CliffordK

Over the last 5 years or so following this forum, I've seen 1 or 2 dooring deaths or serious injuries posted due to secondary hit from behind accidents.
Oops, this popped up in RoadBikeReview

I did a bit of a hunt for statistics. Rather incomplete, but somewhere around 15% of Urban police involved or EMS involved bike accidents involve dooring, usually attributed to be vehicle 100% at fault. It does vary significantly from place to place and study to study.



Actual fatalities and serious injuries seem to be significantly more rare.

Wikipedia: Dooring Fatalities.

So, 3% of NYC bicycle fatalities is significant, but one does need to also consider the other 97%.

London: 3 dooring fatalities, 40 deaths total. That is a whopping 7.5%.

0% of the cycling deaths in New Zealand were dooring related.

North Carolina has a lot of interesting bike crash data:
North Carolina Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Data Tool - Bicycle Data Tables

Unfortunately, not differentiating injury severity.

North Carolina, however, does list about 10x as many accidents in travel lanes as in bike lanes.

One should note that each urban center is different, and the big urban centers like NYC and London may be substantially different from smaller urban centers like Portland, or small cities like Eugene.

caloso

I don't think anyone could reasonably deny that this is a hazardous condition:



https://offthebackistan.tumblr.com/p...ten-ride-on-or

Could you safely avoid this hazardous condition and still ride in the bike lane? I don't think so. So the law, at least in California where I live, reasonably allows a rider to leave the bike lane to avoid this hazardous condition.

Does the hazardous condition only exist while the door is actually opened? No. The essential hazardousness is the possibility that the door will be suddenly and without warning flung into the path of the rider. And the reasonable action would be to ride beyond the reach of the hazard which, as you can see from the photo, would require you to ride outside the bike lane.

So you pass the first car, and you've passed the hazardous condition presented by its door. Now we come to the next car, and its door. Does it present a hazardous condition? Of course. So, you'd be within the exception in the statute to continue to stay outside the bike lane, right? Now a third car. Does its door present a hazardous condition? Of course. So again, you'd be within the exception to continue to ride outside the bike lane, and so on and so on.

KraneXL

So instead of having some exclusive bike space you'd rather have none and take your chances?

Which would mean somebody "intentionally" created a dangerous bike space? Is that what you get from the passage?Who's being "trivially obvious?"

P.s. Its time to leave well enough alone.

I-Like-To-Bike

Another caveat, what does all the gibberish about driver factors and bicyclist factors and SMIDSY and SMIDL supposed to mean as far measuring or comparing the relative risk (or "danger" if you prefer) of riding in a door zone vice the actual alternative in existance

Another caveat of measuring/evaluating risk with data limited to accident totals, without any reference to hazard exposure (what percentage of bicycling in Boston and Cambridge is done in door zone areas? How much cycling is done in door zones in Boston and Cambridge without serious injuries or any incident at all?

Another caveat, do the unreferenced Boston and Cambridge "studies" define "serious injuries", or indicate in any way the relationship of the severity of injuries to the various causes of accident?

BTW, statements clearly identified as "guesstimates" are not based on studies, I thought that would be clear, but I didn't account for feigned obtuseness.

mr_bill

This guy said anything within 14 feet is the door zone!


Here's a famous street where everybody knows your name, indicating the "door zones" in red and the "safe" space in green:


Nearby, here's Louisburg Square, indicating the "door zones" in red, and the, er, no green:


LOTS OF PEOPLE?

-mr. bill

Miele Man

#1 . You'd be constantly ringing your bell or sounding your horn.
#2 . A lot cars today are pretty sound proof or sound deadening and therefore there's an excellent chance that your bell or horn (unless it's an air-horn) won't be heard inside the car. And that's not factoring that the driver might be listening to music, instructions or yakking on the cell phone.

Again; it's best NOT to ride in the door zone.

Cheers

I-Like-To-Bike

I also have seen reported and discussed ad infinitum for over a decade on BF and elsewhere on bicycling related sites, the unfortunate secondary hit from behind door zone related death in the Boston area of Dana Laird in 2002.

Thankfully, such secondary hit from behind door zone related fatalities are a rarity, though the paranoia and hysteria promoted by some so-called bicycling safety experts is very real.

njkayaker

In this particular case, it's not "exclusive" (it's in the door zone and shared by doors).

This particular case seems like a dumb place for a bike lane.

Who cares if something dangerous is intentional?

If it was obvious to you, why are you concerned about liability? Bizarre.

Leisesturm

And get right back in the bike lane! You conveniently forget that part. Bike lanes can be blocked with all manner of debris, vehicles, or persons that would not promote this kind of response. Why are open car doors different? That door wouldn't give me a second's pause. There would be open space next to that car so I could ride the line around the door or I wouldn't be on that road. Bike lane or no bike lane, a road so clogged with traffic that cars are bumper to bumper all the way from stoplight to stoplight isn't a road I want to cycle on. This is getting tiresome and as usual the opinion on the fruit loops side of logic have the most energy to try and ram their group think down the throats of reasonable people.

Notice the lack of any bikes in your picture. Good luck convincing post Trump uber angry cagers that you belong in their vehicle lane because the bike lane needs to be wider before your entitled self will use it. Really, good luck with that. I'm just not into the confrontation. My rides are usually on a tandem with my wife. Riding as you espouse would expose us to an undue amount of hassle and stress. Even if I were up to that, she would not be. So, if its all the same to you, I will keep doing what works for me. BTW. The only time in 45 years I ever saw a door that wide open into the bike lane was when the driver actually got in the passenger seat and kicked the door open into my path as I passed! Yes, she deliberately tried to nail a total stranger with her door for some sick and twisted reason. And there still was time, as surprising as the attack was, to jerk out of the way, and stay upright to boot!

People that plow into an open door at speed are no different from people that plow into a left turning car at speed. Both could have avoided injury and/or death with a modicum of defensive riding. TL;DR there is still no evidence that riding in the door zone need be dangerous if awareness of the fact is present. It is better than the alternative. More cyclists are hit outside the door zone than in it. This is a fact. Find me data on a cyclist that was hit by a car while in the door zone. You cannot. I'd rather be in control of my speed and spatial awareness AND the fact that 99% of drivers will actually look back and not open their door in your face. A door takes some time to open maximally, if at all. Most drivers do NOT need the door ALL the way open to exit a car. The alert cyclist can spot the opening crack as the door pops open and stop (what a concept) or take the vehicle lane and give the door a wide berth. It is never necessary to cruise in the vehicle lane. I'm saying this for the benefit of those new to vehicular cycling. I'm past caring what the lunatic fringe thinks about it.

Daniel4

Well, that's exactly what just happened. A lot of cars blocking the bike lanes with a lot of bikes sounding their bells and horns while we were forced to ride with the cars.

So what? That's what your bell and horns are for.

njkayaker

You are missing the point.

The issue isn't doors that are already open. Caloso is just using that image to show how that lane is in the door zone.

The problem with the door zone is doors opening up in front of you as a surprise.

You have no idea what this thread is about.

caloso

I did not forget that part. In fact, I explicitly addressed it in the second and third paragraphs of my post. Please read my entire post before commenting on it.

njkayaker

I don't know who you are talking about. "Within 14 feet" of what?

???

So, the fact that riding in the door zone in this particular place means you should never avoid riding in the door zone?

YES. IT'S PRETTY COMMON. THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT WILL WORK EVERYWHERE.

Leisesturm

I addressed that in my post. Even the door that was kicked open in my path took time to reach the fully open position. I don't expect that to ever happen again in my lifetime. The speed of opening of someone normal opening a car door is glacial in comparison. I have been alongside cars when the door pops open and my yell caused the driver to jerk back. Is it possible that one day I might actually hit or be hit by a door? It is remote but it is possible. I am not riding out in the road on a remote possibility. You do what you want. BTW in that picture the fully open door does NOT reach all the way to the left edge of the bike lane. A cyclist riding at the left edge of that very bike lane might be forced to take some notice of an open car door but the incident should not be dangerous or deadly.

CliffordK

One additional thing is that I tend to judge risk of passing cars based on the type of vehicle and location.

So, I tend to naturally give marked delivery vehicles a wide berth because they may do unexpected movements (not just opening doors, but also pulling out).

Most of my close passes are in residential neighborhoods where cars may remain parked for half a day at a time, if not more.

Business districts might be different when cars would be expected to pull in for a few minutes, then pull back out.

I try to look through windows to look for occupants inside, as well as looking ahead to see if I see activity around cars. So, if I see a car parking, that would indicate a car at risk. Also if there are people around the car, then that would also mean the vehicle would be at risk of not only doors, but people stepping out from around the vehicle.

Of course, there is the risk of the person who parks, sits in the car for some time, then exits.

Miele Man

You want to ride in the door zone with all its attendant risks? Fine. I'l continue to ride way from the door zone where it's a lot safer.

Cheers

njkayaker

Then that sliver of path isn't in the door zone. The discussion is riding in the door zone (not outside of it).

A cyclist whose wheels are at the "left edge of that very bike lane" has their left arm hanging outside of it.

I-Like-To-Bike

You are free to believe what you like about various bicycling riding risk factors and which choices might be safer and act accordingly. If you keep repeating your apparent mantra that riding away from every door zone is always "a lot safer", no matter what the alternative," you might convince somebody else not a member of the vehicular cycling choir, AKA self appointed bicycling safety experts who post such stuff on BF as gospel.

KraneXL

Yes, you can avoid any danger if he isn't there. So by staying home and crawling under your bed you will be safe. For those of us that want to live life and not just be alive, life is not perfect, and there is no way to out think every possible scenario in ever situation from every angle all the time.

Imagine if you and your spouse got robbed coming home from dinner and the police told you you could have avoided being robbed had your wife cooked dinner at home. So its your fault for going out to dinner. Would that be OK with you? Please stop making up these inane scenarios.

mr_bill

Within 14 feet of the curb.

p.s. I have ridden in this particular place, though usually more cars parked on both sides of the road, and not ridden in the door zone.

(But I've also driven on this particular road, again usually more cars parked on both sides of the road, so I had to *DRIVE* in the door zone.)




This particular famous place too, at least the WHOLE road is not a "door zone" here, so it's possible to ride here without risking immanent death:



-mr. bill

njkayaker

So, he's an "always take the lane" guy?

We are discussing a choice between two options (riding in or not in the door zone).

If the whole road is a door-zone, then there aren't two choices.

Presumably, if you were required to ride there, you'd take more care about looking inside the cars and, maybe, riding more slowly.

There is a lower probability of doors opening with the cars on the left (pretty much, every car has a driver).

So, even there, there's a choice.

Being doored in a car isn't the same thing as being on a bicycle. Drivers tend to expect cars and look for them too. (cars are also easier to see). So the risk of being doored is less.

caloso

Not to mention that a driver of a car is encased in a protective cage so, even if that driver is doored, the risk of personal physical harm is essentially zero.

Milton Keynes

Start making car doors out of pillows. That would help.

mr_bill

Mister fourteen feet says the whole road is a door-zone.
Reality check. The whole road isn't a door-zone.

I'd not be looking inside the cars. Why would I? I might be riding more slowly for a lot of reasons. But one of those reasons is not those doors.

People are worried about their precious DOOR.

-mr. bill

I-Like-To-Bike

Inquiring minds want to know - WHO the heck is Mister Fourteen Feet and why would anybody give a dang what he says?

Is he one of the so-called bicycling experts who pontificates about effective cycling?