Advocacy & Safety - Dooring - newspaper seems to be running a campaign

This is the third key article by this paper in recent times. It references the earlier ones. Perhaps the message might get through to a few more drivers.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/fire-chief-another-victim-of-dooring-roads-menace-20111229-1ped4.html


Fire chief another victim of 'dooring' roads menace
Adam Carey
December 30, 2011

COUNTRY Fire Authority chief Euan Ferguson was riding his bike across Hawthorn on Christmas Eve when a car door opened in front of him, sending him crashing to the bitumen of busy Riversdale Road.


Earlier articles:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/cyclists-death-a-catalyst-for-change-20111125-1nzbz.html
http://www.theage.com.au/national/reflecting-on-a-tragedy-20111125-1nzd7.html

This is the third key article by this paper in recent times. It references the earlier ones. Perhaps the message might get through to a few more drivers.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/fire-chief-another-victim-of-dooring-roads-menace-20111229-1ped4.html




Earlier articles:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/cyclists-death-a-catalyst-for-change-20111125-1nzbz.html
http://www.theage.com.au/national/reflecting-on-a-tragedy-20111125-1nzd7.html

Lets' hope so.

This is the third key article by this paper in recent times. It references the earlier ones. Perhaps the message might get through to a few more drivers.Because the message is clearly not getting through to cyclist "Stay out of dangerous bike lanes with door zones."

Because the message is clearly not getting through to cyclist "Stay out of dangerous bike lanes with door zones."

Unfortunately, many bicycling infrastructure designs put cyclist directly in harms way by placing bike lanes in the door zone.

If a cyclist decides to move out of the bike lane and ride in the regular lane of travel, the cyclist quickly becomes the recipient of motorist harassment, and the cyclist generally ends up riding back in the bike lane as the lesser of the two evils since there are more motorists passing them than getting out of their vehicles.

Unfortunately, many bicycling infrastructure designs put cyclist directly in harms way by placing bike lanes in the door zone.

If a cyclist decides to move out of the bike lane and ride in the regular lane of travel, the cyclist quickly becomes the recipient of motorist harassment, and the cyclist generally ends up riding back in the bike lane as the lesser of the two evils since there are more motorists passing them than getting out of their vehicles.

Still, That is conditional to moronic local biking ordinances(like NYC) saying that a cyclist has to stay in the bike lane. Without giving allowance in the ordinance's language to obstructions in the bike lane.

There are a couple of bike lanes here, in the southern end of the county. I checked them out one day on a long-distance ride. While local ordinances are not written that a cyclist should use a bike lane, no fail. The bike lanes I saw on that ride, are right in the door zone, on a semi-high trafficked street in a business district. So, That is another reason why, I won't use bike lanes.

Because the message is clearly not getting through to cyclist "Stay out of dangerous bike lanes with door zones."

I agree, but some inexperienced cyclists don't like to stay too far out if there is traffic.

I also know both these roads and both have tram car tracks up the centre. You are a bit squeezed at times - door zone or the tram track slot?

Because the message is clearly not getting through to cyclist "Stay out of dangerous bike lanes with door zones."

It must be difficult being the most intelligent man on earth. If only everyone was just like you...... :rolleyes:

It must be difficult being the most intelligent man on earth. If only everyone was just like you...... :rolleyes:So you are not educated enough to stay out of the door zone.

Still, That is conditional to moronic local biking ordinances(like NYC) saying that a cyclist has to stay in the bike lane. Without giving allowance in the ordinance's language to obstructions in the bike lane.


There's really no local ordinance mandating strict adherence to riding in our bike lanes, just that many motorists seem to think that there is when one is present.

So you are not educated enough to stay out of the door zone.

No, I'm intelligent and self aware of myself to the point where I realize that not everyone will act like me.

There's really no local ordinance mandating strict adherence to riding in our bike lanes, just that many motorists seem to think that there is when one is present.

Below is a what it says at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/bicyclists/biketips.shtml#laws

Cyclists in New York City must

1. Ride on the street, not on the sidewalks (unless rider is age 12 or younger and the bicycle's wheels are less than 26 inches in diameter).
2. Ride with traffic, not against it.
3. Obey all traffic signals, signs and pavement markings. Cyclists must come to a complete stop at red lights and stop signs. Cyclists are required by law to exercise due care to avoid colliding with pedestrians, motor vehicles or other cyclists.
4. Use marked bike lanes or paths when available, except when making turns or when it is unsafe to do so, etc. If the road is too narrow for a bicycle and a car to travel safely side by side, cyclists have the right to ride in the middle of the travel lane. Bicycling is permitted on all main and local streets throughout the City even when no designated route exists.
Not ride on expressways, drives, highways, interstate routes and thruways unless authorized by signs.
Not wear more than one earphone attached to an aud io device (e.g. radio, ipod, walkman)
Use the following safety and visibility equipment:
White headlight and red taillight must be used from dusk to dawn
Bell or horn (not whistle)
Working brakes
Reflective tires or reflectors
Helmets must be worn by children age 13 or younger, and helmets are strongly recommended for all others.

#4 Does allow for going out of the bike lane when there is an obstruction. But as we have seen the NYPD do countless times, they will ticket any cyclist out of the bike lane. Regardless of the obviously visible obstruction.

Above the listing, at the link listing everything concerning biking in NYC, I love how they mention "protected lanes".:mad:

Are those "protected lanes" so cyclists' are protected from errant motorists' or, is it so motorists' are protected from law-abiding cyclists' that they would rather run over like pigeon droppings.:mad:

I think CB HI's point is dead on: cyclists should to take ownership for dooring avoidance. So while he's not the most intelligent person on the planet, he's a whole lot smarter than those who think others bear primary responsibility for their safety.

Still, That is conditional to moronic local biking ordinances(like NYC) saying that a cyclist has to stay in the bike lane.

Conditional? How so? Cycling ordinance demanding cyclists stay in bike lanes has, I think, little to do with motor vehicle driver perception of cyclists riding outside of a bike lane where there is one. Pretty sure motorists get just as angry if there's a lane a cyclist is not using even where there are no mandatory bike lane use laws...

Maybe groups advising on bike lanes or advocating for them need to include in their plans sharrow symbols painted in the roadway outside the bike lane.

And/or figure out some kind of marking on the parking side of the bike lane indicating a potential dooring situation, like painting that line red with occasional door-like breaks in the line toward the cyclists path of travel and "Warning: dooring zone--DANGER!" stenciled into that line every x'.

Of all the potential hazards that I have in my head, dooring has to be the scariest one. I tend to always be on the lookout for folks in standing cars and ride at least 5 ft out. I have not seen, around here, bike lanes adjacent to parking - seems like a stupid design to me.

-G

I think CB HI's point is dead on: cyclists should to take ownership for dooring avoidance. So while he's not the most intelligent person on the planet, he's a whole lot smarter than those who think others bear primary responsibility for their safety.

It's also nice if drivers are educated about the dangers of dooring people. Why some take umbrage with this is beyond me. I guess it's just the smug self-satisfaction in saying 'I know better; why doesn't everyone else?' The fact is most people who ride bikes are bike nerds who pedantically argue about VC or lane placement. It's a good thing someone is helping to look out for them. We don't live in a Lord of the Flies world......

It's also nice if drivers are educated about the dangers of dooring people. Why some take umbrage with this is beyond me. I guess it's just the smug self-satisfaction in saying 'I know better; why doesn't everyone else?' The fact is most people who ride bikes aren't bike nerds who pedantically argue about VC or lane placement. It's a good thing someone is helping to look out for them. We don't live in a Lord of the Flies world......

fixed?

Conditional? How so? Cycling ordinances' demanding cyclists stay in bike lanes has, I think, little to do with motor vehicle driver perception of cyclists riding outside of a bike lane where there is one. Pretty sure motorists get just as angry if there's a lane a cyclist is not using even where there are no mandatory bike lane use laws...

It has quite a bit to do with the perceptions by the motorized vehicular public.

Those cognizant of the existence of bike lanes, but not cognizant of the actual traffic code, get PO'ed when a cyclist chooses to not go in a bike lane regardless of preference or obstruction. If a motorist is cognizant of bike lanes, that is where they are going to want cyclists'. Because the motorized public could care less about obstructions. The same goes' for the police. If a bike lane exists, they want a cyclist in the bike lane regardless of leeway given in the traffic code, or the potential for being 'doored'.


Maybe groups advising on bike lanes or advocating for them need to include in their plans sharrow symbols painted in the roadway outside the bike lane. And/or figure out some kind of marking on the parking side of the bike lane indicating a potential dooring situation, like painting that line red with occasional door-like breaks in the line toward the cyclists path of travel and "Warning: dooring zone--DANGER!" stenciled into that line every x'.

Said groups should do more, than just advocating for bike lanes. They should put equally commensurate effort into, getting the wax out of the ears and mush out of the brains, of the motorized public, pursuant to apprising the motorized public of the traffic code, pursuant to a cyclist's rights within the traffic code.

Of all the potential hazards that I have in my head, dooring has to be the scariest one. I tend to always be on the lookout for folks in standing cars and ride at least 5 ft out. I have not seen, around here, bike lanes adjacent to parking - seems like a stupid design to me.

-G

Since I 'take the lane', motorists suddenly pulling out of a driveway/parallel streetside parking space, are the ones' I am always on the lookout for. I am always looking for some numskull who isn't looking, to just pull out and hit me. By 'taking the lane', I give myself time to react, in order to avoid suddenly hitting a vehicle on the side.

It's also nice if drivers are educated about the dangers of dooring people. Why some take umbrage with this is beyond me. I guess it's just the smug self-satisfaction in saying 'I know better; why doesn't everyone else?' The fact is most people who ride bikes are bike nerds who pedantically argue about VC or lane placement. It's a good thing someone is helping to look out for them. We don't live in a Lord of the Flies world......

There is a 'real-life' way of correlating it, to raise their appreciation, and understanding.

While taking the term 'doored' out of the description for the purposes of correlation, relate the situation of parking streetside parallel to the sidewalk and looking behind the vehicle to see if another car is coming. The only distinction to draw is that, while a motorized moving vehicle will rip off an open door, that same open door can potentially kill a cyclist.

I like the Dutch requirement for drivers to open their door with their right hands, thereby making them turn so that they can easily look behind them.

I like the Dutch requirement for drivers to open their door with their right hands, thereby making them turn so that they can easily look behind them.

I think the Brits do it this way as well.

It's also nice if drivers are educated about the dangers of dooring people. Why some take umbrage with this is beyond me. I guess it's just the smug self-satisfaction in saying 'I know better; why doesn't everyone else?' The fact is most people who ride bikes are bike nerds who pedantically argue about VC or lane placement. It's a good thing someone is helping to look out for them. We don't live in a Lord of the Flies world......Every US drivers ED course teaches to look before opening your car door. It did not do much for the dead and injured cyclist that have been doored.

The benefit of teaching cyclist to stay out of door zone far outweighs trying to teach motorist to look first. Hell, we cannot even teach traffic engineers well enough to not paint door zone bike lanes. We have cyclist that think door zone bike lanes are just fine.

Maybe groups advising on bike lanes or advocating for them need to include in their plans sharrow symbols painted in the roadway outside the bike lane.

And/or figure out some kind of marking on the parking side of the bike lane indicating a potential dooring situation, like painting that line red with occasional door-like breaks in the line toward the cyclists path of travel and "Warning: dooring zone--DANGER!" stenciled into that line every x'.The answer is - DON'T PAINT DOOR ZONE BIKE LANES!

The answer is - DON'T PAINT DOOR ZONE BIKE LANES!

+1000000!!!!!!

It has quite a bit to do with the perceptions by the motorized vehicular public.

Those cognizant of the existence of bike lanes, but not cognizant of the actual traffic code, get PO'ed when a cyclist chooses to not go in a bike lane regardless of preference or obstruction. If a motorist is cognizant of bike lanes, that is where they are going to want cyclists'. Because the motorized public could care less about obstructions. The same goes' for the police. If a bike lane exists, they want a cyclist in the bike lane regardless of leeway given in the traffic code, or the potential for being 'doored'.

Um... you were the one saying it was conditional on NYC-like bike lane use mandatory ordinances; I was the one saying it really didn't matter... Thank you for agreeing?


Said groups should do more, than just advocating for bike lanes. They should put equally commensurate effort into, getting the wax out of the ears and mush out of the brains, of the motorized public, pursuant to apprising the motorized public of the traffic code, pursuant to a cyclist's rights within the traffic code.

Oh. You want to "educate the public." Right. How do sharrows, recognizing that bikes can exist outside the bike lane, and warnings about possible dooring situations not educate riders and drivers in a very public, and unmistakably graphic way?

The answer is - DON'T PAINT DOOR ZONE BIKE LANES!

You say that like it's not going to continue to happen... And remember, you're supposed to be grateful about them.

So why not make it an educational opportunity, too? Warn cyclists to watch doors; remind drivers to look before opening. Remind drivers that bikes can be outside the bike lane; make sure cyclists know they can take a lane of traffic.

You say that like it's not going to continue to happen... And remember, you're supposed to be grateful about them.

So why not make it an educational opportunity, too? Warn cyclists to watch doors; remind drivers to look before opening. Remind drivers that bikes can be outside the bike lane; make sure cyclists know they can take a lane of traffic.You say that like it's actually going to change driver behavior ...

Remember it is already taught in drivers ED.

The answer is - DON'T PAINT DOOR ZONE BIKE LANES!

Easier said than done, our city's cycling advocates quickly trounced any notion of considering anything other than a dedicated bike lane as being the first option, and only when a bike lane was not feasible, due to road width constraints, did our local advocates consider any other option.

Oh. You want to "educate the public." Right. How do sharrows, recognizing that bikes can exist outside the bike lane, and warnings about possible dooring situations not educate riders and drivers in a very public, and unmistakably graphic way?

They do educate the public. But they don't do enough to educate the public.

Every US drivers ED course teaches to look before opening your car door. It did not do much for the dead and injured cyclist that have been doored.

The benefit of teaching cyclist to stay out of door zone far outweighs trying to teach motorist to look first. Hell, we cannot even teach traffic engineers well enough to not paint door zone bike lanes. We have cyclist that think door zone bike lanes are just fine.

Uh, there are a lot more motorists than cyclists. I think it would be great if they paid more mind to cyclists. Some how you think this is a bad idea.......

this is a hilarous thread - the australian newspaper article about the fire chief getting doored says nothing about 'bikelanes' but the thread quickly devolved into a bikelane bashing.

you guys might not have heard- cyclists ride further from parked cars when there's a bikelane, thereby reducing chances of a dooring. Y'all might have forgotten that roads WITH bikelanes are safer than those without, and that the door zone still exists (and riders will position themselves closer to the cars) when there isn't a bikelane.


that is neither here nor there however. What stands out to me is the Victoria paper is focusing on bicycling.

They do educate the public. But they don't do enough to educate the public.

I contend that they would be the best way, reaching the most people, maybe combined with some kind of PSA announcements and publicity.

Remember, we're already educating the public about door opening responsibility in drivers' ed...

You say that like it's actually going to change driver behavior ...

Remember it is already taught in drivers ED.


People take drivers ed once. Typicaly when they're really young. People see road markings ever day. Include some PSAs when the paint is being sprayed, and at least you're reminding people.

Whether it would make a difference is debatable -- no one seems to pay too much attention to superfluous road markings anyway, and more, different ones might just provide more visual overload.

I contend that they would be the best way, reaching the most people, maybe combined with some kind of PSA announcements and publicity.

Remember, we're already educating the public about door opening responsibility in drivers' ed...

But they only tell them to watch out for cars when opening the door of a car parked parallel to the direction of the street. They don't mention cyclists'. Because if cyclists' are mentioned, they do a lousy job of it.

Because the message is clearly not getting through to cyclist "Stay out of dangerous bike lanes with door zones."

You don't have to stay out of the bike lane with the door zone. You just have to stay out of the door zone.

I've read some study where responding motorists reported being more cognizant of bike traffic while parking on a street with a bikelane.

You don't have to stay out of the bike lane with the door zone. You just have to stay out of the door zone.The bike lanes wide enough to stay in the bike lane and not get doored with a fully open door are very rare or non-existent in most cities.

People take drivers ed once. Typicaly when they're really young. People see road markings ever day. Include some PSAs when the paint is being sprayed, and at least you're reminding people.

Whether it would make a difference is debatable -- no one seems to pay too much attention to superfluous road markings anyway, and more, different ones might just provide more visual overload.Again comes the suggestion of PSAs while painting door zone bike lanes.

Seriously, if you guys insist on painting something, just to prove cyclist are worthy, then paint sharrows in the middle or left side of the travel lane and out of the door zone.

The bike lanes wide enough to stay in the bike lane and not get doored with a fully open door are very rare or non-existent in most cities.

Pretty much describes my city as well, today one section of my commute was especially anxious with numerous full sized pickups extending out into the BL, with motorists exiting or enter the pickups, and with more full sized pickups passing within one to two feet of the inside BL line.

.........then paint sharrows in the middle or left side of the travel lane and out of the door zone.

That option was quickly trounced on by our local advocates on sections of roadway where a bike lane could be physically installed, and only then considered when the roadway was to narrow.

That option was quickly trounced on by our local advocates on sections of roadway where a bike lane could be physically installed, and only then considered when the roadway was to narrow.To me that proves their real goal is to get cyclist out of the way of motorist and they do not care about hazards to cyclist if the goal can be achieved.

For these people, the sharrow is something that just gets cycling advocates off their back when they cannot achieved the goal of getting cyclist out of the way.

To me that proves their real goal is to get cyclist out of the way of motorist and they do not care about hazards to cyclist if the goal can be achieved.


Actually, the main proposal for installing bike lanes was that studies our local advocates were touting were that women cyclists preferred to ride in bike lanes, and women were better indicators of safety. So far, I've seen only one woman cyclist riding in this bike lane, and that was just a couple of days after this bike lane was installed, none since.

The irony is that the only dissenting city council vote towards installing bike lanes on this section of roadway, and who was in favor of sharrows, was cast by the lone woman cyclist on the city council.

There's really no local ordinance mandating strict adherence to riding in our bike lanes, just that many motorists seem to think that there is when one is present.

DD,

You may be lucky enough to live in an area without mandatory bike lane use laws, but here in Florida and other jurisdictions there are such laws. Now granted there is usually a "laundry list" of exceptions that allow us to leave the bike lane for our safety. But as you noted sadly most drivers (and/or LEOs) don't seem to be be aware of them.

Of all the potential hazards that I have in my head, dooring has to be the scariest one. I tend to always be on the lookout for folks in standing cars and ride at least 5 ft out. I have not seen, around here, bike lanes adjacent to parking - seems like a stupid design to me.

-G

You're lucky, around here there are a number of bike lanes that are in the door zone of parked cars. Even worse is in the downtown area where not only are the bike lanes in the door zone, but they are to the right of a combination through/right turn lane. Compounding the danger even further.

City/traffic planners need to realize that just because they paint a bike lane on the side of the road doesn't mean that it is safe or convent for cyclists. When city/traffic planners install bike lanes (protected or otherwise) they need to do so, so that they are safe for cyclists.

As I've said before, where I live not only are there bike lanes in the door zone, or run along on street parking, but also have cyclists popping in and out of the blind spots of buses stopped to take on and let passengers off of the buses.

Also as I have said before I am NOT anti-bike lane, I am however anti-bike lanes that do NOT improve cycling. It would be nice if when city/traffic planners design and implement bike lanes (protected or otherwise) that they actually go out and ride them. So that they can learn first hand if they address the concerns of cyclists.

Every US drivers ED course teaches to look before opening your car door. It did not do much for the dead and injured cyclist that have been doored.

The benefit of teaching cyclist to stay out of door zone far outweighs trying to teach motorist to look first. Hell, we cannot even teach traffic engineers well enough to not paint door zone bike lanes. We have cyclist that think door zone bike lanes are just fine.

Yep, and IIRC one of them lives down in Miami, he also seems to think that so long as cyclists travel ssssllllloooowwwwwllllllyyyyyy enough they can avoid most if not all situations. He also seems to think that cyclists should always ride either hugging the curb or in the gutter pan. Using the "logic" that if a motorist passes too closely that they can just "step off of the bike onto the curb and 'hopefully' pull the bike behind them."

I've read some study where responding motorists reported being more cognizant of bike traffic while parking on a street with a bikelane.

Care to provide links to the study, or is this more of your made up reports/stats?

Actually, the main proposal for installing bike lanes was that studies our local advocates were touting were that women cyclists preferred to ride in bike lanes, and women were better indicators of safety. So far, I've seen only one woman cyclist riding in this bike lane, and that was just a couple of days after this bike lane was installed, none since.

The irony is that the only dissenting city council vote towards installing bike lanes on this section of roadway, and who was in favor of sharrows, was cast by the lone woman cyclist on the city council.Just too funny.

Care to provide links to the study, or is this more of your made up reports/stats?
If I recall from the last time Bek referenced this study, it did indeed show that cyclists rode further from the cars when a DZBL was painted on the street. However, they were still in the door zone. It was sort of the cycling equivalent to being just a little bit pregnant.

There's really no local ordinance mandating strict adherence to riding in our bike lanes, just that many motorists seem to think that there is when one is present.

http://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ

http://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ


That's NYC, and does not apply to our local bike lanes.