INSIDE THIS ISSUE
JULY 2009
TCSD Contacts Volunteer Members Board Members Event Calendar Weekly Workout Calendar
TRIATHLON CLUB OF SAN DIEGO
2 2 2 2 5
Member Profile New Members Ironman Conversation Race Discounts Product Review
5 6 7 8 9
Ask The Trainer Friends Offering Discounts Show Off Your TCSD Spirit! Cooking with KASHI Application
10 10 21 22 25
TriNews
THE DOOR ZONE DEBATE By Richard L. Duquette, Esq.
JULY CLUB MEETING July 30th, Thursday Road Runner Sports SPECIAL GUEST: Mike Reilly, “The voice of Ironman”
CONGRATULATIONS TCSD! 25 years and growing stronger & faster then ever. The largest and best triathlon club in the world.
I would like to comment on pending legislation affecting bicyclists. I was prompted by a helpful email from Bill Nesper – League of American Bicyclists. (www.bikeleague.org) Specifically, Assembly bill (AB) 1408 has been authored to add Section 298 to the Vehicle Code (VC). This section would define a “Door Zone” as that section of the street adjacent to a parked vehicle that would be unsafe for use by vehicles or bicycles in motion, if one or more doors of the vehicle were opened. Apparently the Vehicle Code is silent on this specific definition, and so is (VC) 21202 – which defines where cyclists should ride. Generally, its as far to the right of the road as safe, or in a posted bike lane. Essentially, this door zone statute would broaden the legal zones to ride, i.e. when approaching parked cars – you can ride further into the road. Practically, this may prove helpful if hit from an advancing motorist, because it would eliminate the insurance companies argument you
were comparatively or totally at fault for riding wide. Realistically, as we know, parked motorists inattentively fling open car doors, and often seriously injure cyclists. Since it’s hard to foresee this, the door zone statute would add more legal protection to cyclists, than California Vehicle Code § 22517 which says: No person shall open the door of a vehicle on the side available to moving traffic unless it is reasonably safe to do so and can be done without interfering with the movement of such traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open on the side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers. Conversely, the insurance industry might argue that if you failed to ride wide (out of the door zone) you’re partially at fault since you had an “option”. So, I suggest further amending the legislation and closing this loophole. For example, add “However, riding in the door zone shall not be construed as assuming the risk of injury.” I’m sure we all agree cyclists continued on page 15