This is the kind of report we all dread hearing and it’s all too common: a cyclist riding on the sidewalk gets hit by a motorist in an area where bicycle accommodations are just not that great. This time it occurred along a major school route at an intersection recently rebuilt as part of a school building project to meet the demands of parking and vehicle drop offs. The crossings are long and the corners are wide.
While I’m relieved to hear that the student’s injuries aren’t serious and the details of what happened are not yet clear, I hope in the spirit of Vision Zero something can be learned from this incident to make our streets safer, especially for kids riding to school. There’s a common misconception that cyclists are safer on the sidewalk, but pedestrian crossings aren’t designed for cyclists. Transitions at every driveway and roadway put cyclists in great danger.
The following statement was sent by Bike Newton tonight to its listserv:
| NNHS Student Cyclist Update |
|
Bike Newton members and friends: Yesterday, Wednesday, February 16, a student biking to Newton North High School collided with a car. The student was heading west on Cabot, riding on the sidewalk on the north side of the street, and crashed into an eastbound car turning left from Cabot onto Eastside Parkway. Perhaps the driver never saw the student coming off the sidewalk, nor the student the car. We have heard injuries to the student were not life-threatening. We at Bike Newton are concerned because this is but one of several recent crashes involving students commuting by bike to school in Newton. That many cyclists choose the sidewalk on busy streets should not surprise us. Without bike lanes, sidewalks sometimes seem safer than contending with traffic. But sidewalk riding has its own dangers, as this crash indicates. We also believe that traffic often moves too quickly on Newton’s roads, whatever the speed limit. For that reason we support traffic-calming measures from speed bumps to bump-outs on certain streets, particularly near schools. Most of us would like more students to ride bicycles to school instead of being dropped off by parents. But to do so safely requires more action on the part of the city to make roads friendlier to cyclists…and calmer roads! |
|
|
|
“But, but there are bicycle figures painted onto the street at that intersection! Surely if the student had heeded those markings and biked in the street they would have been fine!”
The fact that the city can paint those figures onto the street, check off their “Bicycle infrastructure” box, and call it a day is both laughable and frustrating. The city needs to do its part to truly encourage cycling by making its streets more friendly to bikes, and, yes, more unfriendly to cars. As the Bike Newton email mentions, traffic calming measures are an important action (especially on already narrow streets like Cabot that might not be able to support full bike lanes). Start with raised crossings at that Cabot-East Side intersection, add in a chicane a few hundred feet before the intersection, and make the turn at the intersection much sharper by expanding the curbs. Suddenly we have a situation where the car is travelling slower, the driver is forced to be more alert, and the turn must be taken more cautiously. Accident avoided? Maybe. In any case, are those changes really too much to ask for, especially right next to an elementary school?
I’m extremely upset to hear about this accident, first and foremost because of the injuries suffered by the student. I hope they will be able to make a full recovery. But it’s also upsetting to think about how many future students this incident will discourage from riding their bikes to school. When they choose to drive, this will only put more cars on the road, further compounding the hostile environment encountered by cyclists.
I don’t know how many wake-up calls it will take for officials to realize that they need to start taking real steps if they want Newton to be a bikeable city.
There seems to be some movement on protected bike lanes.
Albemarle from Washington st to charles river:
Now if they included walnut to NNHS they would have a half decent route for students.
https://www.newtonma.gov/government/planning/transportation-planning/projects/albemarle-traffic-calming-bike-lane
The Albemarle project will increase comfort and safety for people walking, biking and rolling through the Albemarle area from Washington St. all the way to the Charles River safer by reducing vehicle speeds, improving safety and visibility at crossings and intersections, and adding bike lanes in sections. The public meeting is Thursday, March 10 at 5:30 p.m. at the link that Bugek provided. Further down the line, the Crafts and Albemarle intersections and Albemarle and North intersection will receive some much-needed significant safety improvements in Summer 2025 through a MassDOT Safe Routes to School Infrastructure grant.
As with all bike- and pedestrian-related projects in Newton, the Albemarle project includes trade-offs between driver convenience and student safety. While the bike lanes planned for the southbound (Fessenden) side of Albemarle will be protected with flexposts for April-November (flexposts are pulled in the winter), the bike lane between Watertown St. and Gath Pool on the northbound (Gath Pool/Fields) side is currently planned as paint-only, and to the left of the vehicle travel lane in order to preserve angle parking on the park side. Very few middle school students have the confidence and experience to navigate an unprotected bike lane to the left of the travel lane and the hours they will use it are when Albemarle is at its busiest with the overlapping arrival times for F.A. Day middle school and the new NECP at the location of the old Horace Mann School at the corner of Watertown and Albemarle, where half the students are anticipated to arrive by private vehicle. This is the time when a protected bike lane is most needed.
The Eastside Parkway and Cabot intersection is a similar compromise of driver convenience v. student safety. The crossing where the student cyclist crashed is over 50 feet long. As Cabot was being designed, advocates pushed for narrowing the crossings at both Westchester and Eastside Parkway but the loss of a few extra parking spaces was unpalatable and parking “needs” won. A neckdown at Cabot Street would have added visibility to those in the crossing and slowed turning drivers, possibly preventing incidents like this one.
If the protected lanes are only on southbound, the whole thing becomes really pointless. A school child has be safe going and coming back.
Cars backing out probably cause the most accidents and would be hard to see a fast moving bike.
I would be surprised if this can go forward without revolt from homeowners potentially loosing parking spots on brookside and its unclear what is planned for the residential side leading to Charles river (protected lanes all the way on both sides?)
Protected bike lanes are only planned for southbound Albemarle from Crafts to Watertown and for the section of northbound Albemarle from Gath Pool to Crafts St. Areas like Brookside and further north on Albemarle will have traffic calming and bikes will share the road with vehicles. These areas see much lower traffic volumes.
Bugek:
You can’t do that on Walnut. The Village portion of Walnut is too narrow to have protected lanes. But you could do that on Lowell I think. I’ve never understood why they don’t do that coming from the North side. Maybe one of the bike experts can tell me. Lowell seems like a better “safe route to school” except for the intersection between Lowell and Austin Street, which is awful and needs work.
Protected lanes on Walnut would be a larger engineering challenge, but the decision was made when the new enhancements were made to maximize sidewalk space rather than add even conventional bike lanes. That clearly has its benefits; I don’t want to fall into the trap of pitting pedestrians and other sidewalk users vs bicyclists, because that just winnows down a tiny piece of the road budget pie even smaller.
However, the deal was that bicyclists “sharing the road” would be safe. That means constant attention to making this a slow speed zone. That’s safer for everyone, on bike, on foot, pulling into or out of a parking space, getting across the street in a wheelchair.
Why not Lowell? First, part of the answer to “why not a bike lane on ?” is “parking”.
Second, and more fundamentally, while NNHS is perhaps the most important destination in the area, it isn’t the only one. Students flock to the business district every day investing tons of money there and generally not taking up parking spaces. We want other people to ride in the area as well. And they come from all directions.
While we should make new and safer through routes, we always need to keep in mind that people should be able to walk and ride from and to as many places as possible. Newton has for so long had an image of being a safe city with strong neighborhoods and local villages, where kids and young people can grow socially and independently to be awesome adults.
Why shouldn’t every local road be safe biking and walking route?
Mike,
Since homeowners dont own the parking infront of their home, why can they legally object?
Is there something in the city charter that requires % of homeowners to agree? I always wondered this.
Its not some random street, its a major street leading directly to the highschool
True protected bike lanes in the Newtonville Village would have been very difficult unless you eliminated parking on one side of the street. Engineering challenge is one way to put it…
And as an occasional bike rider through the village, I couldn’t figure out how they’d deal with the chance of being doored if parking was kept on either side. I’d rather keep up with traffic than deal with a false sense of protection on a not truly protected bike lane.
They attempted that engineering challenge in West Newton with a far wider space, and honestly, I think it hasn’t worked out well.
Not trying to provoke you, I generally support bike lanes. Not sure every problem can be solved in our village centers though.
I certainly know you are far more knowledgable than me on this, so take my personal opinions as just that.
First, I wish the student a speedy recovery and thank goodness their injuries are not serious. On a more practical note…
1. If I’m reading this correctly the accident happened while the student was riding on the sidewalk…the SIDEWALK. That’s less about infrastructure, than it is an irresponsible driver (and in no way am I casting any blame on the cyclists. This is 100% on the driver.)
2. Have you all seen Cabot Street? It’s narrow. The only way to add bike lanes – let alone a protected bike lane – is the rip out the sidewalks or turn Cabot into a one way street.
It’s a tragedy when any kid or any cyclist is injured unnecessarily, and I’m fully supportive of make biking to schools safer, but let’s not spotlight this accident as a referendum on going bike lane and speed bump crazy. Practical, balanced mitigation is the way to proceed. Fixing one problem by creating another is a zero sum gain.
Matt, sorry my language was not more precise. From reports I’ve heard, the cyclist was using the sidewalk along the route and was hit crossing at the intersection. I don’t want to guess who is at fault here. Yes, like many Newton roads, Cabot is extremely constrained. I don’t think anyone can make specific recommendations at this location until we know all the facts, but I’m sorry you don’t share a sense of urgency to look critically at every crash as a situation that can be improved rather than an unfortunate “accident.” By using that term you are accepting injuries on our roads as the cost of getting around town. That’s not the balance I’m looking for.
Has anyone ever proposed to give kids who want to ride a bike to school some training.
Maybe a bike permit with training in how to be a visible rider, map out the best routes from their home to school choosing safer roads over high traffic arteries, review and practice how to maneuver Newton’s more difficult intersections, how to ride with a book bag, basic bike maintenance, etc.
As a former cyclist I’m of the opinion that only protected bike lanes, i.e. with a physical barrier make urban roads safer for cyclists.
I used to live and ride in Boston, and learned how to choose routes with calmer secondary streets avoiding Boylston, Beacon, and Mass Ave whenever possible.
There are scenarios as a cyclist when it’s just best to become a pedestrian for a few minutes.
Sometimes we rely too heavily on reverse engineering to solve our problems. Washington Street and Beacon Streets are main arteries and will always be main arteries.
We can and should to our best to make them marginally safer for cyclists, but they will always be challenging roads for cyclists. no amount of road calming and green paint are going to make these roads safe.
I think a program to train kids how to ride in an urban environment Is the conversation we should be having.
Education should definitely be part of the conversation, but I don’t think we should accept the status quo either. Some arterials have tremendous potential as safe, separated bike routes, including Washington Street.
Yes, there is a bicycle safety program in Newton, usually given in 4th or 5th grade. I remember Officer Feeley leading my class at Angier around Waban when I was a kid. I’ve run bike safety a couple of times at Bowen with a lot of help from the NPD and Bike Newton, but it’s not part of the curriculum, and I think it had been a few decades since it had been done there! The program only happens when a parent takes the initiative to set it up, and only when the principal and staff are willing. Bicycle education should be mandated by the curriculum, and one session probably isn’t enough. Bike Newton also has a wonderful “bike rodeo” they do at South.
Mike, I agree. Drivers training is assumed for teenagers but not broader mobility training. We should have mobility education and skills training in schools as part of the curriculum, and include health science, environmental science and climate change dimensions of mobility. And mobility justice, meaning choices and access for all, which we don’t have.
In fact, Councilor Bowman and I team-taught just such a class at Newton Community Ed for two summer sessions, and Newton Safe Routes to School is partnering with the MA SRTS coordinator Vivian Ortiz to do bike education in Newton. We need a whole lot more support for initiatives like these.
@nathan, can’t easily find the post where we were talking about e-bikes, but just watched this vid. 🙂
https://youtu.be/fgAUuJXRtzs
Matt, that’s an excellent video, and the recommendations on brands matches what I’ve heard and read elsewhere. I’ve heard great things from many about Radbikes.
The new bike shop in Newtonville, The Roasted Spoke, carries the highly rated entry level e-bikes by Aventon.
Micah Toll at electrek.com has many excellent e-bike reviews.
The best piece of advice from the video is to test ride, preferably if you can borrow one from a friend for a few days.
Matt:
You don’t live in this neighborhood. That crosswalk sucks. It has nothing to do with the sidewalk. Poor planning by the city. Crosswalks should be the shortlist distance possible. Lots of kids use the sidewalks to bike to school. Mine do. The crosswalks are the danger points, and the cars cutting through go to fast.
First, I also wish the student a speedy recovery. I am so sorry to hear about this accident.
I have an honest question about the rules of the road – when cyclists are on sidewalks.
For the record, I am am aware that I do not know the exact details of this specific, recent incident with the student.
When a cyclist is riding on a sidewalk and approaches an intersection, is the cyclist supposed to stop and look for cars?
From the ‘Massachusetts Pedestrian Regulations’ link below, I read:
(4)Pedestrian Crossings and Use of Roadways.
(a) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a sidewalk or safety island
and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that
it is impossible for the driver to yield the right of way.
I am just wondering: have the rules of the road have changed from what I remember learning as a child?
Also, how are schools advising/teaching children how to ride their bikes safely to school – when they ride bikes on roads that do not have spacing for bike lanes?
https://casetext.com/regulation/code-of-massachusetts-regulations/department-720-cmr-department-of-highways/title-720-cmr-900-driving-on-state-highways/section-909-pedestrian-regulations#:~:text=(a)%20No%20pedestrian%20shall%20suddenly,the%20right%20half%20of%20crosswalks.
That intersection, in the particular, is dangerous to walkers, bikers, and vehicle operators alike, at least during commuting hours. Incredibly, Cabot Street is a cut-through for drivers seeking to avoid congestion and traffic control devices on Walnut, in Newtonville and especially at Washington.
If Traffic Engineers were insightful, they would distinguish local traffic from out-of-Newton vehicles, when analyzing flows and patterns so to inform public policy. Were the numbers to show what Cabot residents know to be true, the corrective policy of closing the Parkway to motorized traffic from 6:30am – 9:30am would improve safety, improve quality of life, and support a “Newton value” (actually, still trying to figure out what those are ..)
Mary P.: Eastside is where we drop off for Cabot too. Can’t eliminate that for vehicles. Some of us tried to get more parking and easier drop off near the school, but were not supported in those efforts by Parks and Rec and our city councilors. Cabot Street has been a challenging street for many years. The improvements helped, but I also would have preferred narrowing the crosswalks as much as possible. The decision was made not to do that, I think related to when the extra parking on the west side of the park was removed due to the objections to taking any amount of the parkland to improve access and parking at the school. It was shortcited and poor planning, especially after the city offered park improvements to compensate for the minimal loss of parkland. Sometimes compromises have to be made (and in the Cabot new school process, A LOT of compromises had to be made.).
Don’t get me started on this, I’m still angry about it 5 years later.
@fig, moving the blue zone away from the school I thought was a good thing. Keep cars away from the school and let kids who are driven walk through a park. It spreads out and dilutes the congestion, but it does move the pain points. In this case, that intersection becomes even more critical. The geometry is more challenging than it looks since it’s not 90°, but it be a good start to make the road two lanes wide at the intersection instead of three. What would it take to make neckdowns there? Just eliminate the last one or two spaces? The compromise was made, and it was not in the interest of safety.
I won’t bore you with writing the whole, laugh-out-loud story, so here is the punchline: “So the mounted cop said to me ‘Yep the traffic sign is right, it is illegal to drive on Winter Street, except we grandfathered-in the permission for people who are heading to Locke Ober. Anyone going to Winter Place can drive though this pedestrian walkway.'”
By way of saying, if the Big City called Boston is sufficiently provincial to have such exclusionary-of-others/only-locals-are-in-the-know-and-allowed rules, li’l ole Newton ought to be able to figure out how to allow school parents to do the drop off while ticketing and fining everyone else on the Parkway during those hours.
Of course, the Police would have to stand there and, well, police.
Funny. Boston. 🙂
Two points, though. First, parents dropping off and picking up may well be part of the problem. On Albemarle Rd, I personally observed, in the span of ten minutes, three cars passing a pack of double-stacked school buses with their lights flashing, red stop signs out, and honking to get the drivers to stop. In general, blue zone behavior isn’t anything I’d want advertised. Most experienced “through” drivers know to avoid those routes at these times.
Second, police are often called out to replace crossing guards who have called in sick. When that happens, they are stuck, and can’t leave that post (except I would assume the most dire public safety emergency). So the police are most tied up during school arrival and dismissal, exactly the time that their presence and visibility would be the most helpful.
@Mary P.: “Cabot Street is a cut-through for drivers seeking to avoid congestion and traffic control devices on Walnut, in Newtonville and especially at Washington…”
I use Cabot St. to avoid Walnut for none of those reasons, but for safety of myself and others. If I’m going north on Walnut to turn east on Washington, I’m very nervous dealing with the intersection of Austin St, going over the commuter rail/Pike, and then Washington St. So many pedestrians and cars are going in so many directions that it’s hard to keep track of everything – that whole stretch is a nightmare.
Terrific idea, Mary.
This is terrible and it shouldn’t happen. I truly wish the student the best, and glad to hear he isn’t seriously injured.
I learned earlier this school year that the police department eliminated most of their traffic enforcement departments, especially in the school mornings and the evenings when kids are out and about. Humphrey and
Bowman’s Vision Zero Police?
Maybe that’s why I see drivers acting without worry of being stopped for speedy, or just dangerous driving.
These accidents will just continue when there is no recourse for dangerous driving.
Commoner, this has absolutely nothing to do with Humphrey or Bowman. And I’m not sure where you are getting your information on the traffic enforcement. Anyone want to confirm that?
Yes it does. It is more of them saying they care, but proving their indifference through their actions.
Pay attention to them.
Commoner’s interpretation of the facts here is misleading. As I explained in another comment, it is very hard for police to do enforcement during school arrival and dismissal because of school crossing coverage. This is nothing new.
Councilor Bowman, along with Councilor Downs, has been one of the most consistent and involved advocates for bicyclist and pedestrian safety, including engineering, education, and enforcement.
Everyone including the police will tell you that enforcement’s lasting impact on behavior is limited. We won’t ever have police presence at every problem intersection throughout the day, and it isn’t clear we’d like that (or that Newton drivers wouldn’t revolt over the tickets). Traffic stops simply aren’t popular, including with police who may be concerned about their safety risk, the paperwork involved, and the possible need to appear in court. Traffic stops are way down in the past year, and it isn’t because of budget cuts. I look forward to understanding the details of why, and working with the entire city to find the best blend of engineering and enforcement solutions to improve road behavior. Vision Zero is the philosophy that binds all of that together.
Replying to several comments –
While both NPS and the City of Newton agree that students need to be able to safely walk and bike to school given our neighborhood-based schools and bus routes that start up to 2 miles from secondary schools, the logistics are largely left to families and students to figure out on their own. I chair the Newton Safe Routes to School Task Force and we advocate for safer routes to school, communication of those routes to families, and pedestrian and bike safety training in school. We have made much progress on all fronts in the 15 years the Task Force has existed, and there is so much more work to be done.
Mapping and sharing suggested routes is a continued frustration. I was advised that by sharing suggested routes to school, I personally could be held liable if someone was injured or killed on the route. We need the City or NPS to map and share the routes, not volunteers. Note that the Mayor has committed ARPA funds for a consultant to design Newton’s first Bike/Pedestrian Plan which should also include routes to schools.
Many elementary schools traditionally have a bike safety talk and an on street ride led by Newton Police for students in 4th or 5th grade. This program was on pause due to COVID and is resuming this spring. However, we also need bike safety reminders and education for middle school and high school students who have longer and more complicated routes to school. The Newton SRTS Task Force is also advocating for NPS to include pedestrian safety training for students, and NPS seems amenable.
Where *should* students be biking? Ideally in protected bike lanes, on slow streets with low traffic volume, or on slowed streets with painted bike lanes. However, in Newton that doesn’t get you all the way to school, especially as most approaches to school prioritize parking over bike lanes. To make biking on a street like Cabot more comfortable for cyclists, we should slow vehicles with more traffic calming such as speed cushions, and tightened intersections. At this crash intersection, crossing distances should be reduced to slow down vehicles as they turn. As others have mentioned, drivers use Cabot St. as a cut-through. It will be less appealing to drivers if travel speeds are slowed.
We also need more families opting to walk/roll/bike/bus to reduce the amount of school-related traffic on school streets like Cabot St.
Mike, those are cheap excuses for doing nothing. Commoner is right, there is much more that could be done. France has been issuing tickets for over 30 years based on camera surveillance and now many other cities in the U.S. do too. Councilor Bowman has been silent on making bicycle riders wear helmets and I continue to see students and ride share users riding helmet free around town. She is no champion of bicycle safety
Camera surveillance requires changes to state law and will likely be the subject to local debate regarding privacy. I support camera enforcement. If you do too, please support the current efforts at the State House. They tend to focus on speed enforcement and passing school buses at this point, and thus would not benefit crashes like this one.
Helmets wearing for riders is a separate and important issue from road safety. It should be addresses, but should not distract us from also addressing the many other issues around bicycling, education, enforcement and road safety in general. We need to work just as hard at preventing crashes as we do protecting the people involved in them.
Your claim about Councilor Bowman is simply inconsistent with the work she has done establishing and supporting Safe Routes to School in Newton and a variety of other efforts. It strikes me as an example of strict ideology that frequently divides and cripples advocacy in this city and elsewhere, to the point of exhaustion on one side and inaction on the other.
I strongly prefer a constructive, cooperative, and positive approach.
Actually, Mike: the “yeah but we can’t because …” is a perfect Newton response. Perfect because it sounds like it might be true, it isn’t true, and it is used to justify timidity and inaction. Not my “values” …
Let’s look closer at your point on camera and privacy. State law does not say that a camera surveillance is illegal. Instead, it says that a traffic violation citation has to be issued in-person, which is intended to remove the financial basis that funds camera enforcement systems. Plainly, the distinction is a difference.
That traffic control enforcement law says nothing about privacy. Were you to be a privacy hawk, you’d already know that there is no privacy protection from law enforcement for any circumstance that is freely visible in a public space. Improperly operate a motor vehicle on a public street during daylight hours and there is no privacy argument that can protect you from law enforcement detecting a violation and nicking the operator or owner (in the case of that kind of infraction). Massachusetts privacy law does not distinguish remote observation as different from direct observation, for such cases.
“Yeah but” excuses are appeasements of the status quo. You don’t want to ____? OK. Why would one not want to? Only your hair dresser knows for sure … ideally for the right reasons, which have yet to come in view
I would also add that almost all bike safety and advocacy work in the city is being done by volunteers. Bike Newton would, I am sure, love the help to promote helmet safety and other related safety programs. Its an easy and positive way to turn passions or frustrations about an issue into results that can make a difference. It doesn’t and shouldn’t wait for City Council or the city itself to take action, though it may motivate or amplify what the city does do.
To provide more information about traffic camera enforcement in MA, the Governor filed a bill allowing speed camera enforcement and providing other safety measures in April 2021:
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/baker-to-make-announcement-on-road-safety-legislation-monday/2364307/
Another more expansive bill (including speed and school bus enforcement) is also being considered:
https://mass.streetsblog.org/2021/10/19/state-house-update-new-bills-would-tackle-racial-profiling-traffic-enforcement-cameras-e-bikes/
These bills try hard to address some of the criticisms of traffic enforcement cameras in other locations, but as a result they are pretty toothless. I don’t know the current status of this legislation.
Protected bike lanes are only planned for southbound Albemarle from Crafts to Watertown and for the section of northbound Albemarle from Gath Pool to Crafts St. Areas like Brookside and further north on Albemarle will have traffic calming and bikes will share the road with vehicles. These areas see much lower traffic volumes.
Thanks for the info. What you described probably has the highest chance of getting approved… even though its not perfect.
I think issues around this particular crash should wait for the police report to be issued in order to provide important details. Until then, here are some more general thoughts.
Vision Zero, an international effort to reduce and finally eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries, has principles that guide in investigating and learning from these incidents in order to avoid future ones. https://visionzeronetwork.org/
One of Vision Zero’s important principles is the acceptance of human fallibility. All road users make mistakes, become distracted, or fail to notice things they ideally would. We have to engineer our roads with this important idea in mind, not with a sense of forgiveness but rather prevention. That idea also frequently allows us to move toward solutions with purpose rather than blame.
Many of Newton’s streets can be more bike and pedestrian friendly. We do, however, live in a built-up environment, and we don’t have infinite flexibility to, say, install protected bike lanes everywhere there’s a demand. Ultimately, we want as much of the great things in our city to be accessible by foot or by bike as possible, and we will never build bike lanes to all of them.
Where we have limited infrastructure options, however, we can always try to increase our margin of safety and provide for fallibility by lowering speeds. The prevailing speeds on many of our roadways is higher than the speed limit (in some cases much higher), and in other cases our speed limits are higher than is appropriate for the surrounding contexts. Traffic engineers have traditionally used the 85th percentile speed for a roadway to set the speed limit based on research that said it was safest, but that research only took into account motor vehicle crashes with each other, not crashes involving bicyclists and pedestrians.
As a result, we have fast vehicles being driven on residential streets (and in Newton, almost every street has residences on it). This isn’t a bicyclist issue, this isn’t a pedestrian issue, it’s a quality of life issue that vexes people all across the city. The complaint of speeding neighborhood traffic has to be one of the most persistent ones our Councilors and city staff face. One of a parent’s worst fears is a collision between a kid accidentally stepping into the street with a car driven well in excess of the safe speed.
It doesn’t matter if those cars pass your house only one in a hundred or one in a thousand times. It shapes our view of our neighborhoods. It forces us to change our behavior. “Don’t play in the front yard.” “Don’t bike on the street, use the sidewalk” (even though sidewalk riding has a huge number of other hazards, from curbs to backing out drivers to collisions with pedestrians to a complete lack of sidewalks). “It’s not safe to walk, let me drive you.”
We may sometimes lack consensus that a particular street can accommodate a dedicated bike lane. However, I bet there’s wide consensus across Newton that neighborhoods should be safe enough so that kids *can* ride safely on neighborhood streets. That they *can* walk safely to their friends’ houses. That families and other adults *can* take a walk around their neighborhoods and villages without the risk of careless or illegal drivers jeopardizing their safety.
And the same is true about safe travel by foot or by bike to our neighborhood schools, sometimes on larger roads. Biking and walking to school has been a tradition in Newton for decades. The music room of our local school, Franklin, was actually an entire bike room when the school was built, with a ramp from street level down to the basement. I see no reason why kids and young adults today should not have the same access to safe and independent travel than generations that have come before. Our neighborhood school model depends on it for reasons of safety, traffic congestion, parking, and the environment.
When it comes to bike safety, we need an “all of the above” approach. We need to get riders, especially kids, more confident and experienced so they can avoid potential crashes and ride legally and safely. To get experience, they need to have access to safe places to ride, they need to model the behavior of other safe riders, and they need to have informed encouragement. Ultimately, they need to matter, before there’s a crash or tragedy.
There are plenty of places where we can make roads safer for everyone, encouraging legal behavior by all users and reducing the ability for drivers to engage in unsafe, reckless, or illegal behavior that endangers others. That’s a big investment in engineering, but it also can bring about, say, pedestrian signals with less wait, or traffic signals that are more responsive to drivers and reduce the risk of collisions. And where we hit the limits of engineering, yes, we need enforcement, to punish dangerous behavior as well as to set a community standard of acceptable behavior.
We frequently get caught up the the weeds, mired in specifics and differences. However, there are themes and principles here on which we can get broad agreement.
carefull figgy what you say
about the disaster known as west newton square
mt thm
will jump all over you!!!!!!!!!!!
Joe, the signals need tuning for sure. On a bike I get as frustrated as drivers must sitting there at a red when no one is moving across the square.
I didn’t say it was a disaster Joe. I just said I didn’t think the bike lanes worked out as folks hoped they would. In hindsight, I would have eliminated the bike lanes, which would make the traffic signals less complicated, make it easier to make right turns, and increase the size of the sidewalks and bumpouts. From what I can see, you get far more pedestrians walking through the village than we get folks biking through it. The blue bikes are rarely used, and in the limited time before snow, I saw more folks biking in the car lanes than using the “protected” bike lanes. It is a complicated place to bike.
But it is just my opinion, and perhaps I’m just biased against bike lanes in village centers.
The rest of the redo was quite nice in my opinion. I like the new lights, benches and now that the lanes are marked, it really isn’t hard to figure out the lanes.
Certainly not perfect, but lots of folks just hate change. Can’t tell you how many folks have complained to me about Newtonville’s village improvements early on, mostly about “so much parking lost” or the “benches are ugly, no one will use them, why do we need them, etc.”. Most of them have stopped complaining because parking is plentiful and the benches and seating are used constantly. But few people come back to admit maybe it wasn’t so bad after all.
No public project is ever perfect and opinions will differ. And balancing priorities is hard. Bike lanes vs. pedestrians vs cars vs parking. But the alternative of letting everything go to hell by worshipping the past is pretty bad too. Cites grow and change… West Newton has some cool new restaurants, and seems to be pretty hopping these days. Can’t be ALL bad, no…?
Most of the changes in light timing and lane configuration in West Newton Square was because of pedestrian safety, not bike lanes. In general, I don’t really see how the West Newton bike lanes impact drivers in much of any way (assuming that the lights are timed correctly and the bike detectors at the signals are working correctly, which is an assumption).
Bike lane networks usually get built one piece at a time when individual projects are completed. West Newton’s lanes currently don’t connect to much, so they aren’t going to get as much use as if they connected to more stuff. Potential changes to Washington Street between Newtonville and West Newton, which multiple studies have shown to be significantly overbuilt and dangerous to all users, will connect to West Newton Square. You’ve simply got to start somewhere.
There’s also one extra benefit to bike lanes for automobile users in West Newton Square. The block by the cinema was always very difficult to park in and to get into and out of a car because the through travel lane was right next to the parking lane. Now, the bike lane provides breathing room for drivers to park and exit their cars (with care, or course). When I have to drive or bike, I find this area far more pleasant and convenient.
Mike, wasn’t West Newton also a hotspot for vehicle-on-vehicle collisions? As much as people want to blame pedestrians and bicycles for what they see as unnecessary change, weren’t the new signals and traffic configuration aimed at reducing these crashes, too? I’d love to see data on whether that has succeeded. Same for emergency response times with the new preemptive signals.
The intersection of Cabot and East Side Parkway is, as Adam and others have noted, large, and oddly shaped. It begs drivers heading east on Cabot who want to go north on ESP to cut right across the middle of the intersection and essentially unexpectedly cut off any other drivers. The same happens with SB ESP drivers wanting to turn east onto Cabot and so on.
This intersecting could use a mini-traffic circle. It would stop that behavior and provide predictable lanes of travel for cars, pedestrians and bicyclists and stop this errant and dangerous driver behavior.
Police tickets are down because the police chief ended the traffic enforcement department. They used to have dedicated officers for traffic enforcement in the evening, but it was ended for some reason. Now, no one is afraid to drive fast and crazy through our streets.
Traffic enforcement cameras would have done nothing to prevent this accident. Personally, I doubt they do anything to actually prevent accidents at all. They also raise some serious constitutional questions.
I think it would be a mistake for Massachusetts to allow traffic enforcement cameras. I know it will be a battle if the Newton City Council decides to install them. I would have no objection to the cameras, provided they comply with the constitution, and provide for immediate email notification to the alleged offender, so the incident is not a distant memory by the time they get a ticket in the mail.
Mike, 22 states have traffic enforcement cameras. I don’t know where you get your information that they wouldn’t help with traffic safety but I think that red light, crosswalk and stop sign scofflaws might have a 2nd thought if they knew that they may get a ticket in the mail. The fake constitutionality argument is the real distraction here. The cameras don’t need to aimed inside of people’s homes. I don’t think they are needed everywhere but school zones would be a great place to start. Mike I have been to TBI facilities and the people who work and reside there don’t consider head safety a “distraction”.
@Jackson Joe– It’s right there in the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution. The right of the accused to face their accuser. It’s already been the subject of many court cases involving traffic enforcement cameras.
I’m not suggesting that the 6th constitutes sufficient reason to not use cameras. But if cameras are allowed under Massachusetts law and the City of Newton chooses to use them, our City Councilors have an obligation to do so in a way that fully complies with constitutional rights.
Additionally, without immediate email notification [including the photo] of an alleged offense, ticketed drivers will learn nothing from their bad behavior. It’s very different than the in-the-moment learning experience of being pulled over and ticketed by an officer.
Mike that argument doesn’t hold up in traffic court where you do not have a right to face the officer that gave you a ticket, I promise you that the first time you get a $250 fine for a moving violation in a school zone that you will remember and have learned a lesson!
I am a fan of bike safety. I am not a fan of camera proliferation. I can see the balance of pro/con tipping toward a camera in a spot that has real and repeated issues. Not sure of threshold but surveillance state activities should not be the norm. Some of you might be fine getting filmed for police purposes whenever outside the home. I’m not.
As a sarcastic aside – is improved biking safety worth the likely increase in property values it could lead to? Remember – many who post here are trying to find ways to decrease the cost of housing in Newton.
This is very sad to hear and I hope the student is OK.
To echo some of the comments above – traffic enforcement in Newton, particularly speed enforcement, is terribly lacking. I don’t let my kids bike alone in our road because there are drivers who think 40 mph is an appropriate speed for a residential side street. Where are the speed traps? And don’t get me started on how cars rarely yield at pedestrian crosswalks, despite their obligation to do so.
The city should immediately hire 10-20 dedicated traffic enforcement officers who hand out tickets to speeders, people who fail to yield at crosswalks, etc. The officers would pay for themselves. And Newton would quickly have a reputation as a place where speeding will cost you, literally. Residents would get it, as would people cutting through the city.
Speed cameras are also great. To the comment above about the need for an immediate email – I disagree. If you know Newton has speed cameras everywhere, and you get a few tickets, you’ll quickly learn to drive slowly in Newton *all the time*, because you never quite know where the speed camera is.
A good stop gap would be speed bumps along school routes… there appears to be no courage
First to echo others, very relieved the cyclist is mostly ok.
As a long-time cyclist I do have to point out that speed impediments (speed limits, bumps, bump-outs, raised intersections) and cameras would not prevent this type of accident, because it was not about speed. The car turned left; the cyclist (simultaneously? or subsequently?) entered the road from the sidewalk.
A protected lane might have helped, if the student had been riding in the protected lane — and/or drivers learn to look and cross a protected cycling lane with caution.
Speed bumps force drivers to pay attention to the road vs mindlessly driving at high speeds for prolonged stretches
Dulles, I will agree with you that there is no one thing that would fully prevent this type of crash. However, there are steps that could reduce the likelihood of a crash or reduce a crash severity. A tighter intersection geometry (which is challenging here because the roads don’t quite meet at a 90° angle) reduces the size of the zone of potential conflict. The need for this change is somewhat mitigated by the all way stop at this intersection. And a slower speed roadway would it make it more likely that more riders use the road itself (though we will need to improve our education and training program to help more riders feel more comfortable doing so). in this case, a bicyclist in the roadway is more predictable for all road users (especially if they stopped at the intersection).
Imperfect answers to a hard problem. That’s one of the reasons this topic is all over the place: we naturally grasp for easy answers even when there are none.
Mike I believe you found common ground with your last statement
“Imperfect answers to a hard problem. That’s one of the reasons this topic is all over the place: we naturally grasp for easy answers even when there are none.”
Ridiculous that people always assume that the cyclist is never at fault. They are the sacred cow of transportation. It’s a joke.
Maybe the automobile is at fault in this case. We don’t know. But every single bicycle post on this and every other blog, puts the blame on the automobile and that just isn’t the case.
Where did I say that, Kim?
Kim – Because it usually the driver’s fault. Distracted driving is out of control on the streets. Drivers are spending more time looking at their phones and infotainment screens.
Of course there are some reckless cyclists with their 30 pounds of steel. But that pales to 3000 pounds of steel and the deadly force delivered by cars in a crash.
First, and it may seem like a niggling point, but crashes involve the physics of vehicles but the judgement of people. Car and bicycle, driver and bicyclist. The automobile itself was not at fault or an issue here. It was the driver (and bicyclist) making decisions.
Second, as facts and the statement of the bicyclist seem to indicate that he did not yield or stop when entering the intersection, the rider is likely at fault in this case.
Third, fault isn’t the end of the story. Humans are fallible, especially young or inexperienced ones. Humans generally do things – correctly, incorrectly, or accidentally – for a reason. Ultimately, our end goal should be safety, not personal blame (though accountability is part of understanding problems and coming up with fixes if possible). That means understanding why people do things, even wrong things, that contribute to harm.
We should also acknowledge that crashes will still happen. Our job is then to make them less frequent and less serious. The cyclist seems to have suffered only minor injuries. That’s a success, though not a total one. (BTW, the cyclist was wearing a helmet, and there police saw no indication of helmet impact or damage.)
For decades, we have learned from airplane crashes through an analysis and accountability process that focuses on identifying causes of problems and preventing them from happening again. As a result, flying is incredibly safe (though not 100% risk free). Vision Zero depends on that kind of objective analysis and an acknowledgement of human fallibility to make everyone safer. I think it’s an excellent model to follow.
@Mike Halle – where did you see a report of the bicyclist’s statement? I’d like to read that and I’m sure other people would too.
I was able to hear about the police report, but it has not yet been released that I know of because a minor is involved.
The police report is at:
https://www.newtonpolice.com/ACCIDENTS/files/22000158.pdf
Also – Please read my full post below.
@Debra – thanks for the link. Given that the bike crashed into the side of the car, it’s clear that the driver wasn’t at fault. And much as I’m a strong proponent of making crosswalks safer for bikes and pedestrians, it sounds like it wouldn’t have made a difference in the case of a rider who didn’t stop when transitioning from sidewalk to street to see if there was any oncoming traffic.
I say this as someone who biked Manhattan streets to high school and saw my share of both dangerous cars, buses, and trucks, and kids being oblivious and making dangerous maneuvers. I think it’s important that we not automatically assign blame before knowing the circumstances of a crash (or anything else, for that matter).
One more thing to add. While assessment of accountability and the root causes of crashes should be as objective as we can make it, we must also act based on relative risk of harm. Bicyclists and pedestrians are far more vulnerable in crashes than are drivers, who both direct and are protected by thousands of pounds of metal, crush zones, and other safety devices.
We want everyone to return home safely after travel. Toward this goal, we all have different responsibilities. Drivers have a great responsibility to protect others based on the potential harm their vehicle may cause. Pedestrians and bicyclists have a significant responsibility for self-protection, which can unfortunately only go so far. We as a city have a responsibility to engineer and enforce a transportation system that minimizes the risk of harm. And finally, we all have a shared responsibility to each other, on the roads and when making decisions, to work together and address our mutual but individual needs for safe travel.
IMO cyclists have a responsibility to protect pedestrians, not that the two have a shared responsibility for self-protection. The situation has certainly improved as newer cyclists assume responsibility for learning the rules of the road, but as a pedestrian, I continue to fear cyclists more than motorists.
Agreed that cyclists have a responsibility for the safety of pedestrians. In my mind, that is one of the primary reasons to provide dedicated bike facilities and well-designed multi-use paths in urban areas.
The pedestrian concern about being hit by a bicyclist, independent of fault, is real – crashes are often in shared pedestrian spaces, and bikes are harder to hear and see.
The actual risk and frequency compared to crashes with motor vehicles is dramatically smaller, however. I was indirectly part of a conversation with Newton Police traffic division, and they could cite few if any such crashes that have required police response.
That doesn’t mean the risk, fear, or concern isn’t real, or that we should ignore the issue. There are just far more, and far riskier, crashes between pedestrians and motor vehicles.
@Mike Halle – I don’t think we can use police reports to compare the frequency of people being hit by cars vs. bicycles, since I doubt most people think to call the police in the latter case unless they have to call 911 due to the severity of injuries.
Meredith, agreed that we have imperfect data on bicyclist/pedestrian conflict. However, we also have imperfect data on driver/pedestrian conflict, or driver/bicyclist conflict for that matter.
All of these conflicts happen on Newton streets with regularity if we are discussing close calls, verbal interactions, or even no damage crashes. The shear number of drivers/motor vehicles on the roads suggests that they are more likely to be involved in such interactions.
However, I believe the police are pretty good observers to identify and roughly quantify these kinds of problems, police report or not. And police / 911 reports are an effective measure of serious crashes. And there are plenty of pedestrian crashes involving motor vehicles every year in Newton.
I’ll repeat, that doesn’t mean that bicyclist / pedestrian conflict isn’t important to understand and minimize. It is. It represents a real and perceived risk that ultimately may discourage people from walking. Ideally, bicyclists (and all road users) should be respectful, law-abiding, and have a space of their own.
That, however, isn’t possible on all of our streets. We will never have separated facilities in all of our neighborhoods, for example. Our neighborhoods should be safe enough that even novice bicyclists can ride on the roads (while following the rules of the road) without fear. That’s a win for everyone, except people who think that neighborhood streets shouldn’t slow them down.
Right now, the responsibility rests on the pedestrian and clearly people walking in Newton take it seriously. That being said, I’ve had many more negative interactions (“get out of the way”) and near misses with cyclists than motorists. Police reports don’t tell the whole story.
I walk around the city plenty, and this is the exact opposite of my experience as a pedestrian. Although you don’t get that personal level of interaction with someone in a car by seeing their face or hearing their voice, flagrant violations by motorists, like Bob describes, are common. I can’t remember the last time I had a bad encounter with a cyclist that wasn’t on a shared use path. I know it’s anecdotal, but Jane, can you describe some of the situations you mentioned? Are these with cyclists riding on the sidewalk? Or disrespecting crosswalks or signals? Or something else?
Can’t agree with Jane on this one. Although most motorists are usually deferential when I cross Beacon Street while walking my dog, a few look intent on knocking us over. Some dangerous impulse transforms humans when they sit in the driver’s seat.
“Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Apologies if this has already been posted, but here is a link to the police report about the accident.
https://www.newtonpolice.com/ACCIDENTS/files/22000158.pdf
Here is also a link to the Mass.gov summary of the laws for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists in the presence of bicyclists.
https://www.mass.gov/doc/laws-for-bicyclists-and-motorists-in-the-presence-of-bicyclists/download
According to the accident report, the bicyclist stated that “he was on the sidewalk and entered the intersection without stopping” and then “crashed into the side of MV1 [the motor vehicle].” Also, according to the accident report the motorist stated that “he came to a complete stop at the stop sign on Cabot Street….did not see any vehicles or pedestrians in the area….proceeded to travel through the intersection from his stopped position and take a left turn onto East Side Parkway. [The motorist] stated at this time a bicyclist crashed into the passenger side of his vehicle.”
From the accident report, it first appears that the bicyclist was the ONLY one at fault. To me, however, it appears that the laws for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists are ALSO at fault. The published summary of the laws has 30+ laws and requirements for bicyclists, but surprisingly the correct way for a bicycle to exit a sidewalk onto a road is NOT one of the laws or requirements. There is a requirement for pedestrians that states “Before you cross a roadway, stop at the curb, look left, look right, and look left again for traffic,” but no such requirement for bicyclists, either in the law summary or in M.G.L. 85, Section 11B, the state law governing bicycles. The law allows bicycles to ride on sidewalks, outside of business districts. The law also gives rules for bicycle operation on sidewalks, but, again, there appears to be no state rule/law for exiting the sidewalk safely.
The state law should be amended so that bicyclists are also required to stop and look both ways when re-entering the road from the sidewalk in the way that pedestrians are required to stop and look both ways. The most conscientious driver in the world is just not going to see a bicycle suddenly exit the sidewalk onto the road. In the absence of this change to the law, perhaps groups like Bike Newton could step in and train Newton bicyclists, especially kids, on the safest way to exit a sidewalk onto a road.
My understanding is the state law is ambiguous about bicyclist behavior on sidewalks and in crosswalks.
There’s a process to change state law. It’s arduous, as seen by MassBike’s years long effort to get what’s currently on the books in place. But, ultimately, a law change won’t help situations like this. The police reports said no one was cited, and even if the bicyclist was cited, it doesn’t change the facts on the ground or make things safer. Better assigning isn’t a safety solution.
Our streets should be safe enough so that responsible bicyclists can ride on the street, in the presence or absence of a dedicated bike facility. That should be our city goal. That should be the direction we aim our education, engineering, and enforcement efforts. Achieve that aim, and bicyclists gain the confidence and experience they need to be even more comfortable riding in a variety of urban environments. Don’t achieve it, and you increase risks for all road users while discouraging bicycling all around.
Sidewalk riding is a crutch, a stopgap, something we should do for only the youngest of riders (or, alternatively, that we do only when we can design a multi-use path of sufficient size and safety). Sidewalk riding imposes additional risks and hazards to bicyclists, pedestrians, and even drivers entering or exiting driveways. Yet, on the surface it seems safer.
The fact that so many bicyclists of all ages use sidewalks because they are or are perceived to be safer than the roadway is a statement about our support of bicycling, and safe streets in general, in Newton. This isn’t just “if we build it, they will come”. We have hundreds of students riding to school each day across the city, and hundreds of parents of other students saying that’s too dangerous. There are lots of places in Newton where great solutions are really hard, but there are lots of others where good solutions are possible if we commit to them.
That the student cyclist was apparently at fault here doesn’t alter the fact that biking could be much safer in Newton. From what we have learned, we can hardly blame the driver for this crash. That point conceded, all bike advocates and Bike Newton in particular will continue to encourage the city to improve conditions so that everyone- pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers- can coexist in a climate of safety and mutual respect.
If only Bike Newton would advocate helmets for all riders including those that use ride share, but that doesn’t support their mission.
Of course cyclists should wear helmets. They offer a modicum of protection. We need to move away from seeing them as some cure-all for cycling issues or a signal of virtue for the cyclists. In my view, there is too much focus on the whether the cyclist was wearing a helmet as a signal for fault. That little bit of plastic is not going to do much against 3000+ of steel moving at 30+ mph.
It’s not a matter of bike vs car and It’s not a matter of fault anyway. It’s a matter of basic safety like wearing seat belts and requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets. In case you didn’t know it there are also biking accidents that don’t involve cars.
Mike Halle – The state’s bicycle laws that exist in M.G.L. 85, 11B aren’t ambiguous at all. For example, M.G.L. 85,11B clearly empowers cyclists to use sidewalks by stating that “bicycles may be ridden on sidewalks outside business districts when necessary, in the interest of safety, unless otherwise directed by local ordinance.” The problem is that there is no state law requiring cyclists to stop at the curb when re-entering traffic from the sidewalk. Nor is this practice suggested in the Mass.gov summary of the laws for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists in the presence of bicyclists – a summary that contains best practices in addition to laws.
Bob Jambol – With regard to this accident, I think Bike Newton needs to put aside its bicycle rights advocacy role temporarily and perform a bicycle safety education role. They can do this in two ways. A) Bike Newton already has a “rules of the road” webpage with safety tips for motorists and cyclists. Bike Newton can add the tip about cyclists stopping at curbs when re-entering traffic from the sidewalk; B) Bike Newton appears to have a newsletter and mailing list, which it already used to publicize the first partially known facts about this accident. Now that more facts are known, Bike Newton can use this newsletter and mailing list to publicize, again, the importance of cyclists stopping at curbs when re-entering traffic from the sidewalk.
The ambiguity of the law is not whether bicyclists are permitted on sidewalks outside of business districts. The ambiguity covers their behavior, and you have cited one element. Is a bicycle/bicyclist a vehicle on the sidewalk, or a pedestrian? What about in a crosswalk? It may or not matter in this particular case, but may matter in others.
I have been working with municipalities regarding bicyclist, pedestrian, and motor vehicle related safety issues for thirty years. While we learn from every crash, we also learn there are a hundred things we need to do better. We can add this particular failure to the list and address it in education, but we also need to keep it in perspective and focus. Education, particularly of kids, is important but hard. They don’t read Bike Newton newsletters, nor do many of their parents. And there are a lot of other safety tips that are also important to convey, including helmets and lights and being predictable and making sure your brakes work and you look for car doors and you yield to pedestrians and you go around potholes but don’t weave into traffic and watch for pets and drivers will sometimes not look and left or right hook you and drivers text while they drive even though it is illegal and bicycling is fun and empowering and I can go on but I won’t. Or at the same time, we can make our streets more tolerant of human failure.
Bicyclist and pedestrian advocacy and safety is primarily a volunteer activity. Everyone’s help is welcome.
May we stop trying to find ways to blame a kid for just trying to get to school and work together to make it safe for kids like him to do so.
Not blaming the kid at all. Just trying to tell other kids that they need to stop at the curb when re-entering traffic from the sidewalk. If one kid doesn’t know, then other kids don’t know – because no one is telling them that they need to stop.
Making it safe means not forcing kids to ride on sidewalks on school routes, which are dangerous crossing driveways, and for pedestrians.
Surprising that the officer didn’t ask the driver if he was using his phone during the crash. We need to focus more on distracted driving. This should be a standard question and point of investigation during a crash.
Nor did the report state whether the officer asked if the cyclist was using his cell phone during the accident. According to the report the cyclist hit the car broadside…passenger side door. I would suggest the cyclist may have been more distracted than the car driver who appears to have followed all of the rules of the road as per the police report and the eyewitness report.
No argument. Except for you calling it an accident and the implication that it couldn’t have been prevented. There is fault here and it looks like most of it was on the cyclist. Please note the consequences of bike-car interaction. The driver had a little damage to his car. The cyclist had to go to the hospital.
Not an either/or, in my view. Roads need to be safer but cyclists need to learn road safety. Both points well taken.