Archive for August 10, 2009

Incomplete Streets: DOT’s secret plan to take away your bike lanes

August 10, 2009 / / 14 comments

Prepare to get mad.Parking-Sign

Because this is a city that lacks even a minimally sufficient level of biking infrastructure. A city where the new bike plan fails to include a number of routes proposed in the previous plan that no one ever got around to building. And where the vast majority of potential routes that cyclists might actually use are considered “currently infeasible.”

Yet the Department of Transportation is preparing to remove an already existing bike lane in the San Fernando Valley.

That’s right.

West Valley traffic planners intend to erase the thin line of paint that carves out just a tiny fraction of Reseda Boulevard for bicyclists, just to feed an ever increasing need for motorized vehicle capacity. Regardless of what effect that might have on the safety of cyclists. Or the livability, and sustainability, of our city.

Or maybe they just didn’t get the memo that there are other road users on the streets of L.A.

And now it’s up to us to stop them.

Not surprising, they’ve done their best to keep local residents and business people in the dark — along with the area Chambers of Commerce and all three of the Neighborhood Councils in the effected area.

Then again, the people who live and work in the affected area shouldn’t feel alone. The Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee, and even the DOT’s own bicycle planning department, were kept out of the loop, as well.

Evidently, as far as the West Valley DOT was concerned, it was on a need to know basis. And anyone who might possibly object didn’t need to know — even though public hearings are required before removing an existing bike lane.

According to BAC Chairperson Glenn Bailey, it only came to light when bike planning engineers tried to coordinate with the West Valley traffic engineers about long-standing plans to add another three miles of bike lanes, and eventually extend the current bike lane the full length of Reseda Blvd.

Instead, they were told not to waste their time. The WVDOT had already overridden those plans in order to create Peak Hour Lanes along Reseda Boulevard — meaning that all on-street parking will be banned during peak hours.

As a result, the three miles of planned bike lanes, which would have run next to the parking lane, were no longer under consideration. And a full two miles of the existing bike lanes on both sides of the road between Van Owen and Ventura Boulevard would have to be removed.

Similar Peak Hour Lanes have recently been installed along Balboa, Tampa and De Soto, as well as Topanga Canyon Blvd — a state highway where CalTrans had been willing to put in a bike lane, but was overridden by the DOT’s inexplicable lust for maximum motorized throughput at the expense of any form of alternative transportation. Even though research shows half of all car trips could be walked or biked.

Evidently, four north/south Peak Hour routes within just a few miles aren’t enough, even though evidence has repeatedly shown increasing capacity usually results in short term gains, at best.

Of course, when Glenn tried to get more information, his emails were ignored — despite that fact that he chairs a supposedly important civic committee and was appointed by the mayor himself.

Then when he finally reached the West Valley District Engineer by phone to ask about the cancelation of the planned extension, he was told “I’m not going to put in a bike lane for one or two bicyclists.”

This despite the fact that neither the city, nor anyone else, has yet conducted an accurate survey of existing ridership along the route, or potential ridership if the route is completed. And the fact that a completed bike lane would serve Cal State Northridge, as well as other area schools, and countless commuters who might feel more comfortable riding to work if they had a dedicated lane to ride in.

Instead, area residents will be forced to contend with high speed, curb-to-curb traffic, which will only serve to discourage cyclists and pedestrians, while putting both groups at greater risk.

Not to mention the inconvenience faced by people who live along Reseda, who will no longer be able to park in front of their homes and apartments. Then there’s the impact an unexpected loss of street parking will have on local businesses already struggling to survive in an adverse economy.

It’s only a bike lane.

But removing it would establish a dangerous precedent, putting every bike lane in the city at risk. And rendering the proposed Bike Plan meaningless, because even existing routes could be eliminated at any time, for any reason.

Mad enough yet?

It’s draw a line in the sand. And fight back.

There is a motion in favor of the Peak Hour Lane proposal before the Northridge West Neighborhood Council Tuesday night at 7p, in the auditorium of Beckford Avenue Elementary School, at 19130 Tulsa Street in Northridge.

If you live or ride in the Valley, I encourage you to join Glenn at this meeting to oppose the motion and fight for your bike lanes. Or if you can’t make it, email your comments to Glenn at glennbaileysfv @ yahoo . com (remove spaces).

And contact your councilmember — as well as councilmembers Greig Smith and Dennis Zine, who represent to affected area — to demand a halt to this misguided, short-sighted plan.

Because it may just be a bike lane. But it — and what it represents — couldn’t be more important.

I emailed councilmembers Smith and Zine to ask for their comments, along with Transportation Committee Chairperson Bill Rosendahl, and my own councilperson, Paul Koretz, Vice Chairperson of the Transportation Committee. So far, I haven’t received a response from any of them; if it turns out someone actually cares enough to get back to me about this, I’ll let you know.

………

Like me, Will Campbell comes down squarely in the helmet-wearing camp. Flying Pigeon announces this month’s non-Dim Sum ride. Enci and Stephen are looking for volunteers for what could just be the coolest bike ride in L.A. Allstate says L.A. and Glendale drivers are among the worst in the nation. Well, duh. L.A. Creek Freak examines construction on the L.A. River Bikeway. Detroit shock jocks say they’d love to lob something at your head. Lance Armstrong urges Colorado’s governor to revive the great bike stage races of the ‘70s and ‘80s. A newspaper in Rochester, MN argues that bike-friendly streets need bike-friendly drivers, while New Mexico cyclists argue for safer streets. A bikeway named after America’s first black cycling champion is treated with as much respect as he was. In other words, not much. With a little luck, you can buy former Talking Head David Byrne’s folding bike on E-Bay. Spanish riders get the world’s longest bicycle commuter tunnel. Finally, if you’ve ever felt like your bike could fly, an English cyclist proves you may just be right.

Category: Best of, Streets and Infrastructure / Tags: , , , , , ,

Today’s ride, in which I inflict intense self-suffering. Twice.

August 7, 2009 / / 3 comments

I’ve mentioned before that I have one last goal before I consider myself fully recovered from the infamous beachfront bee incident.

I want to get back the climbing ability I used to have. Along with that knot of muscle above the knee that instantly identifies you as a serious cyclist, when there’s not a bike in sight.

You see, when I first moved to California, back when Ronnie Reagan was still riding a desk in the Oval Office, I wasn’t that great with hills. Sure, I could pull off the occasional mountain ride, but it wasn’t that hard ride to through Denver without any real effort.

That changed when I got to San Diego.

Most visitors to San Diego never get past the beach or the Gaslamp Quarter, so they don’t realize the city is just one steep hill and canyon rolling into another. And it quickly became clear that if I wanted to ride beyond my own neighborhood, I needed to get a lot better at hills.

So I found the longest, steepest hill I could. And I rode it.

Everyday.

At first, I could only go 50 to 100 feet before I had to stop, feeling like my heart and lungs were going to explode. Then I waited until I got my pulse and breathing back under control, and rode another 50 feet or so. Then I did it again, and again, until I finally topped the crest and got on with my ride.

It took me a few weeks before I could make it all the way without stopping. Slowly, chest pounding and legs screaming in pain, but I made it.

Then once I could make it every time, I focused on getting up that hill faster and in progressively higher gears. Until at last I reached the point where I would find myself passing some of the local pros on climbs, only to have them fall in behind and let me pull them up the hill — unless I happened to feel like dropping them that day.

But that was a long time ago. And I want to get that back.

So at least twice a week now, I work hills into my route.

One route starts uphill as soon as I leave my door, with eight steep climbs in the first five miles. The other follows my usual route, but adds a full mile of non-stop climbing up Temescal Canyon, from the beach to the Palisades.

This week, for the first time, I felt like I was making real progress. I zoomed up the first route on Tuesday, attacking hills, riding out of the saddle and upshifting on the upslope. So I was really looking forward to today’s ride up Temescal.

Which, as it turns out, was like looking forward to a root canal.

The first third or so was fine. I attacked at the base, upshifted when I rose out of the saddle, and shifted back down when I sat, without missing a beat.

Then without warning, I was done.

I’m not sure why. But suddenly, every pedal stroke was an effort. Standing didn’t help, shifting didn’t help. And I refused to use my granny gears.

So all I could do was suck it up, and focus on one pedal stroke at a time. I’d pick out a landmark a few feet ahead — a car, a tree — and just try to make it that far. Then I’d pick out another, and another. Finally, I made it up past the high school, where the incline eases up a little, and could make it the rest of the way to Sunset.

Then I rode back to the bottom, turned around and did it again.

It wasn’t any easier the second time.

But that wasn’t the point. Because I was damned if I was going to settle for a ride like that. And as hard as it was, it should make it just a little easier next time.

Then I revised my route to include another hard climb on the way home. Because the only way to get better at riding hills is to ride hills.

And the hill you don’t ride today will be the same one you can’t ride tomorrow.

……….

Flying Pigeon needs more double rail saddle clamps if you happen to have a few hundred laying around. Damien asks if it’s time California had a 3-foot law of it’s own. Short answer, yes. A biking newbie asks how to become a little better at climbing. Missouri’s Tracy Wilkins discovers traffic calming islands that force bikes and cars a little too close for comfort. MTB Law Girl lives up to her name, presenting a synopsis of a cyclist vs. cyclist road rage case; the offender was sentenced to 35 years. First they got mad, now Texas riders plan to get even. A San Francisco columnist says if you want cheap, easy transportation to the office, take a bus. The Examiner suggests that Amtrak could increase their ridership if they were more bicycle friendly. We can’t get sharrows, yet Portland riders get their own bridge. A Vancouver writer says it’s time to get past the whole bikes vs. cars conflict. After a two-year doping ban, former Tour de France favorite Vinokourov is back; next year’s tour is starting to look very interesting. Finally, build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door; so what happens when you build a better bike reflector?

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

Speaking of falling: A brief word about helmets

August 6, 2009 / / 3 comments

I see it just about every time I ride down by the beach.

A few cyclists will be riding bare-headed along the bike path, with their helmets slung casually under their handlebars or clipped onto a rack.

Of course, if you’re not planning to wear your helmet, it’s easier to just leave it at home. So I can only assume that they ride to the beach wearing their helmets, then take them off once they get there, where they feel safe. In fact, I’ve watched riders do exactly that.

The problem is, they have it backward.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a huge believer in wearing a helmet. And I’m firmly convinced — as were the neurologist and trauma team that treated me — that I might not be writing this now if I hadn’t been wearing one during the infamous beachfront bee encounter. Which, by the way, occurred on the very same bikeway these other cyclists seem to feel so confident in riding sans helmet.

The problem is, bike helmets are most effective in slow speed accidents — the kind that are more likely to occur on an off-road pathway, as opposed to surface streets where both bikes and cars tend to move at much higher speeds.

In fact, bike helmets are designed to provide full protection from brain injuries at speeds up to just 12.5 mph, while reducing the severity of such injuries at speeds up to 20 mph. If you get hit by a car, there’s a good chance it will be going a lot faster than that.

Just to be clear, the standards reflect the speed at which your head strikes the pavement, not the speed you’re riding or the speed of the vehicle in the event of a collision. But until someone overturns the laws of physics, speed of movement will continue to have a strong correlation to speed of impact — the faster you’re going or the greater the force of a collision, the greater the force with which you’ll strike the pavement.

Helmet advocates frequently cite a landmark study showing that helmets reduce the risk of head injury up to 89% (and let’s note that helmets only protect your head from injury; they do absolutely nothing to protect other body parts, nor do they do anything to prevent collisions).

However, a re-evaluation of that study showed a 69% reduction in head injuries and a 74% reduction in severe brain injury. Other studies have shown significantly lower results.

There has also been one study showing that helmets can actually increase the risk of a collision, because drivers may give a wider berth to cyclists wearing helmets than riders without. This has lead some cyclists to believe that they are actually safer riding without a helmet than with one.

Of course, the problem with that — even if it is correct — is that the overwhelming majority of bicycle accidents don’t involve other vehicles. You are far more likely to be injured by losing control of your bike, for whatever reason, than you are by being hit by a motor vehicle.

None of this is to suggest that you shouldn’t wear a helmet; rather, my point is that if you’re going to wear one — and yes, as long as you’re an adult, the decision is up to you — you should always wear it, even in situations where you feel safe and think it’s not necessary.

I am, thank God, living proof to that.

But don’t rely on it to keep you safe in traffic. That’s not what it’s for.

You’re far better off improving your riding ability. And developing the skills you need to avoid a collision.

……….

Westside bike co-op Bikerowave has a new home on Venice Blvd. Could this be the beginning of a beachside Bicycle District? The Times reports on this weekend’s Brentwood Grand Prix, while LAist reports on a woman who says what she really thinks about Brentwood and greater L.A. Damien Newton asks, when it comes to biking — and driving — who teaches the teachers? The Examiner examines what the LACBC is up to these days, and recommends some riding routes around the city. A Florida bicyclist is the victim of a drive-by hit-and-run, while riding on the sidewalk. A writer reminisces about his childhood biking days, then concludes that bikes and cars don’t belong on the road together. Finally, the U.K.’s Guardian reports on cyclists who wouldn’t be caught dead wearing Lycra, and notes that biking does not make you a saint.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

Always keep the rubber side down. But be ready, just in case.

August 4, 2009 / / 6 comments
You got to learn how to fall before you learn to fly
And mama, mama it ain’t no lie
Before you learn to fly, learn how to fall.
— Paul Simon, Learn How To Fall

A few decades back, I lived down in San Diego before I moved up here to L.A.

One Sunday morning, I got up bright and early for a quick spin along the beach. The early hour meant I had the bikeway all to myself — no cyclists, no pedestrians, no tourists — which allowed me to get up a good head of speed as I circled the bay.

Without warning, a small boy burst out of a beachfront cottage and darted across the path just feet in front of my wheel. There was no time to react, so I instinctively laid my bike on its side; I remember thinking on the way down that this was really going to hurt.

And it did.

But it worked; he walked away without a scratch. And I rode home with road rash and a broken arm, and only his parents gratitude to numb the pain.

I’ve been thinking about that lately because of a recent comment I received. The writer objected to my suggestion that sooner or later, every cyclist can expect to fall, and said that rather than offering tips on how to fall, I should offer advice on how to avoid falling.

Fair enough. But then he added something that has bothered me ever since:

…To that end, I would like to offer my advice for riders: Do not ride your bike where there is any chance to falling.

Which leaves me wondering just where exactly that would be.

Over the years, I’ve fallen in a lot of places, for a lot of different reasons. I’ve fallen after catching a wheel in a cattle guard, and after sinking six inches deep into loose gravel that hid a pothole. I’ve been knocked off my bike by a big friendly dog, and by drunken frat boys who intentionally doored me.

I’ve been forced into loose sand by careless pedestrians, gone sideways because I couldn’t clip out of my cleats, and flipped over my handlebars due to my own carelessness. I’ve been a victim of road rage, and of a massive swarm of bees that suddenly materialized without warning — an event so random that it might as well have been an alien abduction.

I’ve fallen when I was riding straight and when I was turning, going fast and going slow, and been knocked over when I was standing still.

If you can find a common thread there, you’re a lot better at this sort of thing than I am.

Experience tells me you can minimize the risk of falling, but never eliminate it entirely. You can ride slower. You can ride more cautiously. You can avoid busy streets, rough roads and crowded areas.

But the fact remains that a bike is, by it’s very nature, an inherently unstable vehicle. It wants to fall over. And it is only the skill of the rider that keeps it from doing so more often.

As I’ve developed more skill as a rider, I’ve learned what to look out for, and improved my ability to react.

But the only place I know where there’s no risk of falling is in my apartment in front of the TV, with the bike locked onto my ancient mag trainer. And that’s assuming that there isn’t an earthquake.

So sure, minimize the risk. Ride wherever and however you’re comfortable. Do everything you can to keep the rubber side on the road.

But be prepared for the alternative, just in case.

After all, even he falls every now and then.

………

Stephen Box comments on separate but unequal cycling infrastructure, and getting run out of town. Actor Shemar Moore is injured after being hit by a car while riding in Los Angeles; Damien at Streetsblog takes the mainstream media to task for trivializing the story. Ever wonder what happens to bikes left on transit systems? Me neither. Evidently, some people in Columbia, MO think the law should be changed to make it legal to harass cyclists again. Wired wonders if bikes should be treated like cars. A dead cyclist is found laying next to his bike on a Colorado overpass, with no evidence to explain what happened. A Las Vegas paper reports on a story so rare, it merits full coverage — a cyclist commuting to work by bike. Tucson Bike Lawyer barely avoids a wrong-way cyclist while driving. A Kentucky man kills a triathlete on a closed course and drives off with the bike still embedded in his windshield. And finally, in case you ride around that area, my friend at Altadena Blog offers a map to help you avoid cute, cuddly cartoon bears.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

The secret agenda of L.A. cyclists

August 3, 2009 / / One comment

I’ve been bicycling in Los Angeles for nearly two decades now.

For most of that time, I haven’t involved in local politics or government, aside than complaining about the idiots running this city, like everyone else.

Which made me the idiot, of course.

Because like most Angelenos, I was far too busy with my work and family to get caught up in some seemingly unimportant local election. And like most cyclists, I was more concerned with my next ride than what might be happening at the next city council meeting.

But while I was busy with my own concerns, decisions were being made that would affect the ability of cyclists to ride in L.A., as well as the very livability of the city. And not only did I not have a voice in those decisions, I was quite sure that my voice — and yours — didn’t matter, because no one was listening anyway.

Turns out, I was wrong.

Over the past year or so, I’ve learned that the low level of involvement exhibited by most Angelenos means that it really doesn’t take a lot of people to influence the process. In fact, one reason special interests have such an outsized influence in this city is that too many of us don’t bother to make our voices heard.

Of course, the other reason is they have all that money to contribute to campaigns and parties and PACs to influence the process.

As it turns out, though, a few motivated cyclists really can make a difference. And we seem to have some real friends in government, as well as a few others who are willing to take our side as long as we can make a good argument and show that we have some support on our side.

There’s also a secret government agency that exists solely to deal with cycling issues in Los Angeles. Or at least, it might as well be a secret since most riders have never heard of it.

Don’t believe me? Just stop the next cyclist you see, and ask if he or she is going to the BAC meeting tomorrow night.

That blank stare should be all the answer you need.

Yet the Bicycle Advisory Committee has been around for over 30 years, ever since it was founded by Tom Bradley — the city’s last great visionary mayor and standard every local political leader has failed to measure up to since the ‘70s.

And it’s a pity, because the BAC has the potential to make a huge difference for L.A. cyclists. It can, and should, provide a direct voice for cyclists in our city government — giving cyclists access to the city’s leadership and giving our leaders insight into the issues we face on the street everyday.

But it only has the power our mayor and city council give it. And the power they give it is in direct proportion to the support it gets from the cycling community.

You and me, in other words.

I can’t speak for you, but I know I haven’t been giving it enough support. In fact, I’d never heard of it until about a year ago, and only attended my first meeting just two months ago to argue in support of better police training.

That’s on the agenda for tomorrow night, along with further discussion of the proposed new bike plan, the new Expo bikeway, the proposal to limit bikes on Metro trains to just two per car, and the problem of trucks blocking bike lanes, among other items.

You don’t have to go. Unless you happen to live around there, it’s a major pain in the ass to get downtown, especially so close to rush hour. In fact, I can usually drive to Orange County in less time than it takes me to get Downtown from the Westside.

But it’s important, and it’s worth it. Because what happens there will help determine the quality of biking in L.A. today, and for the foreseeable future.

Besides, you might just see me there.

………

Will Campbell bears witness to a recent tragedy. MetroRider discusses the city’s proposed bike plan. A Helena letter writer insists that the rules of the road apply to cyclists, too, while a Toronto paper observes an intersection where only 13% of cyclists stop. A suburban Chicago paper says there’s room enough on the road for everyone, and a writer in South Carolina says safety goes both ways. Colorado cyclists and a driver fight in the roadway, and can’t agree on what happened. Finally, a Cleveland teen hits a police car. You really, really don’t want to do that.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

The things you see while you’re riding: Worst parking job in human history?

August 1, 2009 / / 3 comments

Parking-1

I saw this car parked near the Mormon Temple in Westwood while I was coming home from a ride awhile back.

Parking-2

Maybe the driver saw the small gap in the red curb where the handicap ramp is, and thought park there, as long as he wedged himself into that tiny little space. Or maybe he was running late for something at the temple and all the other spaces were taken, and he thought no one would notice.

Parking-3

Of course, in that case, you probably don’t want to be the last one to leave.

And please excuse the blurred photos on the last two pictures; that’s my fingerprint on the lens.

Oops.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,
  Recent Entries »
Wordpress Theme by ThemeZee