SEATTLE — Emily Robinson, a former Seattle resident and avid cyclist, is suing the city of Seattle and the Ballard Terminal Railroad Company, claiming negligence led to a bike crash that left her with lasting physical and emotional scars.

Robinson said the city was aware of the dangers posed by the railroad tracks under the Ballard Bridge, a spot known for bicycle crashes, yet failed to take adequate measures to protect cyclists.

It is a highly dangerous area, and there have been a lot of bike crashes since, and the city of Seattle is responsible for that,” Robinson said. “I had no idea that there was a history of bike crashes at that site. I was new to Seattle, and if I had known that, I would have never biked that way.

In May 2020, Robinson was cycling along Shilshole Avenue when her tire got stuck in the train tracks under the Ballard Bridge, causing her to flip over the handlebars and land face-first. The crash left her with a bloody knee, a chipped tooth, and a scar on her lip. Robinson said the incident was so traumatizing that she had to leave Seattle and has not been able to ride a bike since.

The effects from my bike crash are something I have to stare at and face in the mirror every single day,” she said. “There’s a scar on my lip. My face is so sensitive that I can no longer bike, which is something that used to bring me so much joy.

Robinson’s attorney, Catherine Fleming, argued that the tracks were set at a shallow angle, forcing cyclists to cross at a dangerous angle, which contributed to the crashes. She added that poor signage and poor visibility contributed to Robinson’s crash. “That’s why we have this long history of crashes there. Emily was certainly not the first, and she wasn’t the last, unfortunately, who crashed there,” Fleming said.

You can read the full article by Komo News Here!

The post Cyclist sues Seattle over dangerous Ballard Bridge tracks after crash leaves lasting scars first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

In 2019 there were 2 separate incidents that took place South Jackson Street. Janet Ball and Eric Boris were both riding West on South Jackson Street and both times their wheels became stuck in the grooved rails of the Streetcar tracks.

On July 22, 2019, Eric Boris was on his commute home to West Seattle on South Jackson Street. He passed some buses when one pulled into traffic causing him to pass on the left side. Because busses pick up passengers in a curbside pocket then re-enter the right general lane, it pushed him to merge into traffic into the left lane over the streetcar tracks. Now worried about the cars behind him, Mr. Boris tried to return to the right lane when his tire got caught on the tracks and he fell into the right lane of traffic in front of the bus, resulting in a fractured clavicle. Mr. Boris has since had to quit his job as a Window Washer as arm movements above his shoulder remain painful.

On September 25, 2019, Janet Ball was bicycling with four other women, and changed lanes to avoid a bus line up on Jackson. Ms. Ball approached the complicated intersection of Fifth and Jackson focusing on which lane was most appropriate for her to choose on the far side of Fifth street and her front tire unexpectedly fell into the rails of the streetcar tracks. Ms. Ball landed on the street, unable to walk and suffered head and pelvis injuries, which requires care from her husband. Janet Ball, now 72, was an avid rider completing group rides to Portland and Vancouver B.C. but now suffers from the long-term condition of partial paralysis. Ms. Ball and her Husband Bobby have since moved to a single story home in Florida, where they can be closer to relatives to help assist with her care.

Unfortunately the city did not admit liability and did not pledge specific street changes as part of the settlement even though danger to bicyclists in the Seattle area remains.

You can read the full article by The Seattle Times Here!

The post $5.75 Million – Two Bicyclists Crashed Along Streetcar Rails first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

Medical Liens & Personal Injury Settlements

A medical lien in the context of personal injury settlements is sometimes a difficult concept for people to grasp. We’ll break down several concepts into simpler, more understandable parts.

What is a Medical Lien?

When you get seriously injured in a crash that wasn't your fault, you will usually need medical treatment. Now, medical treatment costs money, and sometimes, those bills can climb quickly. If you don't have enough insurance coverage or any at all, paying these bills may be a challenge. This is where a medical lien comes into play.

A medical lien is essentially a legal claim or a "hold" placed on any future money you (the injured party) might receive from a personal injury settlement or judgment. This means that the hospital, doctor, or healthcare provider who treated you for your injuries agrees to wait for their payment until you settle your case or win a judgment against the party responsible for your crash.

How Does It Work in Personal Injury Settlements?

When you file a personal injury lawsuit seeking compensation for your injuries, you're essentially asking for money to cover your medical bills, lost wages, and other damages. If you win your case or settle out of court, you'll receive a certain amount of money as compensation.

However, if there's a medical lien against your settlement, the healthcare provider who treated you has the right to be paid first out of this settlement money. The idea is that because they provided you with medical care (often knowing that you might not be able to pay upfront), they should be reimbursed for their services once you receive your settlement.

Why is it Important?

Medical liens ensure that healthcare providers are compensated for the treatment they provide to injury victims. Without the possibility of placing a lien, some providers might be hesitant to treat patients who are unable to pay immediately. This arrangement also allows you, the injured party, to receive necessary medical care without having to worry about immediate payment, giving you time to focus on your recovery and legal case.

What Should You Know?

Negotiation is Possible: The amount claimed in a medical lien may get negotiated down. This is often done by your personal injury lawyer, who can argue that the costs should be reduced. However, if the plan is an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) established federal law, there is virtually no flexibility.

Legal Obligation: You are legally obligated to satisfy these liens from your settlement. Failing to do so can result in legal action against you to recover the owed amount.

Impact on Settlement: Medical liens can significantly impact the net amount you receive from a personal injury settlement. After paying off the liens, the remaining amount might be less than expected, which is something to consider when evaluating settlement offers.

To recap, a medical lien is a way for healthcare providers to ensure they get paid for treating someone injured due to someone else's negligence, with the payment coming from any settlement or judgment received in a personal injury case. It's a crucial component of the personal injury process, ensuring that both the injured party receives necessary care and the healthcare providers are compensated for their services.

The post What’s a medical lien? Why should I care? first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

What happens when my attorney receives my settlement check?

When your attorney receives a settlement check on your behalf, they are required to deposit the check into a trust account. This is a special account used to hold client funds separately from the attorney’s own funds, ensuring that your money is protected.

Is my attorney required to notify anyone about my settlement?

Yes, your attorney must notify all lienholders of the settlement. Lienholders are parties that have a legal right to a portion of your settlement funds due to debts or services related to your case, such as medical providers or creditors

What is a settlement statement, and why is it important?

A settlement statement is a document that details how the settlement funds will be distributed. It is important because it shows the amounts allocated to satisfy any liens and ensures that all parties with a legal claim to the funds are paid accordingly.

How does my attorney handle liens against my settlement?

Your attorney will include all valid liens in the settlement statement and ensure that these liens are paid out of the settlement funds. This is done to protect you from future legal actions for unpaid debts related to your case.

Can my attorney negotiate the amount of the liens?

Yes, attorneys often negotiate with lienholders to potentially reduce the amount of the liens. This can result in more of the settlement funds being available to you after all debts and legal claims are satisfied.

What if there is a dispute over a lien?

If there is a dispute over a lien, your attorney will hold the disputed funds in the trust account until the dispute is resolved. This ensures that the funds are distributed fairly and in accordance with legal requirements.

Are there any specific rules in Washington State regarding the disbursement of settlement funds?

Yes, Washington State has specific rules that attorneys must follow when disbursing settlement funds. These include promptly notifying and paying lienholders, avoiding the commingling of client funds with the attorney’s own funds, and maintaining detailed records of all transactions involving the trust account.

What happens after all liens and attorney fees are paid?

Once all liens and attorney fees are paid, your attorney will disburse the remaining settlement funds to you. This will be done in accordance with the settlement statement and after ensuring that all legal and ethical obligations have been met.

How long does my attorney have to keep records of the settlement transactions?

In Washington State, attorneys are required to maintain records of settlement transactions for at least seven years after the events they record. This includes all documentation related to the receipt, disbursement, and transfer of trust funds.

What should I do if I have more questions about my settlement and liens?

If you have any further questions about your settlement, liens, or the disbursement process, you should speak directly with your attorney. They can provide you with detailed information specific to your case and ensure that you understand each step of the process. I always encourage my clients to contact me directly with any questions.

The post Settlement FAQs: The process! first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

As our transportation options continue to expand, we need to prioritize the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, and users of public transit. Complete Streets policies are a key part of this effort, and a recent report from the National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC) sheds light on the progress we’ve made in adopting and implementing these policies across the United States.

Let’s learn from the cities showcased in the May 2023 NCSC Best Complete Streets Policies report and take a close look at the successes and lessons learned from cities that have embraced these policies.

This blog post will break it all down for you.

Progress and Collaboration: First, let’s take a look at the progress we’ve made so far. Over the past four years, 157 cities have adopted new Complete Streets policies, bringing the nationwide total to an impressive 1,740. That’s thanks in large part to the collective efforts of organizations like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Stantec, and the National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC) Steering Committee. So, bravo to them!

The Importance of Complete Streets: But why are Complete Streets policies so important? Well, for starters, they play a crucial role in reducing traffic violence, promoting health equity, and addressing the pressing challenge of climate change. Plus, they make our communities more livable and accessible for everyone, regardless of their mode of transportation. Isn’t this something we all want? (Mayor Harrell: This would make you our hero, if you help lead our city with this.)

Room for Improvement: But even with all this progress, there’s still room for improvement. The NCSC report notes that the average score for policies evaluated in this report has increased, but we need to do a better job of prioritizing underinvested and underserved communities. We need to address the systemic discrimination and exclusion that has long plagued transportation planning.

Road Safety: And let’s not forget about the increasing danger on American roads. 2021 was the deadliest year since 2005, so we need state and federal action to address this issue. Luckily, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) includes a Safe Streets and Roads for All Program, so we’re moving in the right direction.

Success Stories: But enough doom and gloom. Let’s take a look at some success stories. Tucson, AZ; Howard County, MD; El Paso, TX; and Joplin, MO have all adopted strong Complete Streets policies. They’ve shown us the importance of community engagement, attention to detail, coalition building, and proactive land-use planning. So, take notes!

The NSCS report highlights lessons learned from four cities that have adopted strong Complete Streets policies: Tucson, AZ; Howard County, MD; El Paso, TX; and Joplin, MO.

Tuscon, AZ

Tucson’s policy was successful in part because organizers engaged community members as valued participants in the planning process. Tucson’s Complete Streets policy, which was unanimously adopted in 2019. The policy was developed over three years with the help of grant funding.

A diverse group of stakeholders was involved in the process, including individuals from city agencies and external organizations. The policy was also shaped by community input, with workshops held to gather feedback. The policy emphasizes equity, with specific measures to prioritize underserved communities. The policy has led to changes in project selection and design, but some challenges remain.

Key lessons learned from Tucson’s experience: The importance of engaging community members and operationalizing equity.

Howard County, MD

Well done to all those who helped realize the Howard County’s Complete Streets policy! Howard County’s Complete Streets received a perfect score from the National Complete Streets Coalition. The city took six years to develop it. However, this teaches us the importance of taking time to get the details right.

Howard County’s Complete Streets policy was adopted in 2019. Initially, the city’s policy was developed over three years, with community input and feedback playing a key role. The main players in the policy’s development included Streets for All, a coalition of organizations, as well as county officials.

Key lessons learned:

• The policy prioritizes equity, with specific measures to identify and prioritize underserved communities.
• We also find in Howard County’s policy clear guidelines for exceptions, which helps ensure accountability. The policy led to the update of the community’s Design Manual, which now reflects Complete Streets goals.

El Paso, TX

The city’s health and safety concerns borne out of its growth and development spurred El Paso’s Complete Streets policy. The El Paso’s Complete Streets Coalition formed in 2020, but it took two years for the city to adopt the policy. The coalition researched other Complete Streets policies for best practices, and used Tucson’s policy as a starting point. Not surprisingly, the coalition faced some resistance from city staff, but ultimately gained support by emphasizing the long-term benefits of the policy.

Unanimously adopted in 2022, El Paso’s Complete Streets policy was developed through a collaborative effort between advocates, city planners, and decision makers. The policy has succeeded in part because the coalition used multiple strategies to get their message out.

Key lessons learned:

• The importance of building a strong coalition and taking advantage of opportunities to share the message.

• A focus on equity, community context, and proactive land-use planning.

Joplin, MO

Similar to the previously mentioned cities,Joplin’s Complete Streets policy was in response to the city’s growth and development patterns that led to health and safety concerns. Joplin’s 2018 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan cited the need for travel options outside of a car to better serve low-income residents, people with disabilities, and older adults.

In 2019, Joplin joined the National Complete Streets Coalition’s Complete Streets Consortium, which provided resources and knowledge to help the city draft a strong policy. Then, in 2020 Joplin received a Livable Community Initiative grant, which helped fund the drafting of the Complete Streets policy.

After a long process of drafting, revising, and garnering support, the policy was adopted in 2022 .

Key features of Joplin’s policy:

• a focus on equity, community context, and proactive land-use planning.
• the importance of building a strong coalition, taking advantage of resources, and continuing the conversation after adoption.
• close coordination during the implementation process, including city departments and community stakeholders.
• the benefit of funding and technical assistance from various sources.
• specific measures to ensure accountability and implementation.

The policy scored highly on the National Complete Streets Coalition’s policy framework, with particular strengths in equity and community engagement. Aimed at improving multimodal transporation options, the policy addresses safety concerns in that framework. Kudos!

Lots to digest, I know. In an upcoming blog post, we’ll dive into the 2023 Complete Streets Policy Framework Updated.

The post How can Seattle improve its Complete Streets policy? first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

Remember: This PBL is on a roughly 5% descent and bicyclists can’t help but pick up momentum. The PBL also jogs a bit, or, as an SDOT engineer explains in a deposition, it “tapers”. (See previous blog post for the details). Thus, engineers should consider sight lines and visibility issues, which the City didn’t in this project.

Our Opposition to the City’s Motion for Summary Judgment points out that SDOT failed to make even basic sight distance calculations. Below is a view that a bicyclist on the descent down the Roosevelt PBL. Notice the bus shelter to the left that sits north of the pedestrian crosswalk that my client walked across?

The post The City of Seattle & King County shouldn’t blame the pedestrian. first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

Below is a snippet of the City of Seattle’s Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that its design of the protected bike lane, transit island, and pedestrian crosswalk (only a few yards north of the main crosswalk) had nothing to do with my client’s collision. In fact, the City blames my client, the pedestrian, for not walking precisely on the painted lines of the marked crosswalk. The City argues, this imprecise footing of the pedestrian, is “jaywalking” and is the reason why the bicyclist crashed into her.

In Seattle, pedestrians are generally expected to follow traffic signals and use designated crosswalks when available like intersections with lights or stop signs. Crossing the street at a location OTHER than a marked or unmarked crosswalk is generally considered jaywalking. However, Seattle has implemented a policy called “Pedestrian First” that prioritizes safety. This policy requires vehicles to give the pedestrian right of way at all intersection, marked or unmarked, regardless of whether there is a traffic control device.

In our fair city¹, “Pedestrian First” refers to an initiative in that the Seattle Department of Transportation has undertaken to prioritize pedestrian safety and improve conditions for pedestrians when crossing intersections. SDOT’s stated goal of the Pedestrian First approach is to create a safer and more accessible environment for people of all ages and abilities to walk and move around the city. According to SDOT’s own blog posts and publications, this initiative involves implementing various safety upgrades and changes to traffic signal patterns to enhance pedestrian visibility, increase crossing times, and reduce the likelihood of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.

In an SDOT blog post from July 2020, SDOT announced the completion of their Vision Zero goal to create 250 pedestrian-first intersections six months ahead of schedule. SDOT explains²,

These intersections are designed with a focus on pedestrian safety and have undergone safety upgrades to improve visibility and reduce the risk of accidents*. As a result of these safety upgrades, data showed a 48% reduction in the number of people hit by cars while crossing the street in these pedestrian-first locations. This achievement signifies a significant improvement in pedestrian safety and highlights the effectiveness of the pedestrian-first approach in Seattle.

“We’ve Completed Pedestrian First Crosswalk Safety Goal Six Months Early and Are Advancing a New Policy to Create More Automatic Walk Signals and Give People More Time to Cross the Street.” SDOT Blog, 23 July 2020. (*SDOT’s use of “accidents” goes against National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s admonition against this term because these are not acts of god but rather the result of human error.)

To further enhance pedestrian safety, SDOT introduced a new traffic signal policy. The policy includes small but meaningful changes to traffic signal patterns that aim to strike a balance between efficient traffic flow and pedestrian safety³. The policy sets target and maximum cycle length times for traffic signals based on street type designation. This approach ensures that pedestrians have sufficient time to cross the street safely without causing noticeable delays for motorists⁴.

Significantly, the Pedestrian First initiative in Seattle focused on creating pedestrian-first (surprise, surprise…) intersections and improving safety measures to reduce collisions involving pedestrians. Per SDOT: The term “pedestrian first” specifically refers to this effort and does not encompass all aspects of pedestrian infrastructure or policies in the city.

SDOT has explained that Pedestrian First is intended to prioritize pedestrian safety, create safer intersections, and enhance the overall walking experience in the city.

In a case that we are current litigating, we represent a pedestrian, Angelina Kolomiets, who observed the law and looked both ways (out of habit, she always looks both ways before entering a road) before crossing the bike lane. However, the bus shelter obscured her view as well as the bicyclist’s view. Nonetheless, because the pedestrian walked a few inches south of the painted crosswalk lines, Seattle City Attorney calls this “Jaywalking.” This is the City’s way of attempting to deny that its design of the transit island, crosswalk, and bike lane led to the bicyclist/pedestrian crash. As a result, Ms. Kolomiets sustained serious injuries to her head, brain, face, jaw, teeth, and body.

Guess what? The City engineer admitted at a deposition that the project team never calculated sight distances, though the engineer knew that the tapered (unstraight) bike lane created visibility issues for both bicyclists and pedestrians.

Here is when I asked the SDOT engineer about the late change to the then-new protected bike lane on Roosevelt Way NE in the University District.

The SDOT engineer wants reassurance that I’m not blaming her. Truly, I’m attempting to understand what the main engineer (SDOT project engineer) thought about the potential issues with making the bike lane zig a little to avoid a utility pole:

When I ask the SDOT engineer whether she and the other SDOT engineers made sight distance calculations in this scenario, guess what her response was…

Seattle claimed that Pedestrian First was its plan to prioritize pedestrian safety. Really? Perhaps it’s more focused on prioritizing the Seattle Attorney’s office first? What do you think?

References:

1. The initiative called “Pedestrians First” was first conceived at the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). ITDP is a non-profit organization that focuses on promoting sustainable and equitable transportation systems globally. ITDP has developed a set of interactive tools that measures walkability in cities around the world, and “Pedestrians First” is one of their initiatives aimed at improving walkability and pedestrian-friendly urban planning.
2. “We’ve Completed Pedestrian First Crosswalk Safety Goal Six Months Early and Are Advancing a New Policy to Create More Automatic Walk Signals and Give People More Time to Cross the Street.” SDOT Blog, 23 July 2020.
3. Id.
4. “Traffic Signal Policy.” SDOT Blog, 29 January 2021.
5. “SDOT creates 250 ‘pedestrian-first’ intersections early.” MyNorthwest, 27 July 2020.

The post When is a pedestrian jaywalking? first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

Did you know that bike-only insurance is available to all people who ride bikes in Washington State, even if you do not have a motor vehicle? Yes! It’s true. If someone hit you while you were riding your bike, you could still get coverage for medical bills and/or property damage with standalone bike insurance. This kicks in as an additional layer of coverage for those who are involved in a bike crash even if drivers stay at the scene and provide their insurance info.

This series of blog posts are inspired by a bright Seattle bike shop owner. In December 2022, he had reached out to me and asked me: “Why don’t we have standalone bike insurance?”

Well, as you know by now, “We DO have it.” Yet, his great question made me realize that a lot of intelligent bicyclists in the Seattle/Bellevue metro area and other more dense regions of Washington state are not aware of the option of purchasing bike insurance, including liability and personal injury protection for themselves in case they were ever involved in a bike crash.

I polled folks for a few hours on Twitter and found that the majority of respondents did not have bike insurance and didn’t seem to think they needed it.

So I had a conversation with a super informative insurance rep from Markel, the main insurer for bikes/bicyclists in this country and throughout the world.

The takeaways: there are a variety of bike-only insurance policies available including

• Bike damage
• Liability coverage up to $300,000 in the event you are found at fault and sued.
• Vehicle contact protection up to $25,000 for bodily injury, if you are hit while on a bicycle.

Markel Insurance underwrites these and other polices, often offered through Velosurance, State Farm, and other insurers. 

Listen to the entire (short) conversation below to get more details:

The post #BikeOnlyInsurance: Get insured before you get injured in a hit & run. first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

Did you know that our cities, towns, counties, and state owe all travelers reasonably safe roads? Why does this matter? It matters! Read on, if you want to learn this powerful rule that is intended to ensure safer roads in Washington State.

When you are injured on the road in a solo crash — riding a bicycle, on a scooter, in a wheelchair, or on foot – what should you do? What are your rights?

Allison, an acquaintance who was new to the city, recently shared details about her horrific scooter crash. Allison was over a mile from her destination and thought she would try out one of a Lime scooter. A super cautious person, she rode the scooter in a protected bike lane. But her first scooter ride resulted in a solo crash where she landed in the hospital for over a week in the ICU. As she told me the story, just a month after her crash, she kept saying, “It’s all my fault.” I was stunned.

“Why do you keep blaming yourself,” I asked Allison, as she shook her head.

“I didn’t know how many bumps and cracks were in that bike lane. And the lane ended really abruptly. Cars to my left had a green arrow to turn right and they didn’t feel the need to look for a scooter rider.”

Based on the events she described, I seriously doubt that the crash was her fault at all.

Whose fault, then? That’s what this blog post is about.

Allison’s assumption about “fault” in a solo crash is a common one. Too often, people beat themselves up and blame themselves for their solo crashes. This is understandable because there’s not an obvious “at-fault party,“ as in the case of a car vs. bike crash or a bike vs. pedestrian crash.

“It’s my fault. I guess I messed up, but I’m not sure how.” I hear it from clients and prospective clients almost every day. That is, they blame themselves until I explain that municipalities in Washington State have a duty to plan, design, construct, and maintain reasonably safe roads.

One client, a seasoned cyclist and one tough cookie (she was formerly in the Air Force) who regularly rides in the STP (Seattle to Portland), was riding a well-known training route on the shoulder of a major road. If you’re familiar at all with the STP route, there are plenty of twists and turns. Well, she wiped out, suffering major and permanent injuries.

Guess what? She recounts the crash and shrugs her shoulder as she points to the scars on her face, “I should have known better.” AAARGH… NO! When she told me the details, I recognized the fact that she was not at fault one iota. When I explained how road design cases work, she had no idea that municipalities have a duty to design, maintain, and warn about the condition of their roads for reasonably safe travel.

It’s pretty clear from how often I have these conversations that this simple concept is not well understood. That is because you’re not going to find a PSA on these like you do about drunk driving or don’t text while you drive.

Never assume a solo crash is your fault. If there is one thing I want you to learn from this blog post, please remember that a flawed road design is not your fault. Why? Because in Washington, we have laws along as legal precedent that firmly establishes that governmental entities have the responsibility to ensure that roads and sidewalks offer people reasonably safe conditions to travel. Washington is one of few states where this is the case.

This brings up the concept of sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity is the idea that you can’t sue the king. Because we don’t have kings (not yet, at least) in our country, the notion that governs many issues is that you can’t sue the government. Generally, there are only a very few and specific conditions under which a person might have standing to sue the government. In recent decades in Washington through a series of cases, municipalities have very little protect from liability specifically regarding road design.

What constitutes reasonably safe travel has a fair amount of gray area. That’s why you should do two things if you are involved in a solo crash:

1. Talk to an attorney about the facts of your crash.
2. Report your crash to the city, county, or state responsible for maintaining the location of your crash.

Reporting is critical, and I’ll explain more about this in part 2 and in other future blog posts.

So, remember: don’t blame yourself if you’ve operated a scooter or bike in a lawful manner, but you get injured. Our cities, counties, and state bear the responsibility to provide all travelers with reasonably safe roads.

The post Can you spot “reasonably safe roads”? first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.

In the past year, I experienced losing vision in both of my eyes temporarily for months for acute retinal detachments.  I continue to experience issues due to my low vision. Walking or running are still some of my favorite activities, but I’ve injured myself a number of times (broken wrist, broken arm, orbital socket, etc.) due to crummy sidewalks and roads in Seattle.

While my vision has mostly returned, accessibility tools on my desktop and phones still help me accomplish tasks that I used to complete in a flash. If my vision had not returned to the current levels, getting to depositions, meetings, and site visits would require even more planning than what I now need post retinal detachments. 

Will you please take the Week Without Driving challenge? Before you hit click away know that this does NOT require you to give up driving!

The challenge is to make you ask:

• What if you couldn’t drive?
• What if taking the bus, riding a bike, walking or asking for rides weren’t a choice you could make, but a necessity?
• What would it be like getting around without driving yourself?

For people who can drive, and can afford a car, these questions aren’t ever an issue. But for nearly a quarter of the people in our state – people with disabilities, young people, seniors and people who can’t afford cars or gas, this is their every day.

I’m also asking our elected leaders and those running for office to join in this WWD Challenge too. The decisions our leaders and each of us make regarding transportation planning, policies and funding impact all of us.  IT’S OK IF WE NEED TO DRIVE! This is part of the point of this challenge! We want everyone to understand what ~20% of Washingtonians must struggle with every day when it comes to basic transportation needs.

This is an opportunity to learn. That’s why my friends at Disability Mobility Initiative at Disability Rights Washington would like to invite WSAJ members to participate in the Week Without Driving this September 19-25.

Below are the stories of David, Katie, and Miguel, who live in southwest Washington.

David P.

“[We] had the hundred-and-fifteen-degree weather. I do not have air conditioning; most people who live in low-income housing in Vancouver do not have air conditioning. And so, I was told I should go to a Cooling Center. But it was on a Sunday and C-TRAN does not have some buses running on Sundays. So, a lot of people like me who depend on public transportation had no way to get to a Cooling Center.”

David lives in unincorporated Hazel Dell just north of the city of Vancouver. David identifies as Deaf Plus, meaning he is a member of the ASL Deaf Community and has an additional ambulatory disability, which is not always visible. David mainly gets around by walking or by taking the bus. He recently graduated from Gallaudet University with his master’s degree in social work. 

One big barrier for David is not being able to afford a car to get jobs that require one. In order to get and keep a job, David needs accessible transportation. With a car, he could obtain a job, volunteer more, and socialize. Some Deaf events are late at night on weekends, and he would have no way home, so he is unable to socialize as much as he’d like. David believes there should be no transit fares, and that funds taxpayers put into the system should be enough. If riders show an honored citizen card, David thinks that should suffice for payment. David knows fares are a financial barrier for many people, so they stay home instead. He also thinks it is important to have covered shelters near grocery stores and apartment buildings on bus routes. There are no seated stops between David’s home and the transit center, which can make it very hard to keep groceries out of the rain when you are already tired of walking and standing and have no covered shelter for miles. Another barrier for the Deaf Community is when a bus driver makes verbal announcements. With background noises, he cannot always hear what is said. He has seen Deaf people visibly upset when they cannot get off at their stop due to a detour they were not informed about. David believes that any verbal announcements by the driver to all passengers needs to also be translated into text in the vehicle for things such as unplanned route changes. David would like the state to create and fund a free driving program for people who are Deaf to be trained professionally by local driving schools, and provide nonprofits grants to help Deaf and disabled low-income people ability to buy and maintain a used car.

Katie

“It is important that I have a job so I can be a little independent and be a part of the community.”

Katie lives in La Center with her family. She has a job in Vancouver and isn’t able to drive or to take the fixed route commuter bus that goes from La Center to the Vancouver Transit Center. Because of her disability, it’s not safe for her to wait alone at the transit center, so she needs something that provides door-to-door service. Unfortunately, La Center is outside of the area where C-Tran, the local paratransit provider, offers service. Katie has been getting rides from her caregiver to her job, but that caregiver is leaving, and her family hasn’t been able to find a replacement. The disability services that Katie receives allow the caregiver to be reimbursed mileage for driving Katie to and from work, but not for the caregiver’s time, which makes finding someone more difficult. Katie looked for work in La Center, but there weren’t a lot of office-type businesses there that would be a good match for her skills, and so the only job she found, after a couple of years of searching, was in Vancouver. Katie really doesn’t want to give up the job — she loves being able to earn money and afford things that she wants. She wishes there was paratransit or another shared shuttle service that she could use to get to work.

Miguel

“When you are transit dependent, you can’t really just plan things as you go. You can’t just do things on a whim or have an emergency. You have to plan everything ahead of time and you don’t have much flexibility to do basic things like going to the store.”

Miguel is a Blind college student, and lives in Vancouver. He gets around by taking Lyft, Uber, fixed-route buses and paratransit. He commutes from Vancouver to Portland Community College, which takes him an hour and a half each way. Not being able to drive impacts Miguel’s entire life. His biggest barrier is not being able to schedule the paratransit ride in the same day period. Miguel would like to see improvements in the transportation system so that he does not have to spend most of his day commuting.

Will you join us and take the challenge? Sign up at weekwithoutdriving.life

As you’ll hear from elected leaders who joined us last year in this video,  They found the experience incredibly valuable and are encouraging other elected leaders, like you, to join us this year.

How Does the Week Without Driving Work?

You can get around however you want, but you can’t drive yourself in any car. This applies to all your activities — not just your work commute. And if you normally transport other family members or friends, it applies to those trips too.

This isn’t a disability simulation or a test of how easily you can find alternatives. We know that it is far easier to give up your keys if you can afford to live in a walkable area well served by transit or can outsource your driving and other transport and delivery needs to other people. Instead, we intend this as a learning experience to inform the decisions you, as an elected leader or policymaker, will make about land use, climate, health equity and transportation access and funding. We want you to have this experience so you can start to understand the barriers non-drivers experience in accessing your (and our) communities.

If you decide to, you can ask someone else to drive you, but make a note of how much you “owe” this person in their time, and if you felt obligated to support them in other ways (ie, doing all the dishes). If it’s a staff person, make a note of how much you pay them for this time. You can use ride-hail or taxis, but make a note of how much it costs you.

During the week, we’ll ask you to share your experience on social media. At the end of the week, we’ll ask you to reflect on and share what you learned from participating in the Week Without Driving.

If you have questions, contact me or Anna Zivarts, director of the Disability Mobility Initiative.

BTW: I’ve invited April Berg, Noel Frame, among others to join us in this Week Without Driving Challenge too! Please forward and invite as many people as you can. Thank you!

Note: Most of this content was provided by Disability Mobility Initiative via Kimberly Kinchen and Anna Zivarts. 💚💚💚

Catherine

The post Can you drive? About 20% in WA can’t… first appeared on FLEMING LAW | Top Personal Injury Attorney: Seattle Bike | Pedestrian | Road Crashes.