Bike Lobby and Dishonesty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

In the absence of striping, the road is one lane.

Surely you've driven down a multi-lane road that was recently repaved and hadn't been painted yet. Did the vehicles all fall into a single file line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

Uh, that's because it's one lane.

Check Google Maps for the location. There was striping there before that delineated the bounds of that lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

It’s crazy that you are performing your own independent investigation, but more power to you.

One problem with your analysis and conclusions are that the lights at that intersection were recently installed and not yet activated at the time of accident.

The news reports indicated that the lights were flashing yellow on the morning of the accident. They are also flashing yellow now.

On the morning of the accident the lights were off and covered in burlap. Whatever news report you claimed to have read is inaccurate. I have read several reports on this accident and none of them have made this inaccurate statement. I really do understand the urge to want the facts to be different but recommend waiting for the professionals to do their jobs.

Look at the pictures, would you? The crosswalk signs are in burlap and still are. The traffic lights for 21st St NW were not covered in burlap when those pictures were taken and are not covered in burlap now.

The street lights were not activated, but if you read a report that says otherwise I’d be happy to read it. Really a sad situation all around.

The street lights are not activated but are flashing yellow today. The NBC News report indicates that they were flashing yellow at the time of the crash.

If the report is inaccurate were turned off completely, the analysis and conclusions still hold. The truck should have come to a complete stop at the stop line (and verified that their right side was clear) before proceeding.

Link?

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/cyclist-hit-by-truck-seriously-hurt-in-northwest-dc/3106101/

Happy?

[Anonymous]

"While the investigation is in its initial stages, the District Department of Transportation said new traffic signals at the intersection were activated a day earlier and were flashing on Wednesday morning."

I'll await your apology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

Uh, that's because it's one lane.

Check Google Maps for the location. There was striping there before that delineated the bounds of that lane.

Not to be argumentative, but Google Maps shows no stripes on either road, aside from the crosswalks, at that intersection. Lots of cars parked on both sides of the road, like in many DC streets. And that's a slow road, not a fast road, the truck wasn't probably wasn't driving very fast at all before the intersection and the turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"While the investigation is in its initial stages, the District Department of Transportation said new traffic signals at the intersection were activated a day earlier and were flashing on Wednesday morning."

I'll await your apology.

Flashing yellow = not activated

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

In the absence of striping, the road is one lane.

Surely you've driven down a multi-lane road that was recently repaved and hadn't been painted yet. Did the vehicles all fall into a single file line?

21st isn't multi lane.

Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

Uh, that's because it's one lane.

Check Google Maps for the location. There was striping there before that delineated the bounds of that lane.

Not to be argumentative, but Google Maps shows no stripes on either road, aside from the crosswalks, at that intersection. Lots of cars parked on both sides of the road, like in many DC streets. And that's a slow road, not a fast road, the truck wasn't probably wasn't driving very fast at all before the intersection and the turn.

Are you looking at the right block? The Google Maps image shows three dashed lines on the right side (traveling southwards) of the street between the parked cars and the "21st St NW" overlay. This is old imagery as the building at 2100 Penn Ave NW has since been demolished and replaced with a new building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"While the investigation is in its initial stages, the District Department of Transportation said new traffic signals at the intersection were activated a day earlier and were flashing on Wednesday morning."

I'll await your apology.

Flashing yellow = not activated

Are you bad at gaslighting or just not reading the thread? No one is claiming they were fully activated. In response to the report that they were flashing yellow, someone was trying to claim that the traffic signals were covered in burlap and not flashing at all. The link demonstrates that they were flashing yellow, as was asserted in the report that someone else (maybe you) claimed was "crazy" and invalidated by the fact that the lights were "not activated".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

Ok, so if there weren’t two lanes until the next block, then would the cyclist be considered to have been passing the truck where the accident occurred and, if so, shouldn’t she have been passing on the left not the right?

Cyclists are conditioned to ride in the right lane because that is where slower traffic is supposed to go. If she was on the left and the driver had turned left without verifying that there was anyone beside the truck, the result would have been the same.

She was passing through an intersection that had at least two (and maybe three) lanes of road ahead of her. If the truck was going straight, she would not have been passing the truck, but rather proceeding in parallel with the truck.

The street is only one lane. The cyclists had decided to lane share with a cement truck, which is very risky.

I don't know why this is so hard. There are no lanes painted on the road. No lanes. Not one lane. Not two lanes. No lanes. Go to the block and look for yourself if you don't want to take the word of a random stranger.

In the absence of striping, the road is one lane.

Surely you've driven down a multi-lane road that was recently repaved and hadn't been painted yet. Did the vehicles all fall into a single file line?

21st isn't multi lane.

Next.

Point.






Your Head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

It’s crazy that you are performing your own independent investigation, but more power to you.

One problem with your analysis and conclusions are that the lights at that intersection were recently installed and not yet activated at the time of accident.

The news reports indicated that the lights were flashing yellow on the morning of the accident. They are also flashing yellow now.

On the morning of the accident the lights were off and covered in burlap. Whatever news report you claimed to have read is inaccurate. I have read several reports on this accident and none of them have made this inaccurate statement. I really do understand the urge to want the facts to be different but recommend waiting for the professionals to do their jobs.

Look at the pictures, would you? The crosswalk signs are in burlap and still are. The traffic lights for 21st St NW were not covered in burlap when those pictures were taken and are not covered in burlap now.

The street lights were not activated, but if you read a report that says otherwise I’d be happy to read it. Really a sad situation all around.

The street lights are not activated but are flashing yellow today. The NBC News report indicates that they were flashing yellow at the time of the crash.

If the report is inaccurate were turned off completely, the analysis and conclusions still hold. The truck should have come to a complete stop at the stop line (and verified that their right side was clear) before proceeding.

The easiest way to determine that this is false is because if the driver had disobeyed a signal it would have been an infraction and they would be issued a ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

It’s crazy that you are performing your own independent investigation, but more power to you.

One problem with your analysis and conclusions are that the lights at that intersection were recently installed and not yet activated at the time of accident.

The news reports indicated that the lights were flashing yellow on the morning of the accident. They are also flashing yellow now.

On the morning of the accident the lights were off and covered in burlap. Whatever news report you claimed to have read is inaccurate. I have read several reports on this accident and none of them have made this inaccurate statement. I really do understand the urge to want the facts to be different but recommend waiting for the professionals to do their jobs.

Look at the pictures, would you? The crosswalk signs are in burlap and still are. The traffic lights for 21st St NW were not covered in burlap when those pictures were taken and are not covered in burlap now.

The street lights were not activated, but if you read a report that says otherwise I’d be happy to read it. Really a sad situation all around.

The street lights are not activated but are flashing yellow today. The NBC News report indicates that they were flashing yellow at the time of the crash.

If the report is inaccurate were turned off completely, the analysis and conclusions still hold. The truck should have come to a complete stop at the stop line (and verified that their right side was clear) before proceeding.

The easiest way to determine that this is false is because if the driver had disobeyed a signal it would have been an infraction and they would be issued a ticket.

A driver issued an infraction and issued a ticket??? What city do you think this is, man/ma'am???

[Anonymous]

That is a single lane road. Why was the cyclist adjacent to the truck? Was she trying to pass him or cut him off?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After visiting the intersection where the crash occurred this morning, I have a bit more insight into what probably happened.

The road on the block on 21st St NW where the crash occurred is about 1 1/2 lanes wide with cars parked on both sides. The lanes are not marked as the road was recently repaved (the imagery on Google Earth indicates that the road previously had lane markings that are not there now). The blocks immediately north and south are at least two (marked) lanes wide.

The intersection at 21st St NW and I St has a traffic light that is flashing yellow for vehicles traveling south along 21st St NW and flashing red for vehicles traveling east along I St NW. The flashing yellow caution light indicates (per the DC DMV's Driver Manual) that vehicles do not need to come to a stop at the intersection and few - if any - vehicles come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection. However, there is a (solid white) stop line painted on 21st St NW before the crosswalk and the intersection, which contradicts the flashing yellow light in signaling that drivers should come to a complete stop before proceeding.

It seems reasonable to infer that the lack of lane markings (particularly given that the preceding and forthcoming blocks feature multiple lanes) and the contradiction between the flashing yellow light and the stop line contributed to the crash. My presumption, based on the evidence at hand, is that the cyclist was riding beside the truck as it approached the intersection. Believing either that the truck was proceeding straight (either because the turn signal was not duly activated or because she didn't see it) or that the truck would stop before turning right, she proceeded through the intersection into the open lane ahead of her (and, as there are 2 marked lanes on the block, she would not have been attempting to "get ahead" of the truck as both could continue in parallel without conflict). Unfortunately, of course, the truck turned straight into her.

I don't believe that the cyclist was technically at fault. The driver may technically not be at fault either, but it is reasonable to expect that those driving heavy truck through congested urban streets to check the mirror before turning and especially so if they suspect a cyclist may be beside them. Whoever left that road without proper road markings and a flashing yellow signal that contradicted the stop line has something to answer for.

It’s crazy that you are performing your own independent investigation, but more power to you.

One problem with your analysis and conclusions are that the lights at that intersection were recently installed and not yet activated at the time of accident.

The news reports indicated that the lights were flashing yellow on the morning of the accident. They are also flashing yellow now.

On the morning of the accident the lights were off and covered in burlap. Whatever news report you claimed to have read is inaccurate. I have read several reports on this accident and none of them have made this inaccurate statement. I really do understand the urge to want the facts to be different but recommend waiting for the professionals to do their jobs.

Look at the pictures, would you? The crosswalk signs are in burlap and still are. The traffic lights for 21st St NW were not covered in burlap when those pictures were taken and are not covered in burlap now.

The street lights were not activated, but if you read a report that says otherwise I’d be happy to read it. Really a sad situation all around.

The street lights are not activated but are flashing yellow today. The NBC News report indicates that they were flashing yellow at the time of the crash.

If the report is inaccurate were turned off completely, the analysis and conclusions still hold. The truck should have come to a complete stop at the stop line (and verified that their right side was clear) before proceeding.

The easiest way to determine that this is false is because if the driver had disobeyed a signal it would have been an infraction and they would be issued a ticket.

A driver issued an infraction and issued a ticket??? What city do you think this is, man/ma'am???

In a fatal collision? Yes, a ticket would be issued.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"While the investigation is in its initial stages, the District Department of Transportation said new traffic signals at the intersection were activated a day earlier and were flashing on Wednesday morning."

I'll await your apology.

Flashing yellow = not activated

Are you bad at gaslighting or just not reading the thread? No one is claiming they were fully activated. In response to the report that they were flashing yellow, someone was trying to claim that the traffic signals were covered in burlap and not flashing at all. The link demonstrates that they were flashing yellow, as was asserted in the report that someone else (maybe you) claimed was "crazy" and invalidated by the fact that the lights were "not activated".

What are you talking about? They turned the new signals on after and as a direct consequence of the accident.