Person on Foot dies from Crash on Highway 22 on-ramp in West Salem

In a crash and death that might have an awful similarity to the crash and death of Alexandria Tereshka in 2018, Police today announced another pedestrian fatality near Highway 22 and Capital Manor.

Westbound Edgewater ramp to Highway 22

From Salem PD:

A west Salem resident injured in a collision with a vehicle on May 11 has died.

The collision between the pedestrian and the driver of a van occurred at the Edgewater ST NW on-ramp to westbound Salem-Dallas HW at approximately 1:25 a.m. that Saturday morning.

Officers and medical personnel responded and aided the pedestrian, identified as 62-year-old Patricia Ann Estrada. She was transported to Salem Health with life-threatening injuries.

The Salem Police Traffic Team’s preliminary investigation revealed that Estrada was positioned on the shoulder of the on-ramp and moved into the van's path as the driver proceeded to access the highway.

The van driver, Melodi Lynn Kraemer, age 43 of Dallas, called for police and stayed at the scene.

Estrada, who was hospitalized, died from her injuries on Sunday evening, May 26.

Drivers are gunning it here to attain speed for Highway 22, and the view is hemmed in. It might not be adequately lit. Additionally, despite ODOT's wishes, there are occasional campsites nearby a person might want to reach. A befuddled elderly resident of Capital Manor, too, might be out wandering.

Signed for 50mph at merge point

Highway speed is just wildly inappropriate for the urban context here. Lower speeds would allow for unexpected people — or deer or other wildlife — to become visible with greater allowances for stopping distance and greater odds of survival after any impact.

This post may be updated.

Poppy Day joins Decoration Day and Memorial Day in 1924

Back in 1924 "Poppy Day" joined "Decoration Day" and "Memorial Day" in the advertising and comment on the holiday.

Civil War Memorial, City View

May 30th, 1924

Poppy Day as an independent thing appears new here. Internationally, Poppy Day has existence independent of the US Memorial Day, and here was mostly consolidated into it.

In July of 1923 the phrase "Poppy Day" had appeared here in the wholly secular context of a "City Beautiful" and "Floral" theme for the "Salem Slogan" and "Pep and Progress" pages, but not in any Memorial Day context. This use in 1924 was new here in Salem.

The morning paper had published the famous poem, which was not new, and some extensions, which did seem new.

Safety at the MPO

A year ago the MPO project to write a Metropolitan Transportation Safety Action Plan held an open house and survey. They've published a summary now, and it is interesting to consider a little.

The Policy Committee for the MPO meets on Tuesday the 28th, but there's not really anything much to say on that agenda, so we'll talk about that safety plan instead.

Survey summary

The results in general do not seem very surprising: People feel more safe walking than biking, people really feel vulnerable while on bike, intersections are a problem, and people feel safe in their cars.

Leveraging the precarious feelings of being on bike to support better bike lanes is wholly warranted.

But should messaging also underscore that you are not as safe in your car as you might think?

A few days ago

Just a few days ago the husband or relative of retired Librarian Judy Brunkal lost control of his vehicle on Croisan Creek Road, and she died in the crash.

In February a passenger, Lynda Rohrback Bush, died when her driver apparently tried to sneak across 12th street at Oak Hill in south Salem.

The lethality of autoism claims as many lives as gun violence.

It's not just those on foot, on bike, or otherwise rolling, who are at risk.

When he was at the paper, Dick Hughes used to say "Driving is the most dangerous thing that many of us will do in our lifetimes." 

Maybe in a strict actuarial sense this isn't the best way to put it, but he was right to underscore the dangers of driving! Drivers are the author of calamity.

One of the best things a transportation safety plan could do is say loudly and often, "Driving is dangerous and employs lethal force. The drive not taken is the safest drive. As often as you can, don't drive." Not-driving meets the exigencies of our moment: Climate as well as safety.

Pushing back on the illusion of safety when a person is inside a car would be salutary.

Driver Fatally Injuries Person in Scooter attempting to Cross Liberty St NE

A driver has struck and fatally injured a person using a motorized scooter attempting to cross a zoomy urban State highway.

Liberty just south of River Street

From Salem PD yesterday the 22nd:

Emergency personnel responded to the intersection of Liberty and River STS NE at approximately 9:45 a.m. today [yesterday] on the report of a collision involving a person riding an electric-powered chair and a car.

The initial investigation by the Salem Police Traffic Team determined a woman on a motorized chair was attempting to cross Liberty ST from east to west when she was struck by a [driver operating a] vehicle traveling northbound on Liberty ST. Witnesses reported the scooter operator entered the roadway close to oncoming traffic when the crash occurred.

The woman operating the motorized chair is identified as Lois Marie Randall, age 70. Randall was transported to Salem Health where she later died from injuries received in the collision.

The driver of the vehicle, Jami Lee Duhrkoop, age 36, remained at the scene after the crash. Duhrkoop is cooperating with the ongoing investigation.

Liberty here is signed for 30mph.

One more block south it's signed for 30mph

Earlier this year you may recall in an online Open House ODOT discussed an enhanced crosswalk on Academy, one block north of River Street. There is an existing marked crosswalk at Columbia for Highland Elementary School. A Bottle Drop facility is also a block away, just off River Street on Commercial.

About 1924 May Election Afternoon Paper said Invisible Government given Crippling Blow

After the May Election of 1924, the afternoon paper trumpeted the defeat of the Klan slate across the board.

May 17th, 1924

The terms they used were "invisible government," focusing on secrecy.

Earlier in May they had reported on a new Salem Klan, which had incorporated in March through Indiana rather than Atlanta, and was not affiliated with Frederick Gifford. They highlighted "secret political methods" rather than policy. They were ok with a lot of the nativism and racism. The afternoon paper's opposition to the Klan was more on style than substance, it has seemed.

May 8th, 1924

If there was enough interest to charter a new Klan group, the triumphalism of "crippling blow" may not be wholly warranted.

There was, in fact, a sense that Senator Charles McNary had struck a deal with the Klan for reelection.

A Century Ago Salemites Raised Funds for Doughboy WWI Memorial

The paper this morning has a preview of activities and ceremonies for Memorial Day. Not much mentioned is World War I.

A century ago it was all too fresh. Back in the first week of May in 1924 Salemites formalized plans to fund the World War I "Doughboy" Memorial.

Salem Library Historic Photos

May 6th, 1924

The statue would be one identical to one in McMinnville, except it would have a grenade, which those in McMinnville decided to edit out.

Left apparently a little understated was that it was in fact one in an edition of many!

Proposed Drive-thru Coffee Shack shows Weakness of MU-III Zoning

When we went through the Our Salem process and designated lots of the south end of Commercial Street in various flavors of "mixed use" zoning, and then subsequently went through a minor revision in the debate over overlay zones, and we talked about how much it was going to help us reduce driving and emissions, an important part of our climate action, were more drive-thrus really what we wanted?

Drive-thru coffee shack proposed

The City has an application for an additional car wash bay and wholly new drive-thru coffee shack for the corner of Judson and Commercial, very near the cemetery.

MU-III zoning here - City of Salem

The parcel is zoned MU-III, and in early returns, this new mixed use zoning does not seem to be inducing very much actual mixed use.

Staff Report from Our Salem, April 2022

More importantly, we continue to allow new drive thrus and all the driving trips they induce. No amount of PR on idling will change that! MU-III zoning was specifically formulated to allow drive-thrus. We saw this out on the new project east of Costco, and now here in a more inner neighborhood.

via FB

We should give more serious consideration to banning new drive-thrus altogether. Our Strong Towns group discussed this some last month.

(Since the MU-III zone is really a continuation of older commercial zoning, mostly just freshened up with a new brand name and a few more allowable uses, we should also consider renaming it to give a more honest high-level view of the amount and intent of actual mixed-use zoning. The City likes to brag about how much new mixed use zoning there is, but much of it seems very unlikely to be used in any spirit of mixed uses. There's too much PR on very theoretical and unlikely possibility and not enough discussion of realistic prospects. With more sober assessments we would be in a better position to iterate and refine so we are more likely to hit in reality our high level goals, which remain remote at the moment.)

Why no Streetcar Commercial Districts in Salem?

Over at our Strong Towns Group they linked to a recent video by Ray Delahanty, aka "CityNerd," on the largely intact streetcar era commercial districts and congenial urbanism along the former lines in Portland.

Like nearly every city, the greatest streets and neighborhoods in Portland, Oregon exist where the long-abandoned electric streetcars ran. Today we're touring Portland's east side to find remnants of that age and talk about why its lingering impact is so important.

CityNerd on Portland's streetcar hubs

Delahanty highlighted the storefronts lining the sidewalk and tight to it, and also pointed out how often the hubs and corridors were anchored by old movie theaters. He started with the Hollywood district at 42nd and Sandy.

CityNerd on movie theaters anchoring hubs

Why isn't there more of this here in Salem?

New Strong Towns Matrix on Road vs. Street Widens Definition of Stroad

Our Strong Towns group posted a link to a recent note at Strong Towns HQ on safety efforts, "Here Is What Vision Zero Should Really Look Like."

Strong Towns

It it was a new matrix on the difference between a street and a road. As I read it, the matrix expands the definition of the central hybrid they call a stroad, now seeing a stroad as nearly every street designed and posted for 16mph to 50mph. That's basically the whole of a city's street network!

In 2012, Strong Towns said

Anytime you are driving between 30 and 50 miles per hour, you are likely on a STROAD, which has become the default option for American traffic corridors.

And here's a Strong Towns graphic from 2015, which also shows a narrower speed range for a stroad (and a broader range for a "safe" street or road).

Strong Towns, 2015

Strong Towns is right that we should radically alter our understanding of safe city speed. A redefined stroad with an edge at 15mph could help with this, and they might say 20mph is still a pinch high. But a threshold of 20mph does dovetail with our current conversation on a "Twenty is Plenty" culture shift. So it might be convenient to fudge a little and say 20mph rather than 15mph so that there is a more consistent message on safe speed.

Since we've been critiquing the sidewalkification of bicycling lately here, we'll assert another link.

The sidewalkification of bicycling leaves stroads and their dangerous speeds intact. It affirms the autoist paradigm for speed and flow in urban contexts. This is the situation on Battle Creek Road at Mahonia Crossing. Battle Creek Road appears to be signed for 40mph in this segment, nearly the maximum danger for a stroad. 

The project on McGilchrist has a very similar problem, and the forthcoming Marine Drive seems likely to have it also.

Another reason to be generally skeptical about the sidewalkification of bicycling is that it doesn't make the whole street more safe and doesn't fit very well, if at all, with any genuine conception of Vision Zero. It seems to offer safety for people biking, and seems to meet a bureaucratic "complete street" standard, but it adds hazard for people on foot, and lets governments and planners off the hook for designing with safer auto speeds. It's a kind of stroad retention policy.

Better Naito and other "Best Bike Lanes" of 2023 Show Better Way Forward

In Portland the "Better Naito" project has its own set of compromises and imperfections, but it provides a kind of framework for thinking about problems with an overcommittment to multiuse/shared use paths.

People biked on the path system (ASLA)

The westside path system in Tom McCall Waterfront Park used to seem like it provided a generous space for people on foot and on bike.

People walking normally use space (ASLA)

But it was increasingly congested, especially in summertime.

NACTO Recommends Multiuse Paths in Limited Circumstances

The post on the multi-use path on Battle Creek Road at Mahonia Crossing has generated some pushback, and it might be useful to address some of it.

NACTO: Shared use path, low walking counts only

In the original NACTO "All Ages and Abilities" matrix, there was a very limited situation for which a multiuse or shared use path was the recommendation:

"High-speed limited access roadways, natural corridors, or geographic edge conditions with limited conflicts" and "low pedestrian volume."

Battle Creek Road is not a high-speed limited access roadway — that would be Kuebler/Cordon — and a large and important affordable housing complex is not likely to furnish "low pedestrian volume" either. The roadway context there does not call for a multiuse path.

The situation that is a better match for Battle Creek is a roadway with speed greater than 26 mph and volumes of greater than 6,000. That calls for a Protected Bicycle Lane or Bicycle Path, not a multiuse path.

Salem (including ODOT near the UGM and Police Station, not just the City of Salem) seems to be seeing multiuse paths as a "one size fits all" kind of solution. But by these NACTO standards you can see in the grid, Salem is overusing multiuse paths. To critique their overbroad use is not some argument for vehicular cycling! This blog has never advocated for vehicular cycling as a general philosophy. It sees it as part of a useful toolbox of bicycling technique, useful to have in reserve, but never primary.

As the NACTO matrix shows, just as separation from cars and people driving is valuable, so is separation from people on foot.

We shouldn't force people on foot and people on bike to battle over scarce sidewalk space. The primary battle should be about reducing car space and car speed. Another way to consider this is the "bad stuff flows downhill" trope. When drivers and cars dominate people biking on the road, people biking shouldn't turn around and dominate those walking on the sidewalks and paths.

The problem of scorching is the other part of the argument that is important. Zooming bikes degrade the walking environment. There's a reason we banned them from the sidewalk downtown! Who wants to be dodging zooming bikes? Even slow bikes can be troublesome. Though they aren't as lethal as zooming cars, bikes on the walks are highly annoying! When you walk in Minto Park, having to lookout for and dodge people biking is a pain. What is mysterious about this? Electrification only exacerbates the problem.

It really feels sometimes like some bike advocates don't spend much time walking and remembering what it feels like to be crowded by a person biking. They don't attend to the differential power in mobility.

In some ways walking and biking share common threats from driving and cars. But in other ways walking is not the same as biking, and the conflation of them in the "bike/ped" bucket sometimes penalizes walking as an inferior partner.

See also:

• A little bit on history, "Some Thoughts on Scorching" (2015)
  
• "The Prospect of more Biking on Paths in Salem" (2018)
• On a suburb structured around a path system, "Radburn as Dead-end, Pedestrian Displacement System, and Super-Sized Cottage Court" (2023)
  
• "Marine Drive and the Sidewalkification of Bicycling" (2023)
• And at NACTO, "Choosing and All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Facility"

In Hit-and-Run Driver Strikes and Injures Person on Foot who later Dies

From Salem PD:

A Salem man injured in a hit-and-run collision last week has died.

At approximately 11:40 a.m. on May 5, emergency responders were called to the 4100 block of Rickey ST SE after a man crossing the street was struck by the driver of a vehicle who then fled the scene.

The crash investigation determined the pedestrian was attempting to cross Rickey ST approximately one block east of Lancaster DR when they were struck by a pick-up traveling westbound on the same street. The pick-up driver hit the pedestrian who was in the lane of travel.

The pedestrian, Randall Dale Wilson, age 75, was transported to Salem Health with injuries. He was later transported for further care to a Portland-area hospital where he passed away Wednesday night, May 8.

Officers identified the pick-up driver and arrested him at his home later that Sunday afternoon. The driver, Ramiro Gabriel Herrera, age 63 of Keizer, was lodged on the charge of failure to perform the duties of a driver.

This release is a little remarkable. It does not erase the driver in any misuse of the "hit by car" trope and it assigns agency to the driver rather than to a car or truck. 

This is terrible news, but the rhetoric in the release is a real improvement. Hopefully this is a trend at Salem PD.

It will be very interesting to see if media revert to erasing the driver as they churn and revise the press release for their own publications.

Speed seems likely to be an issue also, and it will be interesting to learn more about that.

Back in January on this same stretch of Rickey, just a block away, there was another hit-and-run that did not apparently result in a person's death.

From Salem PD again:

Salem Police and other emergency responders were called to the intersection of Lancaster DR & Rickey ST SE at approximately 8:30 p.m. on Saturday, January 21, on the report of a hit and run involving a pedestrian.

There have also been Safe Routes to School projects nearby, and it is a problem area.

Addendum, May 15th

Here's the paper's note. It is a minimal rewrite and shows the importance of the initial rhetoric in the PD release. It does add that "no charges appear in online court records."

Today's paper

This post may be updated.

"Dangerous Intersections" and More on City Council

The Sunday paper has a big front page treatment for a list of "dangerous intersections."

Front page today

It says,

A Statesman Journal analysis of the crash data reported to ODOT from 2018 to 2022, the most recent available, shows the intersections where the most crashes occurred in the Salem area are centered in downtown, east Salem around the intersection of Market Street and Interstate 5, and on Commercial Street in south Salem.

But it's merely a list! There's hardly any analysis in it.

Deep inside the paper was a blurb for the Ride of Silence.

On the Ride of Silence

In the preview for City Council there was a blurb on the suite of crosswalk applications, potentially to be funded by the Safe Streets for All program that funded our Vision Zero and Twenty is Plenty projects.

In the Council preview

Directly in the same paper there were several opportunities to connect the dots and make a real analysis of our traffic safety problem!

Support for Splash Pads is a Kind of Climate Action: Notes on the Climate Action Plan Committee

Though it has not occasioned much comment at all, last month in the course of the Budget Committee meetings, it came out that the City apparently is shifting formal support for the Climate Action Plan from the General Fund to the Utility Fund.

September 2021

Shifting CAP funding from General Fund

Comments in supplemental reports were not clear that that ending support from the General Fund had a corresponding move to increase funding from the Utility Fund for the CAP. (See comment below for a little more. It would be nice to read more explicit discussion of this rather than having to comb through a line item buried in a set of spreadsheets! In fact, in the folder of agenda and reports for the Budget Committee, there's no obvious document that is the latest version of the budget. It's hard to follow the process. See the addendum below, also.)

Happily, a couple days ago the Committee restored funding for water service and splash pads during the summer in our parks. People flocked to support the splash pads, and several public comments in support of them cited heat events.

Front page today on heat and budget

There could be a stronger thread for climate through the budget conversations.

On Monday the 13th the Climate Action Plan meets.

City Council, May 13th - Lots of Crosswalks

Council meets on Monday the 13th, and they'll consider plans for lots of new crosswalks!

Look at all those proposed crosswalks!

One of the items on Council agenda is a request to

Authorize the City Manager to apply for federal funding up to $10 million through the SS4A [Safe Streets for All] program, using up to $2.5 million of Safety and Livability Bond funds as match, to construct a series of pedestrian crossing improvement projects and further authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the US DOT to accept the funds.

Safe Streets and Roads for All was part of President Biden's Infrastructure package passed in 2022. In a previous round, with $2.8 million the program funded the "Vision Zero" and "Twenty is Plenty" project here.

The City says

The recommended grant application will support construction of 19 enhanced pedestrian crossings at the locations shown on [the map above] and listed below. The enhanced pedestrian crossings will incorporate safety features such as median islands, curb extensions, and flashing beacons. All these features are designed to significantly improve pedestrian safety across our community. The crossing locations were determined with input from the community through the Safer Pedestrian Crossings Program that the City initiated in 2019. Locations were prioritized based on roadway type, crash history, proximity to critical areas such as schools, parks, and transit, and demographic characteristics.

Recommended Pedestrian Crossing Improvements for SS4A Grant Application

• Lancaster Drive NE between Sunnyview Avenue NE and Wolverine Street NE
• Lancaster Drive NE at Cypress Street NE
• Liberty Street SE at Lincoln Street SE
• Hawthorne Avenue NE between Market Street NE and D Street NE
• Kale Street NE near Hoodview Park
• Madison Street NE at 17th Street NE
• Market Street NE at 25th Street NE
• Hollywood Drive NE at McKay High School
• Market Street NE at 15th Street NE
• Market Street NE between Lancaster Drive NE and Tierra Drive NE
• Market Street NE between Childs Avenue NE and Lansing Avenue NE
• D Street NE at Evergreen Avenue NE
• 4000 Block of Fairview Industrial Drive SE (near transit stop)
• River Road N at Delmar Drive N
• Sunnyview Road NE at Greentree Drive NE
• Broadway Street NE at Academy Street NE
• B Street NE at 17th Street NE
• D Street NE at 14th Street NE
• Summer Street NE at Hood Street NE

It's great to see a more ambitious slate of crosswalks proposed.

Crosswalk sites (yellow added)

Also on the agenda is initiating the process to acquire right-of-way for a smaller set of three crosswalks already funded, planned, and in process. 

The Pedestrian Safety Crossings Project will construct enhanced pedestrian crossings at three locations which include River Road N near River Road City Park, State Street at 21st Street SE, and Lancaster Drive NE near Weathers Street NE. Design has progressed to the point where it is now necessary to begin the right-of-way acquisition process....

[Council will consider resolutions] declaring a public need to acquire; the City of Salem’s intent to negotiate; and if necessary, authorizing the City Attorney to commence eminent domain proceedings for the acquisition of right-of-way and easements for the Pedestrian Safety Crossings Project.

There are some other items of interest on Council agenda, and we'll post on those over the weekend.

It's great to see a substantial package of proposed crosswalks and these deserve great support.

CATC to Consider ending Left Turns from Royvonne south onto Commercial

The Advisory Traffic Commission meets Wednesday the 8th, and they'll consider a request to ban left turns from Royvonne Street southbound onto Commercial Street.

To ban a left-hand turn from Royvonne?
Note crosswalk and median on left

A formal public hearing to ban a left turn

The intersection here has a troubled history. Commercial Street is signed for 40mph, which is much too fast for the concentration of shopping and people on foot. Winco, Goodwill, a BottleDrop are all right here. Until the City installed the crosswalk, signalized intersections were inconveniently distant and people froggered across the street. Taking cues from the 40mph posted speed, drivers routinely flouted the legal unmarked crosswalks.

New Multiuse Path at Mahonia Crossing may not be Durable Solution

Last summer the multiuse path along Battle Creek Road was under construction out at Mahonia Crossing. It was an attempt to strike a tricky balance between road widening, tree preservation, and a new bike lane. The solution was a wider sidewalk pulled in from a curb strip with the trees.

Is this really enough for the root zone? (June 2023)

Salem Bike Vision yesterday commented on the finished pathway.

via FB

A commenter there said,

Rode it a few weeks ago, almost ran into a person, smoking, while walking a dog, who stepped out from behind a tree. Be careful.

With the City seemingly pushing the sidewalkification of bicycling as they install or approve multiuse paths for new Strong Road, Marine Drive, McGilchrist, Commercial by the UGM facility, and here on Battle Creek, the theory that there will be an orderly sharing of the path — SBV says "a bike path for southbound bikes" as if no one will salmon or scorch — does not seem to match very well the reality of different users, both those having a smoke and especially newly electrified ones. Micromobility seems to grow more chaotic, not less.

Bend Intersection Merits More Scrutiny, Less Celebration

Over at Salem Bike Vision they note what they call a forthcoming "protected intersection" in Bend.

via FB

While the idea of one is good in general, this particular instance is not a good protected intersection! It's not anything we should seek to emulate. The version in Bend looks like more than a little bit of greenwash/bikewash for a zoomy, autoist set of roads.

And in fact, Bend doesn't even call it a "protected intersection."

"A protected intersection...did not move forward"

In their most recent online Open House late last month, they said, "A protected intersection design was considered...but did not move forward." Among the reasons they listed was a need to "provide the required space for passenger vehicles and large trucks to make turns."

Prioritizing higher speed turning movements really compromised the design.

In a nutshell, look at the slip lane and the way a person on bike has to jog multiple times, shuffled around and inconvenienced to maintain auto flow and speed. (A much larger plan view from the Open House is here.)

slip lane

By contrast, the NACTO discussion of protected intersections shows a straight travel path, without any of the jogs and deflections.

NACTO shows inline travel (black comment added)

Even in the subsection on "variations," where they discuss a "bend-out," a small deflection, it is nothing like the ones in the Bend proposal.

And the subsection "Setting Turn Speeds through Curb Radii" is about slowing turning movements, not speeding them up through slip lanes. It is wholly at odds with the slip lane function.

The plan view also shows plastic delineator wands along the bike lane. For the speeds clearly envisioned by the road design, these are nearly certain to be inadequate and run over often.

All in all this is a very inferior design for anything a person might want to call a "protected intersection" and is something that deserves a much more critical perspective as we might think about one for Salem. We should not uncritically laud this Bend example! And we should reserve the name "protected intersection" for designs closer to the template. If Bend doesn't call it a "protected intersection," Salem Bike Vision shouldn't call it that either.

Previously:

• A little bit on ways our corner bulb-outs downtown made protected intersections more tricky to retrofit, "Downtown Board to Discuss Corner Bulb-outs Thursday" (2017)