This is the final day of our first-ever May BikinginLA LACBC Membership Drive. And your last chance to get some great bike swag when you sign up or renew your membership with the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.
We’re up to 29 members who’ve signed up as part of the drive. So we just need two more to make it one a day for the month of May, with 31 members by the end of the month. Or better yet, get your entire riding club to sign up today to help make our original goal of 100 new members by the end of this month.
So don’t wait. Join or renew now to help make this a more livable, bikeable city and county.
………
Let’s keep things short today — relatively, anyway — to kick off the week after a far too busy three day weekend. We’ll get back to our regular link-filled format tomorrow.
………
This is what happens when someone doesn’t have a clue what he’s writing about.
But doesn’t let that stop him.
Fifty-two years after Bob Dylan warned “don’t criticize what you don’t understand,” indignorant Orange County Register columnist Joel Kotkin attempts to create a public panic over road diets, without apparently bothering to understand what they are or how they’re used.
Kotkin warns that Governor Brown has a secret plan to reduce greenhouse gases by making traffic congestion so bad that it will force Californians out of their cars. And into a “high-density, transit-oriented future.”
And the tool to accomplish this “Soviet-style social engineering?”
Road diets.
That’s right, comrades. He’s onto us.
Never mind that road diets have absolutely nothing to do with reducing global warming or getting people to leave their supposedly non-polluting electric cars at home. (Note to Joel Kotkin: Electric cars cause pollution, too. That power has to come from somewhere, like coal and gas-fueled power plants in most cases.)
Despite his extremely off-base protestations, road diets are performed on streets with excess capacity in order to reduce speeding and improve safety. And in many, if not most cases, can actually improve traffic flow, while making the street safer for bicyclists, pedestrians and, yes, motorists. They can even increase property values by improving livability along the street.
In other words, everyone benefits. Even the bourgeois capitalists in their motor vehicles.
Making matters worse, Kotkin apparently thinks the state’s plan to encourage road diets will a) prevent the widening of freeways, and b) actually be used to narrow said freeways. Although it’s hard to tell with his jumbled, nearly incoherent mixing and mangling of unrelated subject matters.
So just to clarify, road diets are used on surface streets. Period.
They have absolutely nothing to do with freeway projects, nor do they in any way increase freeway congestion. Although they may reduce congestion in the surrounding area by providing people with viable alternatives to driving.
All of which he could have discovered with a simple 30-second Google search.
If he cared enough to actually understand what the hell he’s talking about.
Thanks to Mike Wilkerson for the heads-up.
………
Mike also forwards this piece about Southern California Ghost Bikes founder Danny Gamboa.
It tells the story of how Gamboa, a photographer and filmmaker, became involved in the ghost bike movement when his neighbor’s six-year old son was killed while riding his bike.
And how the purpose of the bikes is to call attention to the need to ride safely, and drive carefully around bike riders.
Vincent Chang, who started Bike San Gabriel Valley, remembers two ghost bikes he helped place in Pasadena.
“It’s to honor the individual who passed,” Chang said. “Also, there’s hope that it brings to light the need for safety improvements. They act as a reminder to vehicles that we have to share the road.”
Gamboa’s been asked if he has a morbid fixation. It’s a question he quickly shrugs off.
“Our goal is to be put out of business so we don’t ever have to do this again,” he answered.
………
The author of that story, Steve Scauzillo of the Los Angeles News Group, also wrote a piece about bicycling fatalities in Southern California, in which he quoted me extensively, along with Danny Gamboa and the LACBC’s Colin Bogart.
And got it right.
Despite the scary headline, he offers a fair and balanced piece, making it clear that while too many people die on our streets, the rate of bicycling deaths is actually going down as ridership goes up.
And that the odds of returning safely from a ride are overwhelmingly in your favor.
It’s worth noting that Scauzillo, a bike rider himself, spent over an hour on the phone with me to get the story straight. Unlike, say, his colleague above.
I spend a lot of time talking with reporters about bicycling and bike safety, on and off the record. And it’s nice when a reporter goes to the effort to make sure he quotes me accurately and in context.
So whether or not you like what I said, I said it. And meant it.
………
Hopefully it’s not a spoiler at this point. But if you still have the last few stages of the Giro or the Nats on your DVR, skip this section.
Still here?
It was a big upset in Friday’s stage 19, as Italy’s Vincenzo Nibali won the stage — and eventually, the tour itself — after Dutch rider Steven Kruijswijk, who seemed to have an insurmountable lead, hit a snow bank and wiped out in spectacular fashion.
Back on our shores, the US National road title was taken by virtually unknown 21-year old Greg Daniel. Megan Guarnier cemented her position as America’s leading women’s roadie by winning her second US road championship, and her third in five years.
And Taylor Phinney completed a nearly impossible comeback from a devastating crash caused by a race moto in the 2014 road championships by winning his second national crit title; doctors weren’t sure he would ever walk again, let alone ride a bike. Carmen Small won the women’s title.
………
Sad news from Spain, as former pro David Cañada died after colliding with another rider in a sportiv, just six years after retiring from racing.
And race motos cause yet another massive crash, as two lead motorcycles collided in a Belgium race, causing dozens of riders to go down and leading to the cancellation of the stage. At last report, Belgian rider Stig Broeckx was still in a coma after suffering a skull fracture in the crash; it was Broeckx’ second wreck involving a race moto just this year.
………
Over the weekend, my wife and I happened to stumble on another new bicycle-themed coffee shop when we stopped to check out a restaurant in West Hollywood.
The Black Bicycle Café opened two months ago on Havenhurst Drive and Santa Monica Blvd; the name comes from the idea that just like bicycles get you where you’re going, coffee fuels you to your destination.
And they make a pretty good cup of joe.
Tell ‘em I said hi if you stop by.
……….
Finally…
Your next bike could be a blimp, if they can actually get it off the ground. Or maybe a lawnmower.
And it’s bad enough when a kangaroo knocks you off your bike; worse when it ruptures both your breast implants.
When I read Kotkin’s piece, I thought he used the term “road diets” as a sweeping term that includes any effort to reduce congestion and emissions that he disagrees with. Actual road diets are just a small part of what he objects to.
As you mentioned, the article is a “…jumbled, nearly incoherent mixing and mangling of unrelated subject matters.”, so it’s hard to focus any criticism, but there are a couple of easy targets.
One of Kotkin’s proposals is to increase the proportion of electric vehicles. Unfortunately, even if every vehicle magically transformed into electric, the streets and freeways would still be horribly congested. We have reached the point where streets cannot be widened and more freeways cannot be built. Instead, the future is in providing attractive alternatives to motor vehicles.
Another Kotkin proposal is to increase telecommuting and ride-sharing. I temper my agreement with those goals by pointing out that they have both been options for years. They, as well as electric vehicles, share a common characteristic. Dramatically increasing their use would require the same heavy-handed “Soviet-style social engineering” that Kotkin finds so objectionable.
Finally, I want to point out that most of the strategies Kotkin dislikes are not aimed at discouraging motor vehicle use. Instead, after decades of auto-centric planning, they would level the playing field for other forms of transportation. People will find a quick bike ride to the store or a bus ride to work a viable option. That will eventually mean fewer cars on the road and less congestion.
I agree with Mike W that Kotkin’s use of “road diet” is misplaced, and likely a rhetorical tool that he uses purposefully. Criticism of Kotkin’s misuse of “road diet” is missing the point entirely, which is Kotkin’s lament on the erosion of car’s highly privileged status in California’s transportation planning.
Kotkin is absolutely correct that the state is making sweeping changes to land-use and transportation planning policies to discourage single-occupant-vehicle use, and the Office of Planning and Research is indeed the lead agency on this, but this is because state law (SB 743, passed by the California Assembly in 2013) mandates such. The Senate vote was unanimous; the Assembly vote was 52-20.
I wrote a primer on SB 743, OPR’s rulemaking process, and what it means for California bike advocacy at http://www.cyclelicio.us/2016/new-california-environmental-regs-will-hopefully-boost-active-transportation/