Archive for Bicycle Safety

Update: Whittier cyclist killed when 78-year old driver backs over her in parking lot

“She looked real happy this morning.”

That’s how her stepmother described 26-year old Rosie Manzanares on the last day of her life. Just a few hours later, she lay dead in a parking lot, victim of a 78-year old driver who lost control of her car after visiting the hairdresser.

The collision occurred around 1:30 pm in the parking lot behind Celebrity Burgers, 11270 Whittier Blvd in Whittier.

According to the L.A. Times, the Toyota driven by Angelica Cuevas accelerated unexpectedly as she was backing out of her parking space, hitting Manzanares before coming to a stop on top of her.

No explanation is given for why the car accelerated; maybe the car malfunctioned, or maybe Cuevas panicked and hit the gas instead of the brake after seeing Manzanares behind her.

Either way, an innocent woman is dead. And an older woman has to spend the last years of her life knowing she took another.

It’s likely to be a very long time before either family — the driver’s or the victim’s — will have another happy morning.

This is the 11th cycling fatality in Southern California this year, and the second in Los Angeles County — both of which occurred in Whittier.

My heart and prayers go out to Rosie, and her family and loved ones.

Update: According to the Whittier Daily News, Cuevas had stopped her car halfway out of the parking space, then inexplicably accelerated as Manzanares rode behind her; Manzanares was pronounced dead at the scene.

Relatives say she had borrowed a bike in order to return a bracelet. Her father said she was getting help for a bipolar condition, and was in the process of straightening her life out.

Now she’ll never have the chance.

A little this, a little that — NBC’s Tracy Morgan doors a cyclist, a killer Santa Cruz driver gets a sore wrist

A few quick notes before I hit the ground rolling on what promises to be a gorgeous day.

……..

Comedian, please.

Tracy Morgan, star of NBC sitcom 30 Rock, clearly doesn’t get it after dooring a cyclist in New York yesterday.

After flinging open the door of his car in the path of a bike delivery man, Morgan blamed the rider for wearing black. And made it clear that the incident was no big deal.

And in all honesty, it probably wasn’t.

To him.

According to the New York Post, Morgan was quoted as saying “This kind of stuff happens all the time in the city. I grew up in the city. I’ve been dealing with this stuff for years. Brooklyn-born and -raised, Bed-Stuy do or die.”

Unfortunately, he’s right. Whether he’s talking about cyclists getting doored, or celebs who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.

Meanwhile, E Online seems far more concerned about the comedian’s health than the cyclist he sent to the hospital with minor injuries.

At least future Gotham bike riders will face less risk of dooring from the city’s cabs, as the next generation cab design approved by the city will have sliding doors to protect those around them.

Maybe we can get Tracy Morgan to trade his Jaguar for one.

……..

While we’re on the subject of New York, local cyclists are tired of police blaming the victim and demand better protection and investigations from the NYPD. Meanwhile, a bike riding transit official clashes with a cop who tried to stop him from riding in a no-access area, and tries to pull rank by pretending to be a police commissioner.

……..

Pennsylvania cyclists get protection from a new four-foot passing law as of the first of this month; at least one driver can’t grasp the concept that it’s okay to wait until it’s safe to pass.

That seemed to be the rationalization our own governor used in vetoing last year’s three-foot passing bill, assuming that drivers would mindlessly slam on their brakes to slow down to pass cyclists at less than three feet, rather that wait a few seconds to pass safely.

Now he may get another chance to be less of an idiot do the right thing, as a new three-foot passing bill heads to committee — this time without the driver-appeasing clause Gov. Brown objected to last year.

……..

In a bizarre case from Edinburgh, a cyclist is slightly injured after jumping on the hood of a car during a roadway dispute, then holding on for dear life as the driver swerves from side-to-side and brakes repeatedly in an attempt to throw him off.

Note to cyclists — no matter how smart it may seem at the time, don’t climb onto the vehicle of the driver you’re arguing with.

Never mind getting killed. You could get strip searched.

……..

A Santa Cruz-area driver gets a whopping two years in jail for running down a cyclist and fleeing the scene, leaving his victim to die on the side of the road.

Can someone please explain to me how that isn’t murder?

The collision may have been unintended, but the decision to let his victim bleed out in the street was purely intentional.

Instead, Elliot Dess gets a slap on the wrist, while an innocent bike rider got the death penalty.

If the laws we have now don’t give prosecutors the tools they need to address crimes like this, then we need to change the law so future heartless killers will get the punishment they deserve.

Two lousy years.

Give me a break.

……..

San Diego cyclists are becoming a political force.

That’s something that should soon be happening here, as the LACBC is in the process of forming a political committee to help influence the election of bike-friendly civic leaders; more details soon.

……..

California’s oldest bike racer has another two titles under his belt. In an impressive performance, 93-year old Gordy Shields of El Cajon — soon to be 94 — won the state championship for his age group in both the 20k time trial and the criterium.

Of course, he was the only competitor in his age group.

But still.

……..

Finally, medical science at last discovers the discomfort many women riders have complained about for decades, and realizes that maybe it wasn’t all in their heads after all.

Meanwhile, Gothamist wonders if this, combined with reports of erectile dysfunction among some male riders, means cyclists will soon go extinct.

Uh, no.

Dramatic drop in SoCal cycling deaths; Santa Monica police to focus on bad bicyclists behavior in April

Let’s take the good news first.

Only one bike rider appears to have been killed in the entire seven-county Southern California region last month.

According to my records, the only March cycling fatality was 29-year old Pacific Beach resident David Ortiz. As you may recall, Ortiz was originally blamed for riding against traffic, when it actually turned out that he was riding with traffic on his way to work, and was the apparent victim of a hit-and-run driver.

How police could possibly make that mistake is beyond me.

But that’s it.

One death is still one too many, but a single fatality in a region that averages nearly per month is a remarkable improvement. And it compares very favorably to last year when five riders died on SoCal streets in the month of March.

In fact, if we exclude the intentional murder of Corona cyclist Herman Armando Villalobos, the nine cycling fatalities so far this year are exactly half of the 18 that were recorded in the region in the first three months of last year.

As for the reason for that improvement, your guess is as good as mine.

Maybe after a horrible year in 2011, in which 71 cyclists lost their lives in traffic-related wrecks — and another nine were murdered by gunfire — we’re returning to the levels of recent years, with 55 fatalities in 2008 and 2009, and an official count of 48 in 2010.

Or maybe drivers and bicyclists are finally figuring out how to safely coexist on the asphalt.

My fear is that there may be cycling fatalities that just aren’t making the news; at least two occurred last year that were never reported in the media. Or that Google’s recently revised algorithms may mean some stories just don’t rise to the level necessary to show up in my daily news searches.

Although the readers of this site are very good at ensuring important stories make my radar, for which I am very grateful.

Still, just one death for the entire month of March is good news.

Because one death is very close to none.

And it proves it just may be possible to achieve a bicycling Vision Zero, in which no cyclists die on the streets of Southern California.

And if that isn’t the goal of every elected official, it should be.

……..

Now let’s correct a mistake I made over the weekend.

Pacific Palisades’ George Wolfberg — who somehow manages the remarkable feat of flying beneath the radar of most local cyclists despite being one of the area’s most vital bike advocates — forwarded an email to me from a representative of the Santa Monica police, noting that they will be focusing on law-breaking cyclists in the month of April.

And in my rush to get out the door on Saturday, I promptly tweeted that it was from the LAPD. Only to have that promptly retweeted by a dozen or so people.

So imagine my shame when I got back home and read the email again.

Mea culpa. Maxima mea culpa.

My apologies to George, the SMPD, LAPD, and everyone who read or forwarded that mistaken message. My cheeks have been red ever since, and not just from trying to ride in our recent winds.

So here’s the real story.

Every month, the Santa Monica police department focuses on specific behaviors that’s are primary causes of traffic collisions in the Westside’s city by the bay.

And this month, it’s our turn.

For the month of April, SaMo police will be focused on violations by scofflaw cyclists.

That doesn’t mean they’re going to be targeting cyclists. But it does mean that if they see you break the law, you’re more likely to get stopped — and possibly ticketed — than you might be when they’re more focused on other matters.

So take it as fair warning.

If you’re riding in Santa Monica, make a point of signaling, observing the right-of-way and stopping for stop signs for the next 29 days. And especially red lights — even on those T-intersections like the ones on Ocean Ave, where many riders seem to assume there’s no need to stop.

I’m sure the SMPD would be more than happy to explain otherwise.

And stay off the sidewalk.

It’s illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk in Santa Monica. Even if they don’t post it so riders from out of town might actually know what the local law is.

Which seems sort of like a town creating a speed trap by imposing a low speed limit, then never informing drivers that they need to slow down before writing tickets.

Meanwhile, the CHP is leading a statewide crackdown on distracted drivers this month.

Now if they could keep it up the other 11 months of the year, our streets might actually get a little safer.

……..

One other bit of interesting news in the email George Wolfberg forwarded to me.

In the first three months of this year, Santa Monica police have investigated 37 traffic collisions involving cyclists. And found that drivers have been responsible for the overwhelming majority of those collisions.

Shocking, I know.

Or at least it would be to a lot of bike hating drivers out there, who seem to blame scofflaw cyclists for every collision involving a bike.

In fact, through the first part of March, SaMo police found cyclists at fault in just 31% of the cases — a far cry from last year, when then Chief Jackman blamed riders for being at fault in over three-quarter of bike collisions.

Either we’re riding a lot better, or the SMPD has gotten a better understanding of bike law and how to investigate bike-involved collisions over the past year.

……..

Finally, proof that it’s not just average cyclists who have to worry about getting run down by cars.

Top American cyclist Levi Leipheimer was forced to withdraw from this week’s Tour of the Basque Country after he was hit from behind while training in Spain on Sunday.

Fortunately, he does not seem to be seriously injured.

Leipheimer reportedly didn’t see or hear the car coming before it hit him, describing the collision as “super scary” and saying he feels lucky to be alive. He’s returning to the U.S. today for further examination.

Thanks to David Huntsman for the heads-up.

Forget what I said — San Diego salmon cyclist wasn’t, killer driver who supposedly stopped actually didn’t

First he was wrong.

Then he was right.

Sort of like me in trying to cover this story.

Either way, San Diego cyclist David Ortiz is still dead, victim of the three cars that took his life a week ago today.

In one of the most amazing turnarounds of a collision narrative that I’ve ever seen, the 29-year old Ortiz was originally blamed for riding against traffic when he was hit by a Ford Expedition, followed in quick succession by two other vehicles. He was pronounced dead at the scene, his body trapped beneath the final car that hit him.

Now it turns out that the driver of that Expedition fled the scene — something that was not only completely left out of the initial reports, but actually contradicted by statements from police.

The San Diego Union-Tribune quoted a police spokesman as saying the first driver stopped at the scene, and clearly implied that she may not have been at fault.

It appears that he was first hit by a black Ford Expedition whose driver had the rising sun in her eyes as she drove up a slight incline on east Balboa, police Sgt. Jim Reschke said.

“The gal in the SUV – she never saw him,” Reschke said. “She felt the collision and pulled over.”

Yet it now turns out that she didn’t stop. Or if she did, she evidently left without providing her identification, as NBC San Diego reports that the driver fled the scene.

According to Bike San Diego, San Diego police officials have also issued a retraction to their earlier statements that Ortiz had been riding against traffic. Comments on the initial report here indicate that Ortiz was actually riding eastbound — with traffic — on his way to work when he was killed, rather than westbound as police had said.

The NBC report also indicates that his body came to stop in the area where he should have been riding, although they note that doesn’t necessarily mean that was where he was when the SUV initially hit him.

And as it turned out, despite initial reports, he was wearing a helmet after all. Not that it would have made a damn bit of difference under the circumstances.

In other words, aside from the actual location of the collision and the number of vehicles involved, virtually every important detail in the initial reports from the SDPD was wrong.

Yet they seem to have been tripping all over themselves to blame the victim, from incorrectly claiming he was riding in the wrong direction to offering statements — that originated God only knows where — to exonerate a killer hit-and-run driver.

Not that they haven’t done that before.

Un-effing-believable.

The San Diego police have a lot of explaining to do on this one.

Distracted Driving: Playing a Risk for Drivers and Cyclists

I’ve been otherwise occupied by out-of-town guests this past weekend.

Not to mention dealing with a 17+ hour internet outage, which is why you didn’t see a post this morning, and I haven’t gotten around to answering my email yet.

Thanks, Verizon. 

Fortunately, Brooke Kerwin has stepped into the breach, offering her thoughts on one of my favorite topics, the ever-increasing risk posed by distracted driving.

And distracted cycling.

……..

There’s no question that automobiles and drivers play a large risk to cyclists every day. In the last few years, technology has certainly had an effect on society, in both a positive and negative light. When it comes to transportation, technology had served as a major distraction to both drivers and cyclists everywhere.

In 2012, smart phones and other tech devices serve as a risk for those using them on their bikes, as well as a risk from people who are driving distracted. The issue of distracted driving is one that is at the forefront for a number of different bicycling advocacy groups right now. While the risk to other drivers is often spotlighted, the risk that is presented to cyclists is often overlooked.

Personally, I can say that I’m guilty of certain times becoming distracted both on a bicycle and operating an automobile. With the increase in accidents, deaths and general injuries related to distracted driving in the past few years, I’ve tried to be more cautious in both forms of transportation. There’s no doubt that this has been the general consensus, yet there’s still plenty of awareness to be had and people to reach.

Legislation is a good step forward in getting awareness of the ground and though the ultimate goal should be a nationwide restriction, it’s likely to continue to stay in the hands of individual states for the near future.

Just as many things that go back and forth between the driving and biking communities, one issue has developed in the form of whether or not texting laws should include cyclists. As someone who both drives and rides a bike, I believe it should. Texting and distracted driving have certainly played a role in a number of different injuries and accidents involving cyclists, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t look to protect cyclists as well.

Already in some large cities such as Philadelphia, legislation has crossed over to include a texting ban while operating a vehicle or a bicycle. The next great move is likely to be here in California, which is a good thing because being one of the larger states in the union, what is done here is likely to be looked at closely by other states.

It’s my general thought that distracted driving and biking can only begin to come down with a combination of things coming together in the future.  It won’t just be limited to increasing legislation and influence from larger states and cities. There will also need to be continuing work to communicate the dangers that distractions and texting can cause to both drivers and cyclists.

……..

The California legislature passed a bill last year to increase penalties for distracted drivers, while banning handheld cell phone use by cyclists, which is currently legal — despite what some websites might say.

Unfortunately, the law was vetoed by Governor Brown, who said he thinks the currently penalty is strict enough to stop most drivers from using handheld phones.

Clearly, he doesn’t get out enough.

I’ve counted ratios ranging anywhere from one in 10 to one in four drivers blissfully ignoring the ban at various times — including uniformed police officers on patrol. And nearly been hit by cyclists using theirs, as well.

Meanwhile, Chicago recently banned cyclists from texting or speaking on a handheld device while riding.

And the National Transportation Safety Board has recommended that cell phone use be banned entirely for all drivers, handheld or otherwise.

Thanks to Brooke Kerwin for the contribution.

Breaking news — police make arrests in murder of San Diego cyclist Jordan Hickey

Finally, a little good news from our neighbor to the south.

Just over eleven months ago, 21-year old Jordan Hickey was shot and killed while riding his bike in the Lincoln Acres neighborhood of National City, southeast of downtown San Diego.

The developmentally disabled man was returning home from visiting his girlfriend, and just blocks from his home when he was gunned down.

For nearly a year, police had no suspects or any motive for the shooting.

That changed last month, when Hickey’s mother and long-time girlfriend appealed for anyone with information to step forward.

Following leads developed as a result of that appeal, San Diego Sheriff Bill Gore today announced the arrest of 21-year old Juan Ignacio Gomez and 19-year old Humberto Emanuel Galvez. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, while both men are associated with a gang, they did not appear to know their victim and the case does not appear to be gang related.

The paper also notes that it did not look like Hickey was robbed; no motive was given for the shooting.

Of the nine fatal shootings of Southern California cyclists last year, this is the only one that occurred outside of Los Angeles County, and only the second which did not appear to be a result of gang violence.

Update — salmon San Diego cyclist killed after being hit by multiple vehicles

You knew it couldn’t last.

After going the first three weeks of March without a single SoCal cycling fatality, San Diego’s KFMB-8 reports that a bicyclist has been killed this morning.

The rider, identified only as a white male, was traveling against traffic on eastbound Balboa Avenue at the I-805 onramp shortly after 7 am when he was hit by a Ford Expedition, followed by two other vehicles.

While facing traffic may seem safer to some people, it dramatically reduces reaction times while increasing the force of impact in any collision. Despite the presence of either a bike lane or painted shoulder on Balboa, drivers would have had no way of anticipating a cyclist riding the wrong way on the roadway, with virtually no time to react before hitting the rider.

This is the 10th cycling fatality in Southern California this year and the 2nd in San Diego, following a disastrous year in which 12 riders were killed in San Diego County in 2011 — nearly twice the county’s six-year average of 6.8 cycling deaths per year.

Update: The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the first driver to hit the victim said she had the sun in her eyes as she entered the roadway, and never saw the rider; she pulled over after feeling the impact. The paper also notes that the victim was killed on impact and wasn’t wearing a helmet.

Note to Union-Tribune — bike helmets are designed to offer protection at impact speeds up to just 12.5 mph; at speeds significantly above that, it doesn’t really matter whether the rider is wearing a helmet or a propeller beanie. Not to mention the rider was hit three separate times, by three separate vehicles; if you can find a helmet that would make a damn bit of difference under those circumstances, let us all know so we can buy one.

Update 2: The Union-Tribune identifies the victim as 29-year old David Ortiz of Pacific Beach; thanks to billsd for the link.

Comments below suggest that the police got it wrong, pointing out that Ortiz would have been riding east from Pacific Beach to his work, rather than the other way around — which means he would have been on the right side of the road riding with traffic. 

And that would make it a completely different matter; instead of the rider being at fault, the first driver who hit him should bear responsibility for breaking the basic speed law by driving too fast for conditions; if she couldn’t see, she should have slowed down until she could.

Update 3: Bike San Diego offers a good follow-up on this case, agreeing with the commenters that Ortiz had been riding with traffic, rather than against it. And suggesting that this may be yet another case of San Diego police jumping to a false conclusion.

My prayers and sympathy for David Ortiz and his family and loved ones.

California traffic deaths continue to drop, but OC bike fatality stats just don’t add up

Evidently, 2010 was a very good year for Orange County cyclists.

Or maybe not.

According to official statistics released recently by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, only three cyclists were killed in the county in 2010.

This in a county that averages one bicycling fatality a month. And one that suffered 21 bike deaths just five years ago, in 2006.

Judging by the stats, the county has shown a remarkable — or perhaps miraculous — improvement in bicycle safety.

Then again, things aren’t always what they seem.

Overall, the state of California showed continued improvements in roadway safety, with the total traffic fatalities in the state dropping from 4,240 in 2006 to 2,715 in 2010 — a decrease of over 1,500 in just five years.

Then again, one death is one too many.

And 2,715, while much better than previous years, still reflects the ongoing carnage on streets, as far too many people leave their homes or jobs, and never return again.

I’ll leave it to others to speculate why we’ve seen such a dramatic drop in motorist deaths.

But just imagine how much that figure could be improved if we could just get people to stay the hell away from their cars when they’re under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Or leave their damn cell phones and other distractions behind once they slide behind the wheel.

Although fighting distracted driving looks like a losing battle as manufacturers seem intent on building distraction into their dashboards in order to bring that death rate right back up.

You have to scroll down to the middle of the NHTSA’s page for California before information on bicycling fatalities finally appears.

Surprisingly, even that shows significant improvement over the last five years, with a drop from 141 cyclists killed on California streets in 2006 to 99 in 2010. That matches the total for 2009, although the percentage of the total traffic fatalities represent by cyclists rose from 3% to 4% as other traffic fatalities dropped even more.

Then again, that number may not be entirely accurate. Because a breakdown of the totals on a countywide basis shows one highly questionable total.

And yes, I’m looking at you, OC.

To put those figures in perspective, we can add in last year’s unofficial totals from my own records, along with an average for the six-year period.

As you can see, the totals for 2010 pretty much fall in line with the six-year average, even though several counties showed a dramatic increase for last year.

With one glaring exception.

Remarkably, Orange County experienced, by far, the greatest improvement in the state, dropping to the lowest rate per capita (pdf) of any county in the California reporting even a single death, with just 0.10 cycling fatalities per 100,000 population.

By comparison, OC reported .37 bike deaths per 100,000 population in 2009, while L.A. showed .22 for both 2009 and 2010.

Maybe it’s a fluke.

Maybe the county did have an exceptionally good year. Maybe far fewer cyclists really did die on OC streets than might otherwise have been expected.

The problem is, at least two cyclists died after being hit by cars on Orange County streets that weren’t included in that total. Published news reports indicated that at least five cyclists died as a result of traffic collisions in the county that year.

In order to clarify the situation, I downloaded the entire list of 1318 bicycling collisions in Orange County from the CHP’s SWITRS database — every bike-involved collision that was reported to police in the county in 2010.

And like the FARS data, it showed just three fatalities within the county.

  • 4/20/10, Beach Blvd & LaHabra Blvd, La Habra, 49F
  • 7/15/10, Spyglass Hill CT, Newport Beach, 35M
  • 12/22/10, Brookhurst & Villa Pacific Dr, Huntington Beach, 69M

Those dates, locations and ages correspond to the tragic deaths of Annette Ferrin-Rogers, Michael Nine and Jurgen Ankenbrand.

The list also showed 59 other collisions in which a cyclist was severely injured.

Of those, two corresponded to fatal collisions that had been reported in the press:

  • 8/3/10, Newport Coast and RT 73, Newport Beach, 65M
  • 11/17/10, Walnut and Browning Avenues, Tustin, 22M

The first matches up with Dan Crain, who died 12 days after he was hit by a car, and Marco Acuapan, who lingered in a coma until April of last year following the hit-and-run collision that eventually took his life.

Maybe the problem is that they initially survived the collision, only to die days or months after the initial impact.

It could be argued that Dan Crain died as a result of the surgeries he was subjected to following his collision; however, those surgeries were performed to treat injuries he received in collision and would not have been necessary otherwise. Meanwhile, Acuapan’s death was a direct, if somewhat delayed, result of the collision that put him in a coma until the day he died.

Maybe Orange County authorities are splitting hairs by excluding their deaths.

But that appears exactly the argument Orange County is making by excluding their deaths from the county’s reported fatalities. Even though it’s hard to argue that Crain and Acuapan might not still be here if they hadn’t both been hit by cars.

Which makes me wonder if there were other deaths that year that we don’t know about. In the absence of any other news reports — and trust me, I’ve looked — we can only hope that no other deaths are hidden among the other 57 severely injured cyclists included in the SWITRS data that never made the news.

After all, it’s only in the last year or so that the press has started taking cycling collisions seriously as bicycling gains in popularity and riders press for more accurate reporting; in years past, it wasn’t unusual for cycling deaths to go virtually unnoticed by the mainstream press.

But even if you count all five fatalities, instead of just the three that were officially reported, 2010 would seem to be an exceptionally good year for Orange County cyclists. And by far, the county’s safest year on recent record.

Sadly, though, it’s not one local authorities can much take credit for; it appears to be a fluke, as cycling fatalities bounced right back with at least 13 deaths the following year.

And just three months into this year, Orange County has already seen three cyclists killed in traffic collisions — as well as a fourth who may have died of a heart attack as a result of a fall while riding, or perhaps the other way around.

Clearly, the county has a lot of work to do to make their streets safe for all users.

Regardless of what may or may not have occurred two years ago.

*Based on primarily on published news stories, as well as CHP reports.

Drunken street racers critically injure Apple Valley cyclist; both drivers under arrest

In a case tragically reminiscent of the street racing death of pro cyclist Jorge Alvarado, an Apple Valley cyclist has been critically injured after getting struck by a drunken street racer.

According to the Victorville Daily Press, the victim, who has not been publicly identified, was riding on the north shoulder of Bear Valley Road near Algonquin Road around 2:50 pm Sunday. A car came off a dirt road and hit the rider, seriously injuring him; an aerial view shows several dirt roads in the immediate area.

Witnesses report that two drivers had been racing when the rider got caught between them; both were arrested for driving under the influence causing injury.

At last report, the victim was still in critical condition after being airlifted to a hospital.

My prayers to for the cyclist for a full and fast recovery.

Thanks to Dj Wheels for the heads-up.

There are no safe streets for cyclists

Yesterday, I received an email from a man who had moved with his wife from Portland to South Pasadena.

They had chosen South Pas, at least in part, because it appeared to offer the most rideable streets in the area. Yet in less than a year, he’d suffered two minor right hook collisions.

His point was that riding in the L.A. area is a completely different experience than riding in Portland. And that local communities need to do more to make other forms of transportation besides motor vehicles a priority.

He’s right.

While South Pasadena has recognized the problem, and is actually doing something about it, a lot more has to be done throughout the county to make cycling safer for every rider.

Though not everyone seems to be getting that message.

The LACBC affiliate chapter BikeSGV reports that the Arcadia City Council decided this week not to develop a bike plan — in part because the city’s Mayor Pro Tem doesn’t think bikes are a legitimate form of transportation.

Vincent Chang

Just got back from a disappointing Arcadia City council meeting where Mayor Pro Tem Robert C. Harbicht took the lead to nix a contract with a bike plan consultant to prepare a bike plan for the city. Unfortunately, the rest of the council, including the Mayor (who established a city “mayors bike ride”) went along. Harbict stated he had concerns about federal funding for bike access in general as he didn’t believe cycling can be a legitimate form of alternate transportation. Ironically, both Harbicht and the Mayor claims to be avid cyclists.

I don’t know whether that reflects ignorance of the potential utility of their preferred form of recreation, or the dangers of riding in their own city.

Either way, they’ve failed the residents of their city by denying them the opportunity to ride in greater convenience and safety, whether for recreation or safety.

Then again, the problem could be that they’re “avid” cyclists, as some — though not all — Vehicular Cyclists actively oppose the sort of infrastructure preferred by the overwhelming majority of riders.

They believe that every rider — even the most unskilled, slow or risk-conscious cyclist — is safer riding in the traffic lane ahead of oncoming, often high speed, vehicles than in a separate lane devoted to bikes.

In fact, John Forester, the father of the VC movement, recently commented on the New York Times website that “nobody has yet “create[d] safe bike lanes”; we don’t know how to do it.”

I think many riders in the Netherlands — and even in New York — would beg to differ.

It’s a battle that rages on in cities and states throughout the country. Like in San Diego, where Forester himself helps lead the fight against more and better bike lanes, much to the chagrin of more mainstream riders.

Despite denials from VC adherents, there have been numerous studies that show well-designed bike lanes can improve safety for everyone. Not just cyclists.

Meanwhile, I have yet to see a single credible study that supports the oft-repeated argument that cyclists are safer riding in traffic than in a good bike lane.

Which is not to say there aren’t a lot of bad ones out there.

Maybe that’s because, like Forester, they refuse to believe such things exist. Sort of like another group that denies compelling scientific evidence.

But it does raise a question another rider brought up awhile back, when he asked for my advice on whether it was better to ride a busy street with a bike lane or a quieter backstreet route with no bike infrastructure.

And the sad answer I gave him was that there is no such thing as a safe street for cyclists.

Depending on your perspective, both present their own unique set of dangers.

On a busy street, you have the risk of high speed traffic and an unacceptably high rate of careless and/or distracted drivers. Along with the near-constant risk of doorings, right hooks and left crosses, as well as drivers who consider the bike lane another motor vehicle through lane, or maybe a parking lane.

Meanwhile, riders on backstreets risk drivers backing out of driveways without looking, children and dogs running out into the roadway without warning, and drivers who don’t even consider the possibility of bikes on their bucolic byways.

Even on country roads, where I did some of my most enjoyable riding in my pre-L.A. days, you might not see a car for hours. But there are still dangers posed by truck drivers and farm equipment operators who assume there’s no one else there, and speeding teenagers out for a joyride — sometimes tossing their empties at any unfortunate victim they happen to pass.

And yes, I speak from experience.

And don’t get me started on the ubiquitous risk of potholes and otherwise dangerous road surfaces and designs. Or the unique thrill presented by riding past bears or gators.

Or bees.

That’s not to say bicycling is dangerous.

It’s not.

But it does demand a constant awareness of your surroundings, as well as a focus on defensive riding by anticipating the dangerous presented by your current environment, wherever you happen to be. And being prepared to respond to risks before they arise.

That doesn’t mean that drivers and other in the road aren’t responsible for using it safely. But it’s your life that’s on the line, and you can’t count on them to focus on your safety. Or even know you’re there.

Or care, for that matter.

That point that was driven home the other day on the quiet residential streets of my own neighborhood, as I made my way through the last few blocks at the end of an otherwise enjoyable ride.

I’d just stopped for a stop sign, and was beginning to resume my route across the intersection when an SUV came up on the cross street. The woman behind the wheel looked directly at me, then gunned her engine just as I was about to pass in front of her, cutting right onto the road I was riding on.

Fortunately, I was prepared, anticipating that the driver might run the stop sign — though not that she would attempt to hit me in the process. I was able to swing out onto the wrong side of the road, allowing her to screech past me and race off into the distance.

Yet as so often happens, I caught up to her at the next red light.

So I asked, as politely as I could under the circumstances, with fear and anger and adrenalin coursing through my body, why she’d just tried to run me over.

Her response?

“Cyclists have to stop at stop signs too!”

Never mind that I had already stopped before she ever got to the corner, while I was still the only one at the intersection. Or the irony that she ran a stop sign in her attempt to run me down.

In her mind, she was entitled to enforce traffic laws with the bumper of her car. Just another driveway vigilante using brute force to intimidate, if not injure, another human being.

Fortunately, I’m not so easily intimidated.

I would have loved to continue the conversation, but she quickly cut from the left turn lane she was in to make a quick right in front of high-speed traffic in order to get away from me.

Evidently, I scared her, even though she was the one wrapped in several tons of steel and glass. And I wasn’t the one who’d just tried to attack someone.

Though I did break my Lenten vow to not swear at drivers, however much they might deserve it; risking eternal damnation for the momentary relief of releasing my anger verbally before I exploded into a thousand spandex-clad pieces.

As usually happens in such cases, I didn’t have time to get her license or a good description of her car. And even if I had, there were no witnesses, so there’s nothing the police could have done anyway.

The really scary thing, though, is that the residential nature of the street she was on means that she’s likely to live here herself. Which means that she’s probably one of my neighbors, and there’s a high probability I could run into her again.

Whether either of us will recognize the other is a good question. As is what would happen if one of us does.

Where you prefer to ride is a matter of your own comfort level. Whether that leads you to ride vehicularly in a busy traffic lane, in various bikeways or on quieter bike streets that seldom see another road user, on two wheels or four.

But it’s a good reminder that no matter how peaceful they may look, there are no safe streets.

Even the ones in your own neighborhood.

Thanks to everyone who forwarded me the link to the San Diego KPBS story.

Update: Oddly — or maybe not so oddly, given the KPBS story — Bike Snob wrote Vehicular Cycling today, as well. And as usual, he’s much funnier than I am.