Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Video
Video: When separate infrastructure isn't enough - cyclist hit by SUV on footbridgeNorfolk VA pedestrian bridge collision YouTube still

Video: When separate infrastructure isn't enough - cyclist hit by SUV on footbridge

But Virginia Department of Transportation says staff allowed to drive on pedestrian and cyclist facility
by Simon_MacMichael
Tue, Jun 17, 2014 10:43
34

Separate infrastructure is not always enough to protect cyclists and pedestrians from injury, as this video from the United States shows, with a bike rider struck head-on by a vehicle while riding across a footbridge – although it transpires the driver may actually have been permitted to use the segregated path.

Cyclist Kelley Howells escaped serious injury as she rode on a caged-off pedestrian and cycle path running alongside the Berkley Bridge in Norfolk, Virginia on Saturday when she was struck by an SUV travelling in the opposite direction.

Ms Howell, who suffered cuts and bruises in the incident, told WVEC-TV: “I saw this vehicle. Oh, my God. Brake. Scream. When I realised I was hitting him, there was no way to stop it.”

She said that the driver was unable to explain why he was there, and when she tried to present video evidence to a police officer, he was unimpressed.

“I said, ‘I have video if you want to see,’ and he said, ‘Oh, why do you have video?’ And I explained that I use it to educate, and he said, ‘Oh maybe you were the person who caused the accident’.”

She was also told police were unable to investigate the incident because an officer had not been called to the scene at the time, though neither the driver nor the cyclist had a mobile phone with them.

Ms Howell said: “[Norfolk] wants to be a bike-friendly community. It’s hard to see how if they have police officers who don’t feel the need to investigate motorists driving on pedestrian bridges.”

Yesterday, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) confirmed that one of its contract employees has been put on administrative leave while they investigate the incident.

In a statement it said its employees are permitted to drive on the pedestrian path, and there are signs warning people on foot and bikes that its vehicles may be present.

A spokeswoman said: “VDOT is working with its contractor to determine the factors involved in the incident and to ensure that proper policy and procedures were followed.”

Virginia
segregated cycle lanes
Simon MacMichael

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

34 comments

Avatar
OldRidgeback | 9 years ago
0 likes

Even if the driver had been allowed to take a motor vehicle onto the bike/pedestrian bridge, the driver should have been taking adequate precautions by driving slowly. That clearly was not the case as can be seen in the video.

The bridge authorities should review allowing any cars onto this part of the bridge however. These structures are not generally designed to cope with large SUVs that weigh up to 2 tonnes such as the one involved in this incident. Cleaning machines or snow sweepers are generally lighter as well.

Avatar
Bishop replied to OldRidgeback | 9 years ago
0 likes
OldRidgeback wrote:

the driver should have been taking adequate precautions by driving slowly. That clearly was not the case as can be seen in the video.

These structures are not generally designed to cope with large SUVs that weigh up to 2 tonnes such as the one involved in this incident. Cleaning machines or snow sweepers are generally lighter as well.

Point 1a.... Relevant authorities had signs "warning people on foot and bikes that its VEHICLES MAY BE PRESENT." I'd suggest that with the displayed warning signs the cyclist should have been able to come to a full stop if they had been cycling at a safe speed for the possible hazards present. The cyclist has just as much responsibility as the driver to act safely.

1b.... Also Its not clear to me that the vehicle is actually moving when the cyclist hits it.

1c.... Looking at the picture used to illustrate the article it shows a gap about 1/3rd of the path wide i.e. enough for a cyclist going at a safe speed to have got into.

2.... Are you a structural engineer? There are plenty of structures that allow heavy vehicles on a "for access" basis. As for snow ploughs for the road Google tells me they are around 20 tonnes. Even those diddy little ones that you drive on pavements 3.2 tonnes. Compared to a fully stripped out Govt. vehicle i.e "no options" electric windows, no electric leather seats etc.

Are you looking at this objectively or is there an agenda?

Avatar
levermonkey replied to Bishop | 9 years ago
0 likes
Bishop wrote:

1c.... Looking at the picture used to illustrate the article it shows a gap about 1/3rd of the path wide i.e. enough for a cyclist going at a safe speed to have got into.

Wide-angle lenses distort horizontal distances. The cyclist has a lot less room than you think. I would estimate that the gap between parapet and SUV mirror to be about 24". To put this into perspective road-bike handlebars are about 18" so the rider has about 6" to spare. The distance between parapet and the first longitudinal shadow is about handle-bar width.

As to comments about the cyclists reaction time then I would like to point out that you react quicker to things you expect. Who would expect an SUV driving towards you on a cycle path?

You have to question the choice of inspection vehicle. Surely this could have been done in a more appropriate vehicle. Cycle, motorbike, trike, golf-buggy, gator or shanks pony would all have been more suitable.

Avatar
Paul_C | 9 years ago
0 likes

the only motor vehicles permitted to drive on those facilities should be sweepers and snow clearers and then only with all their lights flashing... any other inspection should mandate parking up off the facility and walking onto it... if there's maintenance then it should be closed for the duration and suitable alternative provided.

Pages

Latest Comments