The Brutal Truth


“Scene of a cyclist fatality that resulted from a dooring incident in a door-zone bike lane in Cambridge, MA”. Credit:

As I explained in my recent post, “Learning Bike Safety the Hard Way”, for a cyclist, getting doored can be emotionally and physically deflating. Getting back on the bike was an inspiring moment, although I found it important to recall my own experience to provide the Los Angeles cycling community with safety tips and the lessons I have learned in this experience. My last post focused on my own collision and recovery; below, I will discuss the experiences of others, dooring collision studies, municipal safety programs and my own ideas about cycling infrastructure and safety in hopes that cyclists will learn from the mistakes I and the perpetrator made- so they hopefully wont have such an experience themselves.

After my dooring accident in January, I heard many anecdotes from other cyclists about their experience being doored and how those accidents affect themselves or loved ones. One friend had a door opened in front of him and ended up flying over the door, yet escaped with a few minor scrapes. Another had a door opened right into his kneecap and felt excruciating pain, but was able to walk it off and get back on the bike about 20 minutes later. A woman I was speaking to about my experience told me that her mother had also been doored and required a year of physical therapy for her injured hand. I received a message from a friend who knew someone who was also doored recently: the victim suffered a dislocated shoulder, was prescribed two different pain medsications and missed a week of school. Throughout this unfortunate litany of injuries and accidents, a recurring theme was a lack of awareness from the individual opening the car door into the path of an oncoming cyclist. Because of this, I believe it essential that drivers be educated on the importance of observing their surroundings. It is also incumbent on cyclists to be aware of the door zone in order to reduce the rates of this entirely preventable accident.

In fact, in 2007 New York City started the “Look” campaign to address this issue following a 2006 report that showed “nearly all fatal crashes were the result of poor driving or bicycle riding behavior, particularly driver inattention and disregarding traffic signals and signs.” By using public education and outreach in campaigns, organizations and municipal agencies can teach individuals exiting their car to look for passing cyclists. In Northern Europe, individuals are taught to open their car door with the hand that is opposite the door (say, one’s right hand on the driver’s side, or one’s left hand on the passenger side), which would force an individual to look behind them for a cyclist before opening the car door. Cyclists should also use defensive riding techniques such as not being too close to vehicles that appear to be parked as there may always be somebody about to open their door!


New York City’s successful bicycle and pedestrian safety campaign. Credit: New York City Department of Transportation

Tragically, there have been several documented cases across the world in which a doored cyclist lost their life, highlighting just how severe these accidents can be. A majority of the fatal dooring incidents involve the cyclist being struck by passing vehicles after being forced into the traffic lane to avoid being hit by the door. Most of these fatalities involve large vehicles like trucks or buses.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to find data on the total amount of dooring incidents that occur in Los Angeles in a given year. There is no “dooring” category for reporting purposes in the collision databases the state maintains. Because of this, it is a hidden, unrecognized hazard that is difficult for advocacy groups and municipal entities to quantify. Nevertheless, there have been some attempts to understand the rates of dooring accidents, such as a Chicago study that found dooring was the primary collision factor in 19.7% of bicycle crashes; in Boston, door zone collisions account for around 5% of collisions; in Santa Barbara, dooring accounts for around 16% of collisions. The League of American Bicyclists Guide to Safe Cycling suggests that the third most common motorist-caused bicycle collision is opening a door into the path of a cyclist, while cutting off a cyclist while turning, and running stop signs are the top two, respectively.

These experiences suggest the need for added bicycle infrastructure, such as segregated cycle tracks, to protect cyclists and identify a predictable space for them on the road. Outreach is also important, not only to highlight the risks cyclists face, but also illuminate the many benefits that can be realized when one uses a bicycle as their main mode of transportation. These include an active and healthy lifestyle as well as heightened spiritual, mental and emotional health that many cyclists enjoy. Los Angeles has some of the worst congestion and air pollution in the country; cycling serves to mitigate some of their negative effects as well.


A young girl riding in this separated “cycle track” bike lane suggests the perceived safety of such a facility. Credit: Livin in the Bike Lane

Cyclists share a great deal of responsibility for traffic safety. Cycling has some inherent risks, so bicyclists must ride legally and alert at all times. Indeed, this collision could have been avoided if both myself and the woman who opened her door had been paying better attention and if we had not been in such a rush. I would suggest you take a look at the LADOT Bicycle Program’s recommendations on following California bicycle laws; with respect to the door zone, this means cycling at least three feet from parked cars. It is also advised that cyclists not pass cars on the right side (oops).

Despite the pain that I have endured throughout this experience, I am only more inspired to pursue bicycle safety and driver awareness in my work here at the LADOT Bicycle Program. Many individuals have a difficult time making that transition back to the bike after such fearful collisions- and so I dedicate my work to them. Although my ordeal wasn’t that severe, I am interested in exploring solutions to reduce the risks associated with cycling. Hopefully, this story and more like it will contribute to the discussion of implementing protected bicycle lanes, or cycle tracks, in the city of Los Angeles, which separate cyclists from the roadway and reduce the probability that a dooring can occur. Please feel free to share any of your own dooring experiences (or other collisions) in the comments below.

0 replies
  1. Mark Van Horne
    Mark Van Horne says:

    This makes great sense. Instead of creating a two foot wide bike path on each side of the street, create a four foot wide dual direction path on one side and restrict parking! I always wondered why, when creating the orange line bike path, they chose to put a lane on each side of Chandler, during the section that goes between Lankershim and the separated path near Fulton. Since there is already a segregated lane for busses down the center, why not stripe the lane nearest the center for bikes, moving the traffic lanes closer to the parking spaces? More thought needs to go into bike lanes and paths!

  2. Craig
    Craig says:


    Nice post.

    My father had a dooring story of his own while bike riding in the Los Angeles area. I don’t have the specifics on that, but the important point for me is the date when this happened. It was in 1943. My point is to say, dooring is very likely always going to be present to some degree. I think you are right when you say cycling is inherently risky. Steps can be taken to minimize dooring but to expect drivers or cyclists to modify their collective behavior enough to eliminate it is probably to assume too much. The LADOT etiquette list is self evident of the issue. Its rare to see a cyclist or auto driver observing all of those guidelines. If anything, I’d say the cyclists I see are outside these guidelines more often than the motorists. Human nature is what it is, people with the best of intentions get distracted, forget, or simply choose out of spite or a sense of entitlement not to follow all the necessary steps to reduce/eliminate risk.

    In your research, when you were able to find specifics on the number of dooring incidents with bikes, did you also see any data related to “dooring incidents with automobiles”. That is, how prevalent are accidents involving a parked car occupant opening their door on the street side, resulting in a collision with a moving automobile/bus/truck?

    I think there’s another solution to add to the mix when discussing the problem of dooring. Its akin to cycle tracks and involves moving toward guiding bikes along routes with minimal automobile traffic. Given many areas of Los Angeles are built with grid like roadways, the assumption here is that its possible to construct and direct riders to bike routes which use alternate paths, parallel to arterial roads which have should/do have a higher concentration of automobile traffic. Further assumption is, the parallel path having lower automobile traffic allows for a bike rider to “take the lane” rather than rely on riding between parked cars and faster (or slower depending on the time of day and road) moving traffic.

    Would you agree, a bike rider who is able to ride down the center of the lane, much as a car would do, is much less exposed to dooring incidents as well as a host of other hazards inherent when you combine traffic of different types into the same environment?

  3. Kent Stork
    Kent Stork says:

    Listening to the city congratulate ourselves for painting bicycle lanes in the door zone breaks my heart. We should not invite people to engage in foolish behavior. I have been doored twice, so now I ride slowly on the sidewalk or rapidly in the center of quiet residential streets. The city should be spending *all* of its energy and resources on planning and implementing cycle tracks and Class 1 Bike Paths. No energy, paint or bragging should be directed towards these absurd invitations to injury.

  4. Chris Dack
    Chris Dack says:

    Have a look at the Melbourne Age in the past week for many articles on one incident in the CBD (Melbourne, Victoria, Australia). There are now even articles suggesting that cameras should not be used (at least, I think that is what the author was proposing).

  5. Craig
    Craig says:

    We created to empower the cycling community and create driver role models. We would appreciate it if you, Dustin, and anyone who has been injured or has family or friends who have been killed in cycling incidents would upload their stories to our Memorial and Injury Report galleries. Our vision is to end cycling deaths and injuries by mobilizing the cycling community with tools and methods to empower cyclists such as our National Incident Database. Please watch our Overview video and let us know if you have any questions via our Contact Us form.


Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Bike Blog looks at the problem of dooring. but let’s not forget that drivers are almost always at fault for dooring, since they’re […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *