Evidently, the angry drivers in Playa del Rey have made themselves heard.
CD 11 Councilmember Mike Bonin took the unusual step of offering a public apology to people inconvenienced by the road diets in Playa del Rey, while announcing steps to alleviate their anger.
Hopefully, anyway.
Bonin announced an agreement with LA County Commissioner Janice Hahn that will allow “free or affordable” street parking in the county parking lot at Dockweiler Beach, enabling the city to eliminate street parking on Vista del Mar and restore the street to two lanes in each direction.
The city had moved parking to the beach side of the street after being warned by the City Attorney that it would face continued liability if people had to cross the busy roadway after parking on the opposite side, after paying out $9.5 million for the death of a 16-year old girl in 2015.
He also announced the formation of a Playa del Rey Road Safety Task Force, made up of both supporters and opponents of the lane reduction projects, charged with finding solutions to traffic safety problems in the area.
Maybe now the people opposed to the project will take a breath and calm down a little.
And while they’re at it, maybe the city can remove those nonexistent bike lanes that opponents keep insisting were the reason for the road diet on Vista del Mar.
………
While Bonin is focused on saving lives by implementing Vision Zero, CD1’s “Roadkill” Gil Cedillo appears intent on keeping his nickname intact, and his district dangerous.
Cedillo filed a motion with the city council (scroll down) that would make a handful of pedestrian safety improvements, while gutting Vision Zero by halting all “road diets, lane removals and/or lane reductions” in his district without his personal stamp of approval.
This comes after his earlier failed attempt to get the council to remove all the bike lanes planned for his entire district from the city’s mobility plan.
The question is whether he really hates bike riders that much. Or if he just lacks Bonin’s courage to face up to angry drivers.
Or more likely, both.
Thanks to Bike the Vote LA for the heads-up.
………
A California appellate court rules that the basic speed law applies to conditions inside the vehicle as well as outside.
And that the appropriate speed when driving with a cigarette in one hand and a cellphone in the other, with no hands on the steering wheel, is zero.
Thanks to Jonathan Weiss for the link.
………
Sad news, as former two-time European cycling champ Reg Arnold passed away at age 92.
An Op-Ed in Cycling Tips says when the press goes soft on doping, it only serves to normalize it.
Bicycling list seven sort-of-bold predictions for next year’s Tour de France.
……….
Local
Work is under way on a much-needed new community plan for Hollywood, including plans to make Hollywood Blvd, Edgemont Street, Finley Avenue, Rowena Avenue and Los Feliz Boulevard more bike and pedestrian friendly.
CiclaValley says Vancouver could be a model for Los Angeles.
An anti-growth columnist in Santa Monica says build more affordable housing — somewhere else. And uses kids, the disabled and the elderly as an excuse to maintain the city’s failed auto-centric policies. Never mind that kids, the disabled and older people benefit from walkable, bikeable streets as much as anyone, if not more. Thanks to Megan Lynch for the tip.
The Acorn profiles the Conejo Valley’s coed, all-level Stonehaus Cycling Club, established by the founder of what would become the Amgen Tour of California.
State
Laguna Beach unveils new stairs leading to the beach, complete with bike parking.
The bikelash has spread to San Diego’s Hillcrest neighborhood, where merchants would rather have a few dozen parking spaces than business from customers who arrive by bike, and residents can’t figure out what those bicycle symbols on the street mean. Here’s a thought — if bike lanes and sharrows confuse you, either find out what the hell they are or park your car, and leave it there. Permanently.
The bike-riding San Diego man accused of murdering four homeless men has been found mentally incompetent to stand trial.
The annual week-long Big Bear Cycling Festival begins this Sunday.
I want to be like him when I grow up. A 69-year old Cambria cyclist has done a century ride every month for 100 months, and plans to keep it up until he’s 70.
A allegedly drunk Harley rider plowed into a group of up to 20 Fresno cyclists on a club ride Monday evening, sending three riders to the hospital with major injuries; the motorcyclist faces a pair of felony DUI charges. Hats off to the Fresno Bee for getting it right by reporting the victims were wearing helmets, but that those weren’t enough to keep them safe.
This is who we share the roads with. An 18-year old Fresno woman faces multiple felony counts for the fatal DUI crash that took the life of her sister, which she livestreamed as it happened.
A San Francisco ride will follow the route of the original, two-day AIDS Ride over 30 years ago.
National
Tillamook OR tries a bike lane protected by angled parking to give riders adequate road space. Although judging by the photo, there’s not much left after drivers nose over the limit line.
Washington state has banned handheld cellphones while driving, or even resting your hand on a phone at a red light. But doesn’t do anything about hands-free cellphone use, which studies show is just as dangerous.
Bicyclists in Colorado Springs CO have noticed an increase in angry and dangerous drivers in recent years.
No surprise here. A new Wisconsin study shows that investing in infrastructure and policies to encourage bicycling and walking results correlates with improved bike and pedestrian safety. And not doing it correlates to worse safety figures.
New Hampshire Public Radio discusses the state of cycling in the Granite State.
Boston unveils a new Vision Zero website that allows people to individually report safety concerns pinpointed on a crowdsourced map.
An Op-Ed in the New York Daily News says lay off ebikes — which are bizarrely banned in the city — and target reckless cars. But even when they get it right, they get it wrong — cars aren’t reckless, their drivers are.
International
Columbian pro golfer Camilo Villegas is one of us, taking advantage of his “obsessive cycling disorder” to deal with stress. So evidently, cycling is the new golf, and golf is the new cycling.
Kelly Ripa is one of us, running into a bear as she rides with her family in British Columbia.
A parking cop in Toronto takes to Twitter to embarrass people who park in bike lanes. And it works.
A Toronto Op-Ed says pedestrians take precedence in complete communities, and more young people are choosing to forgo driving in favor of walking, biking and transit.
Campaigns to get more British women bicycling have paid off, with nearly three-quarter of a million more women riding than in 2013.
A man in the UK rode his bicycle three days to attend a court hearing on a charge of riding his bike on a freeway, and pled guilty to avoid another three-day trip back for a trial. Pro tip: If police try to stop you for a traffic violation, probably best not to tell them to fuck off, and refer to them by a slang term for female genitalia.
An Aussie rider says you get what you give, so don’t be the jerk who runs a red light on his bike.
Finally…
One more reason you should do your cycling outside. If you’re going to steal a high-end racing bike, at least dress for the part.
And who needs a moving van when you’ve got a bicycle?
Big ups to Bonin. Made a mistake and he owned it and fixed it.
We will see. He hasn’t fixed it all yet. Free OR affordable parking down below? If he takes away any of that free parking at a state beach he will have more problems. Still has to deal with Culver, Pershing, Jefferson. I was running on Pershing yesterday and was going faster than the cars. Pitiful. Mike “Bonehead” Bonin. What an idiot.
Indeed, the parking in the county lot is not free:
http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/dbh/docs/1004478_PARKINGLOCATIONSandFEES.pdf
As for the traffic on Pershing, Culver and Jefferson, this is a speed reduction project because of the inability of a city (in this case the City of Los Angeles) to lower speed limits due to the 85th Percentile Speed Trap Law which allows motorists to set the speed limit with their accelerator pedal and is backed by the Auto Club of Southern California and the CHP:
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/11/the-85th-percentile-folly.html
http://la.streetsblog.org/2016/06/15/legal-obstacles-to-safe-streets-california-speed-limit-laws/
http://la.streetsblog.org/2016/06/09/l-a-city-faces-devils-bargain-increase-limits-to-allow-speed-enforcement/
Bonin Quote: ““If you are one of the many people who were inconvenienced, who were late to work, or who missed a bedtime story with your toddler, I am truly sorry,” Bonin said. “We are working to make this right.”
The city had to act or the next person killed would cost the city at least $10Million, probably more since juries like to punish entities that do not respond to a known hazard.
I commend Mike Bonin for trying to balance safety of humans and wildlife against traffic slowing. He is trying. Give him a break. Imagine if you were in his shoes. Jeanette Vosburg
He is only trying now under the threat of lawsuit and recall. He scoffed at concerns when it was first implemented and these changes did NOTHING to address the safety issues that were touted as the reasons for the project in the first place.
Damned if he did, damned if he did not.
There was no other response, apart from moving the parking to beach lot, which has now happened.
SEPULVEDA CHANNEL offers SAFE ALTERNATIVE from Washington Blvd at McLaughlin TO ACCESS THE BALLONA CREEK BIKE PATH. Mike Bonin knows about this opportunity. I showed Len, his environmental rep the path. It doesn’t solve this problem but it does help bike riders in the neighborhood who want to be safe.
Finally a turn back out of delusional into actual sanity. Vista del Mar’s reversal will have to lead to Culver, Jefferson, & Pershings changing back due to the LADOT’s own words of “If we reduced VDM we had to reduce the other roads as well because they would all be affected.” A crack legal team is presenting their own words to use against them in the coming weeks. So to reverse one, they must all be reversed. No one needs recreational bike lanes for riders with $10,000 bikes on any of of these roads. Drivers need them to get to work to earn a living, take their kids to school, and go grocery shopping, etc. Proper stand along bike lanes exist within close proximity so these are just recreational excess. Plus what the bike coalitions don’t know is that with in 6 months to a year they were going to lose those lanes anyways. The city already has plans to turn them into bus lanes using the narrative “the buses aren’t running on time because of the traffic.”
Justin, did it ever occur to you that many people use bicycles for transportation to go to work, take their kids to school and go grocery shopping — and for some, it’s their only form of transportation. The only reason not many people have done it in Playa del Rey is that it hasn’t been safe.
The truth is that heavy automobile traffic has a corrosive affect on the local community, which can be reversed by making the streets more walkable and bikeable, allowing people who actually live in the area to choose to leave their cars at home to shop and eat at local businesses, or ride to work, school and the beach.
As for your legal argument, it does not logically follow that if VdM is reversed that the others must be as well. There are compelling reasons to maintain the changes on those streets. Unlike VdM, they were the result of a local community-driven process to improve safety and increase livability. They would have been reduced to one lane in each direction regardless of whether VdM was changed; the only thing that affected was the timing.
This whole idea of painting people who own cars as “bad guys”, I get it. This is politics, but its like a gnat trying to fight a Lion. Too many people own cars, no one feels or is ever going to feel guilty about it for the next 50 years. Put in public transit FIRST then try the guilt trip. Much more effective.
I’ll leave the legal up to the legal experts. I am not one. I just know they are purging the city, LADOT, and councilman’s own words on Zero Vision to present back to them as a legal argument of proof that one affects the other so if one is reversed they all need to be.
Don’t put words into my mouth. I drive, as does my wife, and virtually every bike rider I know.
The vast majority of drivers are just trying to get from here to there, just like most people on bicycles. But heavy traffic has a corrosive effect on the communities it passes through. Just because many local communities are trying to find a way to mitigate that doesn’t mean anyone is anti-car, or trying to guilt trip anyone. Just trying to make their own hometowns safer and more livable.
Neither Vista Del Mar nor Pershing/Culver/Jefferson are bicycle projects. These are speed reduction projects designed to counter the effects of the Speed Trap Law:
http://la.streetsblog.org/2016/06/09/l-a-city-faces-devils-bargain-increase-limits-to-allow-speed-enforcement/
(Which is why the speed limit on Pershing is 55 MPH by the backside of World Way).
The bike lane on Jefferson and Culver is a bike lane to nowhere. The city should be concentrating on making the Ballona Bike Path safe. And it’s away from cars! If I were on a bike I’d prefer to be in an open environment not dealing with fumes, horns, emergency vehicles etc.
Then you’d have the path to yourselves and you wouldn’t have to share the road.
Far from a bike lane to nowhere, it takes people who live in the area a safer route to shopping, work and school without having to get in their cars. And since most trips in Los Angeles are three miles or less, it provides an opportunity to do them by bicycle, removing cars from the street and making your commute that much easier.
Ballona Creek is a wonderful asset and great for people who want to get to the beach or Culver City, not so practical for anyone else. And being isolated from public view, few women are willing to ride it after dark, making it impractical for commuting much of the year.
Whats the percentage of people who use a bike everyday to get to work, take their kids to school, and grocery shop VS recreational Lance Armstrong enthusiasts? I would suspect it would be around the same number of people who do the same on rollerblades. Should add a special roller blade lane as well? At the Mar Vista meeting there was a very vocal pro bike lane gentleman standing next to me in cycle gear with is bike blocking a doorway. A police officer told he had to put the bike outside. He refused to leave it outside alone because he said it was a $10,000 bike. I asked him what the average cost of bikes that avid cyclist use in in LA and he said “$5,000 -$20,000” so the idea that the majority of people using the bike lanes are impoverished is similar to LADOT data which is…Fake news.
Bike commuter here who rides through Venice, Playa Del Rey, El Segundo, and surrounding areas 5 days a week. 120 miles per week to my job on a touring bike I got at an REI garage sale for $275. I’m vastly healthier, happy, and get to see my community everyday because of it. Just because you see lots of people with $5,000+ bikes advocating for it doesn’t mean that’s the only demographic.
If I had lived closer to bike lanes I’d have been doing this years ago. Only when I finally moved near the Ballona Trail could I even think about it. Trust me that there are a lot more people like me out there who would love to bike commute more but are not interested in a majority of that commute being without a bike path/lane due to safety concerns.
Thats great and lots of people wish they could do that but in a city like Los Angeles where your job can take you to the other side of the city and back everyday, its not feasible for the vast majority. I have to work all over this city in places I’ve sometimes never even been. Sometimes far, sometimes close. I have a 7yr old son who goes to a school outside our community so not possible to bike him. My neighbor is in a wheelchair so thats completely not an option. Unfortunately we have to cater to the vast majority and not a very very select few. I say if everyone thinks Zero Vision is so great lets vote on it. Majority wins. What’s there to lose?
What you’re not grasping is that most trips in Los Angeles are three miles or less, which makes them easily walkable and bikeable, but only if people feel safe on the streets.
And the great thing is, you don’t have to walk or ride a bike to get the benefit of that. Every person who chooses to leave their car at home when they go to work, school, shopping, dining or running errands, means one less car in your way on the road.
So making it safer for people to walk or bike means your commute gets that much faster and safer as well. It’s not majority wins, it’s a win/win for everyone.
“most trips in Los Angeles are three miles or less” where are you getting this data from? Thats completely fake news. Its from LADOT then its totally fake. They are performance art. A marketing arm of the local government. I mean maybe thats true in Playa after Zero Vision was put in because everyone is trapped in a 3 mile radius. I would buy that.
That comes from the Los Angeles Mobility Plan 2035, which is the plan governing LA traffic planning for the next 18 years, and based on numerous traffic studies over the past several decades.
Again, it is not fake news simply because you refuse to believe it.
Oh god that thing is not real. Has so much miscalculated data in it. Its a propaganda piece. The whole Zero Vision is going to be scrapped. Just heard the fed government and current administration’s DOT might be getting involved and overriding the whole thing. Maybe if they spent the next 10 – 20 years doing a study with an independent company and had real data they could figure something out. I would back that plan. A 20 year study, real public transit, then implement some changes. It’s great in a city like Barcelona, but unfortunately does not work in LA.
And on what, pray tell, do you base your perception that it’s a propaganda piece? Have you conducted any traffic studies? Or do you simply choose not to believe it because it doesn’t fit your preconceived opinions?
It was based on a 10-year public process, driven from the local community up, which I and tens of thousands of Angelenos participated in.
As for Vision Zero, it will not be scrapped. It is a movement that is spreading across the country as countless people realize that too many of our mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters and brothers are dying needlessly on the street. I’ve lost two loved ones myself, and refuse to lose one more.
And the federal government has no authority to override traffic safety decisions made by state and local governments, which is a right granted to them by the constitution. The US only has authority over interstate commerce, which is unaffected by local Vision Zero programs.
Now, no offense, but I have work to do, so I’ll leave the last word in this conversation to you. While we may disagree, I wish you well, and a safe and easy commute.
Justin, you are pushing your view of the world as the normal view when in-fact everyone is different. Just because your commute doesn’t allow it shouldn’t make everyone else have to suffer the same fate. Same with your neighbor which is unfortunate but by that logic simply because there are blind people we should not allow anyone to drive. That’s a bit much in my opinion and I’d imagine either you’d agree or state that it was an irrelevant argument because it’s actually a decent argument against your logic…
Heck, my partner can’t ride to work though she wants to simply because of time + no safe route. She certainly would whenever possible if there was a safe route. So people close to me aren’t immune or special enough to always have a job + life that allows bike commuting. It doesn’t mean they don’t support it for others.
So exactly as you stated “…We have to cater to the vast majority…” which I agree with and that is a diversified majority where many want to drive, many want to bike, and many want to take public transit. I believe everyone should be able to do this safely. Simple as that.
He was wrong, The average value of bicycles used in Los Angeles, and anywhere else, is well under $500. The overwhelming majority of bicycles stolen here don’t even reach the $1,000 minimum value for felony theft.
As for how many people ride everyday, the people in colorful spandex may be the most visible, but again, the overwhelming majority are just people using their bikes to get from here to there. 67% of people in Los Angeles have said they would ride their bikes more if they felt safer on the streets, a category known as “interested but concerned.”
You don’t judge the need for a bridge by how many people swim across the river.
And no, it is not fake news simply because you choose not to believe it, Mr. Trump. Try to look past your own nose and see the world from someone else’s perspective.
The ability to accommodate the free use (and storage) of automobiles by the City of Los Angeles is limited. But again, this was not a bicycle project, it was a maintaining of free but safe parking project, and a reduction of speeds in the Playa business areas by the only means available under California’s pro-motoring laws.
The parking on the beach will not be free and may not be avaialble 24/7.
What’s the percentage of people who crossed from Presidio to Lime Point by any means before the Golden Gate Bridge was opened?
So women would rather take their chances being struck by a car at night than possibly being assaulted on a secluded bike path at night?Both sound dangerous and should be avoided.So I agree with you on this. They should patrol the bike path with police and remove the dangerous lanes on Jefferson and Culver.
Well, this is what any number of women have told me. Oddly, they’d rather risk getting hit by a car than risk getting raped, or worse.
A woman died riding her bike on PCH a few years ago because she preferred taking her chances in traffic to riding a dark bike path on the beach out of site from other people.
That is scary. I can see that too. I’ve ridden the path at night. Seems like that’s something that should be addressed for bike safety. Women or men shouldn’t be in fear of riding a bike path in our neighborhood at a reasonable hour at night.
Agreed. There’s also been a longstanding problem with bicyclists getting mugged on the Ballona Creek trail, even in broad daylight, dating back to at least 1990.
I’ve tried to work with the LAPD, LA County Sheriff’s, and Culver City police to increase patrols on the path, as well as calling for lighting along the trail. But haven’t gotten anywhere yet.
Exactly. The Culver Jefferson bike lanes finally give a safe route to cycle from the beach to Playa Vista. The Ballona Creek trail does not provide this as there is no safe way to cross the river. Thus the new lanes give the opportunity for playa Vista residents to cycle to the beach and for South Bay commuters such as me to safely cycle to a job in Playa vista a couple of days a week rather than driving every day.
Driver frustration did not erupt from “mere inconveniences.” It erupted from sudden, significant, under-announced changes to major commuter roadways which resulted in long delays, road rage and an uptick in accidents. No matter which side of this debate you support, springing major, under-published changes on either group should not be tolerated. The task force is what should have occurred in the first place. Kudos to Mike Bonin for realizing the mistake and undertaking a course correction.
No argument from me that announcement of the timing should have been done prior to the road changes. There were valid reasons for making the change as soon as possible, but I agree that more should have been done to inform the public once the decision had been made.
Bicycle commuters being a minority, thus experience sadly what other minority groups deal with also; without regard to race, religion, sexual orientation, or economic status. 🙁
This was not a bicycle project.
Exactly.
Councilman Cedillo has it right: the bicycle enthusiasts represent a small, but vocal, minority of LA City/County residents, with an impact on local politicians, so far, way beyond their actual numbers. The bicycle enthusiasts agenda is corrosive to the overall quality of life for the great majority of residents.
If not riding their bikes (EVERYWHERE TO DO EVERYTHING) apparently they are lobbying, bribing, and trying to undermine the democracy of America. The good news is there is so few of them and they mistakenly woke up the much greater numbers by us witnessing the unsafe and environmentally unfriendly “Zero Vision” project with the lane reductions. They will go down and be defeated soon enough. This will be as easy for us as taking the chain off a bike. The automobile lobbyist have already been contacted. They have lots of money, time, and power. Bye Bye unhealthy, unsafe, and environmentally destructive Zero Vision and road diets.
No offense, but this is one of the most ridiculous comments I’ve seen.
Tell me, where, exactly, are all these bribes coming from? And how is it that average Americans asking their elected representatives for safe places to ride a bike undermining democracy? That is democracy.
Studies consistently show that roughly two-thirds of Americans would like to ride their bikes if they felt safer on the streets. That’s not a small minority, it’s the overwhelming majority of Americans. That’s who is “lobbying” their elected officials.
And maybe you can explain to me how a proven program designed to eliminate traffic fatalities is unsafe? That is a complete contradiction in in terms. You might also consider that the goal of the program is to keep you and your loved ones alive, and not become one of the 40,000 Americans needlessly killed on our streets every year.
Or do you think that number is acceptable — and you’re willing to sacrifice the ones you love to keep zooming along? Or more likely, crawling along in LA congestion, that will inevitably get worse as more people move here every year.
I’ve already lost two people I love to traffic collisions. I’m damned if I’m going to lose another one without a fight.
As for your silly last sentence, studies have also shown that every minute spent riding a bicycle adds to your expected lifespan by reducing your risk of obesity, diabetes and heart disease. And every minute spent in a car reduces your expected lifespan by contributing to the exact same causes.
So tell me. Which one is unhealthy?
Meanwhile, studies show those “unsafe” road diets reduce injury collisions as much as 47% — improving safety for everyone — including you. Which doesn’t exactly sound unsafe to me. But what do I know?
And as for environmentally destructive, which is more harmful to the environment — cars, or people walking or on bikes? You seem to be confusing the problem with the solution.
http://visionzeronetwork.org/safety-over-speed/
As noted in my comment to Justin below, studies in Los Angeles have shown the same thing our studies across the US have shown. That 67% of Angelenos would like to ride their bikes more often if they actually felt safer on the streets. That’s 8 million people in LA County.
Doesn’t sound like a small minority to me.
And yes, making neighborhoods more walkable, bikeable and livable sure is corrosive to the overall quality of life. That must be why safety improves, retail sales go up, business vacancies go down, and residential properties increase in value when Complete Streets projects go in.
Sure sounds corrosive to me.
LANDMARK NATIONAL STUDY URGES SAFETY OVER SPEED
Vision Zero cities laud call for action to save 10,000 lives annually
http://visionzeronetwork.org/safety-over-speed/
SEPULVEDA CHANNEL offers SAFE ALTERNATIVE from Washington Blvd at McLaughlin TO ACCESS THE BALLONA CREEK BIKE PATH. Mike Bonin knows about this opportunity. I showed Len, his environmental rep the path. It doesn’t solve this problem but it does help bike riders in the neighborhood who want to be safe.
I’m not aware of a bike path along that creek. Are you calling for one to be built, or do you know something I don’t?
The open to the sky Sepulveda Channel is just over one mile from Washington Blvd and McLaughlin to where it connects with or spills into Ballona Creek Bike Path / Fllod Control Channel. There is an easement on both sides. Department of Transportation even had a $400,000 cost estimate. Contact me, Jeanette at 310-721-3512 or email me at jeanette@saveballona.org I will send info., a map and photos. Culver City has expressed interest and Mike Bonin had Len on his staff meet with me. This project needs a champion. Interested?
Haha. So where in your stat does it say that those people polled that “are dying to ride their bike if they only felt safe” would feel that way at the expense of creating loss of car lands resulting in gridlock, road rage, communities enraged at eachother, businesses suffering, more accidents, and more cars burning gas and expelling exhaust as they idle? I’ll wait till a real independent party polls every single person in Los Angeles and the result comes up the same. Sorry you can’t win this but keep trying. Biking is fun. I’m an avid cyclist but I’m also not living in a fantasy land that people who live in Santa Monica who work downtown are just jumping at the chance to ride their bikes to work everyday. Time to get out the small minority of the small bike lobby coalitions and enter the real world don’t you think?
So, the one relying on actual facts isn’t living in the real world, and the one who relies strictly on his own preconceived views is?
I know we’ve entered bizarro world this year, but still.
And no, most people who live in Santa Monica don’t want to ride their bikes to work downtown, even though I know some who do, as well as some who go the other way. But the overwhelming majority of trips taken by car are three miles or less, which is easily bikeable, and often, walkable.
The water’s fine here in the real world. Maybe it’s time to take off your blinders and jump in.
“Actual facts” LOL. Still no answer for where the survey is that asks the question “would you be in favor of losing car lanes for safer bike lanes?” Let’s see those numbers. Also why can’t the city of LA vote on it? If it’s so popular like you say and the majority of people are dying to stop driving in a car and ride their bikes then you have nothing to lose right?
The people did vote on it. It’s called a representative democracy, and Vision Zero was adopted unanimously by the city council.
If you want to pay the multi-million dollar cost of staging an election, be my guest. I don’t want to waste my tax money.
As for actual facts, unless and until you conduct a scientifically valid study to contradict it, those are the facts. And anything else is just opinions.
And that’s a fact.
Exactly. Thank you! No vote by the citizens. A group of politicians that are known to line their pockets in handouts. Thank you for proving that it’s not a program the majority wants.
And I do agree with you on those facts. That they are one sided facts for marking purpose of Zero Vision. Glad we could come together on this. You seem like a good guy and I like your honesty.
So, you don’t believe in American democracy, and you don’t believe in facts.
I’d say this conversation is over. I wish wish you well, and stay safe on the roads.
Justin,
The amount of death caused by automobiles now has become a public health issue, as has the lack of activity which leads to obesity and cardio-pulmonary disease.
Which is why it is actually the medical industry that is leading the fight for these changes. Do we vote on whether we should respond to epidemics?