation: OTHER_97 why other?
(cyclist) UnitAction: OTHER_97 why other?
(cyclist) Lane: LANE_3 (this does indicate cyclist was in the road, as opposed to crosswalk)
JunctionRelation: INTERSECTION (this also indicates crash was not in crosswalk area, a crosswalk location should be coded as intersection_related)
(cyclist) Violation1: DROVE_RODE_IN_OPPOSING_TRAFFIC_LANE (this is inconclusive in the sense that police often use this violation for sidewalk cyclists even when not illegal)
There’s not really anywhere in the database where it’s possible to ascertain that the driver was turning right on red; though it can be inferred from the lack of a signal violation assigned to the cyclist; i.e. that’s consistent with the motorist having a red light, and having made a right-on-red.
Right on Red?
Just to brush up on the rules about making right turns on red (and, as i mentioned above, the news story only indicates that the driver was turning right, and not whether his signal was red or green); a driver must, first and foremost, stop completely; then may proceed turning right but only after yielding to “pedestrians and other traffic”. A driver who does not stop in the first place would be in violation of 28-645A(3)(a); a driver violating the right of way would be responsible for 28-645A(3)(b):
(b) The driver of a vehicle that is stopped in obedience to a red signal and as close as practicable at the entrance to the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if there is no crosswalk, then at the entrance to the intersection, may make a right turn but shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and other traffic proceeding as directed by the signal. A right turn may be prohibited against a red signal at any intersection if a sign prohibiting the turn is erected at the intersection.
Bike Lanes?
It has sometimes been suggested that the presence of bike lanes increases riding against traffic. Without drawing any conclusions: I note from the google maps that N Granite Reef Rd is a dividing line along McDowell between no bike lanes to the west (the direction the bicyclist was coming from), and bike lanes to the east (presumably where the bicyclist was going).
—-
azcentral.com
A 72-year-old Scottsdale woman has died from injuries suffered when the bicycle she was riding was struck by a car early last week, police said.
Ginette McKeehan died about 4 p.m. Saturday, police said. Continue reading “72-year-old bicyclist dies after collision”