Archive for General

Evil on trial: testimony in the Mandeville Canyon begins Friday

October 15, 2009 / / 7 comments

The judge is assigned, the jury empanelled.

If you’re looking at this one Friday morning, opening arguments may be taking place as you read this, Judge Scott Millington presiding — previously notable for handling the drug case of Redmond O’Neil, son of Farrah and Ryan, as well as serving as a prosecutor for over a decade.

According to L.A. cyclist/attorney DJwheels, it’s shaping up as a very interesting trial.

As you may be aware, Dr. Christopher Thompson is on trial for last year’s infamous 4th of July incident in Mandeville Canyon, accused of intentionally cutting in front of two cyclists, then slamming on his brakes directly in front of them, resulting in serious injuries to both.

He faces a long list of charges, including one felony count of reckless driving causing injury, two felony counts of battery with serious injury, two counts of causing great bodily injury while attempting to commit a felony, and one count of mayhem; he’s also charged with one count of misdemeanor reckless driving causing an injury for a separate incident in which he is accused of forcing another cyclist off the road the previous March.

The seriousness of the charges is reflected in the size of the good doctor’s entourage. According to DJwheels, the defense rat pack includes, in addition to his attorney, the attorney’s legal partner, two associates, a jury consultant and two very large body guards, as well as other assorted assistants and helpers.

Appropriate, because the Good Doctor reportedly admitted his guilt when initially questioned by the police. And a conviction on felony charges would undoubtedly mean the loss of his medical license, as well as significant jail time.

Which made jury selection unusually important.

DJwheels reports that, not surprisingly, cyclists were automatically excluded by the defense, with the exception of a former BMX racer. Evidently, he was acceptable because he said that bikes belong in designated places like bike paths and sidewalks — not, apparently, on narrow canyon roads through residential neighborhoods.

On the other hand, the prosecution asked most of the potential panelists about their attitudes about physicians. Like whether the stress of their job excused their actions, and whether they had a right to get away with things as a result.

And the judge dismissed one woman himself, after she said she wouldn’t be able to remain impartial since she has friends who’ve been hit by cars while riding.

The panel they ended up with reflects the diversity of the city — mostly women, with white, African American, Hispanic, Asian and Middle Eastern members, as well as one who may be Indian or Pakistani, according to Wheels, with an average age somewhere in the mid-30s.

He added that the one thing they all seemed to have in common was a recognition that there are bad drivers and bad cyclists. And that fault could lie with either party, depending on the facts.

Which is, I suppose, all we can ask of any jury.

Although personally, I’d feel better if they all showed up in spandex, cycling shoes and Livestrong wristbands for opening statements.

For me, though, the most interesting part was a ruling the judge made on Wednesday to excluded friends of the Good Doctor and other Mandeville Canyon residents as potential witnesses.

That suggests a defense strategy based on blaming the victims, or at least, blaming the actions of cyclists as a group for creating an atmosphere in which the Good Doctor’s actions were understandable, if not justified. Combined with earlier reports that he now claims it was an accident — despite his initial statements to the police — that suggests that he may say he was merely trying to stop so he could confront the cyclists or collect evidence of their actions for the police.

And that could negate the intent to cause harm that would be required to convict on the most serious charges.

DJwheels say the exclusion of the other witnesses may also mean that testimony the Good Doctor could have to testify himself — a move most attorney’s are reluctant to allow because it exposes their client to cross-examination.

And that’s one day of testimony I’d pay to see.

Opening statements are scheduled for Friday morning, between 9 and 11, at Department C of the Airport Courthouse, South La Cienega Blvd just below Imperial Highway; no afternoon session is scheduled due to a previous juror obligation. The trial is expected to last through the end of the month.

………

The Department of DIY creates a new bike lane on the UCLA campus. Evidently, L.A. cycling infrastructure wasn’t much better at the turn of the 20th Century. No Whip provides a great update on the new L.A. bike plan, and what you can do to get involved. Gary joins in support for Saturday’s L.A. Bike Working Group’s look at the bike plan, noting the new time and location. Dr. Alex dodges a massive flying disc while riding (no, not the possible hoax in my home town). CNN asks if ebikes will be the new “commuter cool.” Courtesy of our New Zealand correspondent, TheTricksterNZ, a report of a fatal hit-and-run in Auckland; clearly, it’s not just an American phenomenon. More evidence of a blame the victim mentality north of the border, including testing the victim for drugs or alcohol — but not the driver who killed him. A look back at the Higginson twins, cycling champs from the 1950s. A report from India notes the rise in cycling injuries in the U.S. A cyclist is injured in an apparent hit-and-run in Holywood — no, the other one with just one L. Finally, good news for lovers of massive burritos — East L.A.’s El Tepeyac isn’t going anywhere.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

Evil on trial: the Mandeville Canyon case comes to court

October 14, 2009 / / One comment

By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.

— Macbeth, Act 4, scene 1

Just in time for Halloween, the Good Doctor returns to frighten cyclists once again.

Yesterday marked the beginning of the long-delayed trial in the infamous Mandeville Canyon Brake Check — one of a number of bike-related cases currently working their way through the legal system — in which a respected ER physician verified the stopping power of his Infinity by slamming on his brakes directly in front of two cyclists.

The incident left both riders seriously injured — one with a separated shoulder, which eventually led to surgery, metal implants and arthritis; the other, who ended up embedded in the driver’s rear windshield, with a broken nose and front teeth, his nose nearly peeled off his face.

And even after identifying himself as a physician, Dr. Christopher Thompson refused to treat either victim.

Amazingly enough, he admitted the act was deliberate. According to the LA Times, Thompson told police he did it to “teach them a lesson,” complaining that he was tired of the cyclists who frequently ride through the canyon.

Later he reversed course and pleaded not guilty, claiming it was just an accident. Though how it’s possible to buzz two experienced riders, exchange insults, cut in directly in front of them and accidently slam on your brakes is beyond me.

Then again, this wasn’t the first time it happened. The Good Doctor also faces charges for another incident four months earlier, in which he is accused of stopping in front of two other riders, forcing one off the road and the other into oncoming traffic, then attempting to hit them again before speeding off.

These are the actions of a monster. A psychopath with no regard for human life.

And yet, by all accounts, Dr. Thompson was an excellent physician — a man who dedicated his life to saving accident victims just like the ones he is accused of causing.

And that’s what is so frightening.

It would be easy to argue that the pressures of a high stress job, combined with what he considered rude, if not illegal, behavior from the cyclists pushed an otherwise good man over the edge. Yet the fact that he did it at least once before suggests someone who felt justified in his actions — that he felt he had the right to use a motor vehicle to violently enforce his mistaken interpretation of the law.

And he’s not alone.

Consider this comment by James Sullivan on the Times website:

My sympathies are with the doctor. Far too often I see pretentious idiots wearing tights who think they are Lance Armstrong riding bicycles recklessly. This incident is an excellent example. How fast does a bicyclist have to be moving to generate enough force to ram their head through the rear windshield of a car.? The fact of the matter is that these bicyclists were riding way too fast and were a hazard to everybody on that road. By their own admission when the doctor told them to ride single-file (AS REQUIRED BY LAW) they hurled profanities at him and made threats. I’ll bet they were chasing the car and thought they could catch him at the bottom of the hill.

Or this one from Alex:

His only misdeeds were to admit he was tired of these stupid road hazards and stop to give assistance to these jerks who deserve their pain.

Lets do the right thing here, let Doc go, charge the bike twits and ban non-powered vehicles from public roads/sidewalks/spaces.

And BTW bike jerks next time you get on someone’s butt remember what happened to these guys, and wonder if you are next. I hope you do it to me.

You see Officer, a chipmunk ran out in front of me so I attempted to stop.. and that why Lance is stuck to my trailer hitch.

If the Good Doctor had used a gun instead of a car, would these people still feel he was justified? Or he could have used a bat, like the men who recently beat and robbed an 18-year old cyclist in the Mid-Wilshire area, leaving her with massive facial fractures, and four suspects under arrest.

So the challenge will be to find 12 honest men and women who don’t reflect the attitudes demonstrated above, and don’t think that the crime of riding a bike in a place and manner you don’t approve of justifies a violent attack with a 2,000 pound lethal weapon.

According to L.A. cyclist and attorney DJwheels — whose own girlfriend was seriously injured by a hit-and-run driver — yesterday’s court session was dedicated to assigning a new judge to the case, and the hearing of motions.

Today, they’re scheduled to select a jury, with testimony slated to begin Thursday.

I won’t be attending.

As much as I’d like to report on every detail, I don’t trust myself to sit silently in a courtroom and listen quietly as lawyers justify the potentially murderous actions of a self-appointed traffic vigilante.

So if you have the stomach for it, be my guest. And if you want to report the details, you can find my email address here.

But be careful out there. Because these people drive among us.

And that’s the really scary part.

……….

Here’s your chance to rework the proposed new bike plan — or better yet, write your own. A perfect example of carhead succinctly summed up in a bumper sticker. Riding along the Hudson River with bike writer David Byrne. NY Times readers debate the new New York bikeways, while a Denver initiative would make bikable and walkable streets a priority. A bold vision for an Embarcadero bikeway by the Bay. Seattle riders ask if killing a cyclist should be a crime (I vote yes). An Aussie writer rides the Marvin Braude bikeway end-to-end. Taking London’s new bikes-for-hire for a test ride. China considers charging passengers of drunk drivers as accomplices. An Aussie driver was high on wine and LSD, and on his way to buy more drugs, when he killed a cyclist on Christmas Eve. The ideal recumbent for anyone who wants to leave this world the way they lived in it. Finally, Bike-friendly Santa Monica limits itself to six new bike racks per year; I guess you’re welcome to ride through the city, as long as you don’t stop.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

A simple adjustment in biking infrastructure, part 2

October 10, 2009 / / 3 comments

Let’s consider another easy fix the city could make right now, at virtually no cost.

Take the bike lanes along the recently rebuilt Santa Monica Boulevard.

In just a few short years, they’ve become one of the most popular riding routes through the Westside — largely because they’re among the few dedicated bike lanes than run on a major street. And the only ones I know that don’t run next to a parking lane, eliminating the risk of dooring.

On the other hand, you do have to deal the poorly designed crossover lanes, which force cyclists to dodge cars entering and exiting the roadway, as well as buses that cut into the bike lanes little or no warning.

bus-bike1Then there’s the way they end abruptly, dumping unsuspecting cyclists into the middle of a heavy high-speed traffic lane.

Although a large part of that problem, on the east end at least, stems from the transition from Los Angeles to Beverly Hills, which seems dead set against allowing bikeways to besmirch their gilded streets. If any city ever needed a Critical Mass…

One major advantage these lanes offer is the limited number of cross streets — only Beverly Glen, Westwood, Veteran and Sepulveda cross from both directions. All other streets enter from one side only, such as Avenue of the Stars and Century Park East and West in Century City, which enter from the south, and Selby, Kelton and Camden in Westwood, which come in from the north.

SM-Bike-Lane-1However, that means cyclists riding on the opposite side of the road often have to make a decision whether to obey the law, or common sense, when faced with a red light, with a clear lane in front of them and no cross traffic from any direction.

Some stop and wait alongside the idling vehicular traffic until the light turns green, for no other reason than it’s what the law requires. Most, however, proceed through the light, recognizing that stopping serves no purpose, in terms or safety or rationality — putting them at risk of a ticket, and pissing off every driver waiting for the light to change.

But all it would take to address the situation is one little sign at each of those intersections, saying “bikes proceed on red.”

That’s it.

Overnight, bike flow is improved and scofflaw cyclists are made legal — with zero impact on traffic.

The only possible risk would come from careless drivers who might drift into the bike lane while completing their turns on the boulevard. And even that could easily be addressed by placing a simple barrier — anything from plastic cones to a brief raised curb — on the outer edge of the bike lane.

Or better yet, install a raised curb along the entire length of the bike lanes, broken only by intersections, and crossover exit and entrance lanes.

Then cyclists would enjoy L.A.’s first separated bike lanes, at minimal cost to the city.

And the cars, motorcycles and other assorted motor vehicles that currently use the bike lanes to bypass stopped traffic would be banished once and for all.

This same approach could also be used on southbound Ocean Blvd in Santa Monica, another roadway where cyclists have to choose between breaking the law and stopping for no apparent reason.

……..

Gary writes movingly about that heartbreaking photo of Kylie Bruehler at the funeral of her tandem-riding parents. Even the positive Joe Linton criticizes L.A.’s proposed bike plan, while Stephen Box says stamp it Return to Sender and the BAC demands an extension of the comment period. Box also says a lack of bike parking makes cyclists second class citizens. While L.A. makes plans, Long Beach makes bikeways. GT shares a great route when you want to work hills. Will Campbell risks his credibility to register his bike. Oakland police try to link an online threat against cyclists to a hit-and-run driver who stood over his victim before fleeing the scene. More great photos from the Path Less Pedaled. Bob Mionske’s Blog takes a critical look at a wreck blamed on a sidewalk cyclist, which leads to a call for better police training. Famed framebuilder Dave Moulton continues his discussion on the evolution of frame design. Chicago Now takes a critical look at Critical Mass. Finally, a truly frightening photo of the aftermath of an S.F. dooring incident.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

A simple adjustment in biking infrastructure, part 1

October 8, 2009 / / 4 comments

I confess. I haven’t read the new bike plan yet.

Most of us need a little time to get through a plan that, with appendices, checks in just this side of War and Peace. And Tolstoy didn’t include complicated maps that have to be studied with near microscopic attention.

Or leave out street names, as on the Westside map.

So it’s possible that this could have been addressed in the plan, although a cursory look suggests otherwise.

Yet while city officials frequently cite a lack of funding as a primary reason why we see so few improvements in bikeways and biking infrastructure — even though they have a history of leaving money on the table — there are a number of things they could do that would cost almost nothing and have little or no impact on traffic.

Take Westholme Avenue in Westwood.

It’s currently a Class 3 bike route, offering a safe, quiet route from Santa Monica Boulevard to the UCLA campus — although the new plan shows it’s due to be downgraded to a “bicycle friendly” street. And according to the LACBC, it’s one of the streets that’s under consideration for the upcoming Sharrows pilot project.

Unfortunately, north of Wilshire Blvd, cyclists face a steep, three-quarter mile climb to get to campus. It’s not a problem when you’re southbound and down; not so much fun when you’re struggling to make it uphill.

Westwood-3-wayTo make matters worse, just as the hardest part of the climb begins, there’s a three-way stop at the intersection where Westholme, Glenmont and Le Conte come together.

From a driver’s perspective, it helps control a quiet, but confusing, junction. From a cyclist’s perspective, though, it forces riders to either ignore the law and blow through the stop, or lose all momentum at the base of the hill, just when they need it most — making it a difficult, if not impossible, climb for many riders, and deterring them from attempting it a second time.

And it’s completely unnecessary.

As the photo shows, there’s no parking in the intersection, which means that cyclists can comfortably ride to the right, out of the traffic lane, without risk to or from traffic in any direction. It’s as if we had our own little through lane there.

So why should we have to stop?

Westwood-3-Way-SignsLADOT could address the problem by adding another sign below the stop sign, reading “bikes yield” or “except for bikes.”

Problem solved.

Overnight, it becomes a much more attractive street for riders of all levels — at almost no cost to the city. And without inconveniencing a single driver.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

……..

Streetsblog has posted links to the bike maps released earlier in the summer for anyone wanting to compare the current draft of the bike plan. Why the lack of diversity at the recent Byrne panel discussion? The top 10 facts about cycling. Dallas police will no longer enforce the city’s mandatory helmet policy — the one that was put in place to stop drug traffickers (?!?). Portland police release their internal bicycle training video. Advice from Boston on avoiding the door zone. Delaware declares female bike commuters extinct. A ‘60s era video from GM gives a driver credit for avoiding an accident — caused when she nearly right hooks a cyclist. Women in the UK consider cyclists the most attractive males. Well, duh. A cyclist’s view of rush hour in Scotland. In case you missed it earlier this week, the UK’s Guardian asks if California will become America’s first failed state. Finally, this may just be the most heartbreaking photo I’ve ever seen.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

Move along folks; nothing to see here

October 7, 2009 / / Comments Off on Move along folks; nothing to see here

Not that I don’t have some things to say.

But this one time, I’ll be saying them on L.A.’s Streetsblog — the city’s best source for local and national transportation news, offering a unique perspective from the streets up.

I’m joining a long list of local activists, writers and bloggers — including Joe Linton, Stephen and Enci Box, Angela Serratore and Dan Koeppel — who’ve sacrificed a day or more of their time filling in for Damien Newton so he can spend some quality time with his newborn baby, wife and various assorted relatives. And there’s still more to come.

So today is my day.

Click on the link, and you’ll find coverage of last week’s panel discussion on bikes and livability with former Talking Head David Byrne, along with today’s headlines, and reports from around the Streetsblog network. And later in the day, you’ll find my wrap-up of last night’s meeting of the L.A. Bicycle Advisory Committee, and a rant about the lack of public involvement.

You’ll also find a photo of yours truly.

I’m the one on the left.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

DIY police work leads to meager charges — and dangerously written laws

October 5, 2009 / / 2 comments

A popular L.A. cyclist thinks he knows why the driver who hit him ran.

And he knows who it was.

Maybe you know Roadblock. It’s almost amazing how many L.A. area cyclists do, and just how highly they regard him. But then, as one of the city’s leading bike activists and an original founder of the Midnight Ridazz, it’s pretty easy to understand why.

Or maybe you read about his recent biking accident, when the story of how he got run down by a hit-and-run driver made waves in the local online and cycling communities.

Fortunately, he’s okay, aside from a complaint about lingering back pain. In fact, when I ran into him the other night — figuratively, not literally — he looked good.

But it could have been much worse.

He was hit from behind at high speed, and carried several yards on the hood of the car before the driver applied the brakes and he was thrown off onto the street.

And then, as so often happens, the driver gunned his engine and took off, disappearing into the night. In fact, at least four cyclists in the L.A. and Orange County area have been killed by hit-and-run drivers this year alone; Santa Clarita held a Ride of Silence this past Saturday to commemorate the most recent cyclist run down by a drunken runaway motorist.

Fortunately, he somehow managed to get a partial license plate as he lay in the street. And that’s when L.A.’s Department of DIY sprang into action once again.

Overnight, signs sprang up seeking witnesses. Back channel contacts identified the owner of a suspect vehicle. A little detective work led to a local auto body shop, where photos were taken of the car as it was being repaired.

And in less than 48 hours, the suspect was identified to the police and the legal process was in motion.

Roadblock wants to keep the driver’s identity to himself for now, until the legal process is further along. But he says it’s someone well known in city circles, who certainly should have known better — and acted differently.

He also has a theory — which, due to the delay in finding the suspect, is likely to remain nothing but speculation — that the driver had been drinking. And that’s probably why he ran.

Evidently, the driver’s gamble paid off, since Roadblock had the good fortune to escape with relatively minor injuries, so the driver will escape with relatively minor charges.

Under California law, a hit-and-run that doesn’t result in injury is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in county jail, and/or a fine of up to $1000. And the authorities seem to feel that the sort of soft-tissue injuries Roadblock suffered don’t count, despite lingering pain and stiffness nearly five months later.

If the collision had resulted in a few broken bones, the penalty would be up to a year in jail, with a fine up to $10,000; a hit-and-run resulting in death or serious, permanent injury could bring up to 4 years in state prison.

And that’s the problem.

Existing law actually encourages intoxicated drivers to flee the scene of a collision, because the penalties for drunk driving resulting in injury or death can be far more severe than the relatively minor penalties for running away.

In fact, according to the Driver’s Handbook published by the DMV, a DUI case involving serious injury or death can be prosecuted under the state’s Three Strikes Law, potentially resulting in life imprisonment. Which makes the maximum penalty of four years for running away pale in comparison.

And relatively minor charges like hit-and-run are often dropped or plea-bargained away before a case ever comes to a resolution.

So for a driver who’s had a few drinks, fleeing the scene offers a reasonable gamble that they may get away with it. Or at least have time to sober up before getting caught.

And that has to change.

The penalties for hit-and-run have to be increased, until they’re strong enough that no one would ever consider leaving the scene of an accident.

Because this epidemic of drunken hit-and-runs has to stop. And our government has to stop encouraging it.

………

Santa Monica authorities insist it’s safe to ride through the city even if you don’t have a license, despite what the law says. L.A.’s bike culture captures yet another convert. A motorist in Sun Valley is in desperate need of a better bike rack; if your bike is missing, this might be your prime suspect. An upcoming photo exhibition profiles Angelenos who somehow survive sans cars. The paparazzi catch Sharon Stone bike shopping with her kids; the unidentified store looks like I. Martin to me. Joe Linton lists Long Beach’s leap to livability. In Chicago they even bike for cocktails; how civilized. An S.F. paper asserts cycling steers fashion, and that cars and bikes can, in fact, coexist. New York gets the kind of center median cycletrack we can only dream of. A Florida cop tases a fleeing cyclist before running over and killing him. Lego cyclists can be put back together; real ones can’t. Ex-framebuilder Dave Moulton explains the bike’s evolution away from the wheelbarrow effect. Edmonton police are on the lookout for a biking people-basher, while Toronto cyclists look hotter in a helmet. Finally, the Times touches briefly on last Friday’s David Byrne panel discussion; look for my take Wednesday on Streetsblog.

Category: Best of, General / Tags: , , , ,

Trying to reason with bicycle theft season

October 2, 2009 / / 6 comments

Maybe it’s just a coincidence.

But it doesn’t take a lot of research to get the feeling that bike culture and bike thefts are following the same upward curve. The more popular biking gets, the more popular bikes do — to thieves as well as legitimate riders.

Joe Linton, one of L.A.’s leading bike and environmental activists, had his stolen off the street the other night. Mikey Wally had his stolen recently. Dr. Alex was lucky, he only had his lights stolen.

Meanwhile, theft reports are up from Downtown to the Southbay, and points in between. Even Lance had his bike stolen in California earlier this year. Though thankfully, not when he was visiting L.A.

Of course, this sort of thing tends to bring out the worst in people, understandable though that may be. Personally, though, I prefer prevention to retaliation.

That’s one reason my bikes sleep inside at night.

A large corner of my office is devoted to keeping them safe — from insects, bad weather and various nefarious critters, including thieves. After all, I’d no more leave my bike exposed to the elements than anything else I love.

Like my wife, for instance.

And my bike never complains about how much time I spend cycling.

I used to carry a heavy cable and lock on my old bike, when I rode my little blue Trek everywhere. I’d always park it in some highly visible public place, and strip off anything that could be easily stolen. And I’d lock it securely — through the frame and both wheels — to some large immovable object, since bike racks were even harder to find than they are now.

When I got my new bike, however, I did a simple financial calculation, and determined the cost was equivalent a decent laptop — and there was no way I’d leave my laptop laying on the street, even if I could secure it to a lamppost.

So I saved myself the extra weight, and left my lock at home.

Which means I now use the same technique employed by Catholic school girls attempting to maintain their virtue, and keep it clamped tightly between my legs. Whenever I stop for awhile, I keep it right next to me or maintain a tight grip on it. Or if I want to go inside somewhere, it either comes in with me, or I don’t go.

Which severely limits my options. But it keeps my bike safe at a time when I can’t afford to replace it. And I plan to make that old Trek my town bike, complete with lights, reflectors and multiple locks so I can ride it anywhere, anytime.

Of course, there are other techniques. My friend Tim — subject of a recent Page 2 profile in the Times —  forwarded a story on how to deter thieves by uglifying your bike awhile back. And judging by the photos, they did a pretty impressive job of turning a beauteous Bianchi into a turd-tone junker.

Problem is, thieves seem to target crappy bikes just as much as decent ones these days.

Most people prefer the more traditional approaches to theft prevention, though. And there’s no shortage of advice on how to keep yours safe. Or safer, anyway.

Because there’s no guarantee.

Someone could break into my home and ride out on my bike, with our meager possessions tucked under his felonious arms. Or your bike could be jacked at a red light or an off-road bikeway.

All you can do is take reasonable precautions.

Register your bike. Lock it securely. And make sure it’s covered by your homeowners or renters policy.

It’s not as expensive as you might think. And it’s a hell of a lot cheaper than a new bike.

Even a crappy one.

……..

As I was writing this, I got an email from Erin about yet another bike theft:

These bikes were stolen Tuesday night, September 29 from Hollywood Blvd at Gower, outside the blue Palms. We filed a police report Wednesday morning.

My bike: Black Soma Double-Cross, 52cm frame, 2005 model. I bought it at Free Range Cycles in Seattle; their sticker is yellow featuring a chicken riding a bicycle, placed just above the bottom bracket. Shimano components (mix of Deore and Tiagra). Black plastic toeclips. Black rear rack. Black bar tape (messed up on the left bar). Black saddle. Photo attached (the bike is as pictured, except I removed the fenders when I moved down here from Seattle). They stole my red and silver helmet, too.

Nick’s bike: Green/silver Trek 1200, 56cm? frame. Mix of Shimano and Campy components. Clipless pedals. Black rear rack. Drop bars with black bar tape. Black saddle. They also stole his blue helmet. No photo, unfortunately.

I just listed it in the Stolen Bikes database at totalbike.com, which really seems like it could use some advertising around LA, so anybody buying a used bike knows to ask to see the original receipt or else check the database. If we can find a way to make bicycle theft harder to profit from it will benefit everyone by getting more people on bikes and keeping them on their bikes! I know whatever bike I end up on next will have as many anti-theft devices as I can put on it, but it seems like we should all work together to shift the burden of thievery to bike thieves instead of making it practically a tax on cyclists.

erin-bike

……..

Dr. Alex responds to Green LA Girl’s recent criticism of his call to extend the deadline for comments on the new L.A. Bike Plan, and calls on cyclists to support for the Cyclist’s Bill of Rights at tomorrow’s Neighborhood Council Action Summit — your chance to help spread the CBR throughout the city. As traffic gets heavier, drivers seem to get more careless or aggressive; Will Campbell gets right hooked three times on a single ride to work; at least he figured out what was causing that annoying thunk. Gary reports on Santa Monica ordinances that seem to ban riding through the city with an unlicensed bike — even though licensing isn’t required in California. Stephen Box morns the loss of a genuine bike supporter from the Caltrans regional management; hopefully Caltrans loss with be Metro’s gain. LAist reports distracted drivers left nearly 6,000 Americans dead — and over a half-million injured — last year alone. Finally, an anti-bike rant from an Aussie “comedian” ends with a call for violent assaults on cyclists; related coverage tells of a cyclist who may lose a leg after being struck and dragged under a truck. Yeah, pretty funny stuff.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

Today’s ride, on which I question my cultural identity

September 30, 2009 / / 3 comments

Maybe it’s because of my lifelong affinity for the comedy of Mel Brooks and pre-Hannah, pre-Soon Yi Woody Allen.

Or maybe because I’ve long believed that the Catholic faith I was raised with is actually the fourth branch of Judaism — Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed and Really Reformed.

It could be due to the 10 years I spent working in the jewelry business, where Yiddish is a second language — which I picked up easily, thanks to the lingering influence of my German-speaking Pennsylvania Dutch grandmother.

Maybe the fault rests with couple rabbis I’ve known, who loved to egg me on because it was so funny to hear Jewish expressions come from such a goyishe punim.

Or it could be I’m just the reincarnation of a Borscht-Belt comic.

But even I was surprised when a car edged out from a side street while I was riding today, and the driver looked directly at me as he pulled out further to block my way entirely. And I heard these words pass my lips as I braked hard to came to a stop just feet from his open window:

“What am I, chopped liver?”

Oy gevalt.

………

A reader asks if there’s viable route to ride from Santa Clarita to the San Fernando Valley:

I reside in the Santa Clarita valley and I do plan to go on the “Silent Ride” Saturday.  My comment is that there does not appear to be any reasonable way to go from the Santa Clarita valley to the San Fernando valley by bike.  There’s the Old Road and Foothill Blvd.  Both are plagued by little to no shoulder and a number of blind curves.  I’ve seen cyclist on Foothill and I take my hat off to them.  Never on the Old Road between Sierra Highway and Balboa.  Once you get to Balboa things are good.  I assume this would be a L.A. county issue or maybe CALTRANS.  In any event, I wish something could be done about it.  If you have any suggestions or comments that would be great.  Thanks

Any suggestions for him? Or anyone planning to attend the ride, that he could join to ride back to the Valley?

………

BOLO Alert: Keep your eyes peeled for Joe Linton’s blue Trek, which was stolen last night from in front of an Internet café on Wilshire near Normandie:

So… friends and fellow travelers… be on the lookout for my bike around town… it’s the blue one in the photo (below) – it looks more-or-less like that picture, though it has more stickers and new kinda-bulky black plastic mountain-biker pedals. It’s a big frame (I am 6′3″) light blue Trek, 24-speed, about 3 years old. Bontrager (sp?) black/gray puncture-resistant slick road tires. Lots of stickers – C.I.C.L.E., FoLAR and others. There’s a faded green paper flower and a large Chinese bell on the straight handlebars. There’s a basic black utilitarian rack on the back.

I hereby resolve to lock my bikes really really well in the future.

Be On The Look Out for Joe Linton's blue Trek

Be On the Look Out for Joe Linton's blue Trek

………

Joe Linton takes over for new daddy Damien on Streetsblog to discuss planned sharrows in Hermosa Beach, and promote the upcoming David Byrne bike round table — and yes, I’m planning to be there. Green LA Girl notes that meetings are being held for four bike plans around the area; just pick your city. Continuing with the color scheme, the Green LA Transportation Working Group defines what Living Streets means. A new group ride rolls through the Eastside. A 65-year old KC cyclist was intentionally hit by an impatient driver. Boston Biker offers advice on how to avoid the door zone when riding in a bike lane; plus advice from Philly on how to pass in one — though you might want to signal and announce you’re passing, as well. Finally, good advice on how to share the road from north of the border.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

Today’s post, in which I pause to applaud you

September 29, 2009 / / 3 comments

You’d think that I would have gotten good at riding hills when I lived in Colorado.

But pretty much anything east of the Front Range — that long wall of mountains that marks the east face of the Rockies — is about as flat as Kansas. So it wasn’t until I moved to the hills and valleys of San Diego that I really learned how to climb.

Even a simple ride up the coast north of the city meant at least one major climb along the east side of Torrey Pines State Reserve to get back home.

There was a another shorter, but far steeper route through the park, though. And as I developed my skills by hammering up that long sweeping climb outside the park, I promised myself that one day I’d be good enough to take on that other, more challenging route.

So after months of hard effort, it was finally time to give it a try.

I failed. Or more precisely, I made it, but only after the most excruciating climb I’ve ever inflicted on myself.

I cracked about halfway up — hitting that point where it was too much effort to go forward, and any rational solution person would turn back and try again another day.

But I’ve never claimed to be rational.

Maybe it was old-fashioned determination, or just plain old pig-headedness. But I had set a goal and I was going to make it or die trying. And considering the pounding in my chest, the latter seemed like a real possibility at the time.

So I forced myself to turn the cranks just one more time, followed by another. And another.

By the time I was three quarters of the way up, my body was screaming in pain, and every crank of the pedal was harder than the last. Finally, I began to whisper under my breath with every stroke, saying “Don’t quit.”

“Don’t quit.”

“Don’t quit.”

Or I thought I was under my breath, anyway. Because when I finally took that last painful stroke and rose over the crest, about a dozen people standing around at the top broke into a round of applause.

I was embarrassed as hell. So I gave a weak wave — the best I could muster at the moment — and continued on my way, blushing from head to toe as I rode off.

Yet they also made me feel like I’d just won the Tour de France.

Even now, I look back at that with a mixture of embarrassment and pride. Because it took everything I had just to get up that hill. And a group of total strangers not only noticed, but applauded those efforts.

And that feels pretty damn good.

I was thinking about that today beacause Patrick Pascal forwarded a link to the UK’s Guardian’s bike blog, which discusses a series of videos posted online by French prankster Rémi Gaillard. In them, he establishes a faux finish line along a popular cycling route, and treats an unsuspecting cyclist like he’s just won a hard stage on the Tour de France.

I can’t help but smile as I watch. And mentally put myself in the place of that anonymous rider.

In these days, when it feels like we have to fight for every inch of asphalt, and endure the taunts, insults and often painful indignities inflicted on us by a moronic minority of motorists, it feels good to have someone acknowledge the effort we put into it — even if it is just a prank.

Because we do a lot of good.

Every cyclist riding to work or doing errands on their bikes means one less car clogging our streets and fouling our air — something you’d think even the most impatient driver would appreciate.

Despite the frequent calls to register and tax us, we have virtually no impact on the roads. And the cost of cycling infrastructure represents just a minute fraction of overall transportation and road funding.

And everyone who gets out on a bike — not matter why they ride, how far or fast — is doing their part to improve their own health and fitness. Which benefits society in countless ways, measurable and otherwise, from lowering healthcare costs to lifting the mood of our current malaise.

So maybe we do deserve a round of applause.

Not for winning a stage or making it up a hill, but just for being out there pushing pedals when so many others aren’t. When you could be sitting at home packing calories on instead of pounding them off, or out burning fossil fuels instead of carbs.

So next time I see a cyclist fighting her way through traffic or struggling up a hill, I’m going to give her — or him — a thumbs-up. Or maybe break into a spontaneous round of applause.

Because you’re out there making our world a better place.

And what could possibly be wrong with that?

……….

The first review is in on the new bike plan, and not surprisingly, it comes from Stephen Box. And the verdict is: thumbs down. Speaking of which, new bike lanes have finally appeared on Reseda Blvd. Taking Damien’s place on Streetsblog for the day, Stephen also reports on Sunday’s Crenshaw Crush ride. LACBC offers a look at what a 4th Street Bike Boulevard could be. A look at artistic bike racks in Downtown L.A. The latest side-effect of the growing bike community is an increase in bike thefts, as well as parts and accessories. A new iPhone app lets you snap photos of road problems, and forwards them to the appropriate authorities. Kill a cyclist in Arizona, get fined $254. Austin offers a preview of what to expect from David Byrne on Friday. Does it surprise anyone to learn there’s a gender gap in media cycling stories? Minneapolis’ mayor moves forward with plans to make bikes more welcome. Evidently, the fixie fad has officially peaked. Nashville is looking for artists to design new bike racks. Vancouver cyclists ride to say thanks for the bike lanes. The new Welsh bike share program hits a snag the first weekend. Finally, congratulations to Damien and Marybeth — and welcome to the world Samuel Lee Newton. We’ll try to leave it in a little better shape than we found it.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , ,

Today’s post, in which I don’t criticize LADOT. Much.

September 27, 2009 / / 10 comments

Maybe you missed the cycling community’s response to the release of the full draft of LADOT’s proposed new bike plan.

Yeah, me too.

Aside from a minor pissing match in which Green LA Girl, L.A.’s meiststress of all things ecological, called out Dr. Alex and Bike Girl for their damnable negativity, the plan landed with an overwhelming thud.

It’s not that we’re not interested. As Mikey Wally, who recently completed a coast-to-coast ride of his own points out, most L.A. cyclists are keenly aware of the appalling lack of infrastructure in this city. As well as the risks we take in merely trying to get from here to there on two wheels.

It’s just that A) we weren’t expecting it, considering that it was already six months overdue, and comes months after the much-maligned map that introduced the phrase “currently infeasible” to the local cycling vocabulary; and B) at 212 pages plus appendices, we have no idea what to think about it yet.

It’s going to take a lot more than a single weekend to make heads or tails out of this. And that’s exactly the point Bike Girl and Alex were trying to make.

LADOT’s current timeline gives cyclists and any other interested parties a mere seven weeks from the release of the plan to read, digest and analyze all 212 pages plus appendices, form a considered opinion, and convey that opinion in a reasoned and effective manner. Even less, considering that the first public meeting is scheduled for less than one month from today.

Or we could just do what we usually do, and base our opinions on previous experience. In which case we’d already be readying the torches and pitchforks.

Personally, I think giving us sufficient time to respond is a better option.

But hey, that’s just me.

Then there’s the fact that only four public meetings have been scheduled in a city of nearly 4 million people — which works out to just under 1 million people per meeting.

I hope they’ve reserved a big room.

Then again, they may have considered that. In what could only be read as an attempt to limit public participation, three of the four meetings have been scheduled to begin at 5p — an hour when much of the city is just starting to get off work.

Anyone interested in attending would have to make their way across the city through rush hour traffic to get to the meeting site. And as anyone who has ever attempted it can attest, in riding at rush hour is a contact sport in this city.

And it takes a very, very long time.

The irony here is that if the city had good cycling infrastructure — based on an effective bicycle master plan, of course — there might be more bikes, and fewer cars, on the streets. Which would make it a lot easier to get to one of those meetings.

Another problem is that there are no meetings scheduled in Downtown or East L.A. — despite their large cycling populations, including many for whom a bike is their primary means of transportation. And as Alex points out, the current timeline effectively prohibits any input from any of the city’s 89 Neighborhood Councils, as well.

In fact, a cynical person might suspect that LADOT anticipated a negative response to this plan, and scheduled the number, time and location of these meetings — as well as the short deadline for comments — in a deliberate attempt to limit public input.

Fortunately, I’m not a cynical person, so that never occurred to me.

So I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. And ascribe the inadequate public schedule to a well-intentioned, if ill-advised, desire to keep the process from falling any further behind.

However, I will take the advice offered by Alex:

Email West LA Councilman and City Council Transportation Committee Chair Bill Rosendahl and express displeasure with this situation – Councilman.Rosendahl@lacity.org.  I recommend asking for amendment of the deadline to January 4th, 2010.

In fact, I’ll take it one further, and suggest that everyone email their own council member, as well. And demand more time for an effective, reasoned — and reasonable — response.

Meanwhile, I’m marking my calendar for the West L.A. meeting on October 28. And I hope to see a room filled with informed and passionate cyclists.

Torches and pitchforks optional.

No one knows the streets of this city better than the people who ride them. So take a look at the plan, particularly as it affects the areas you ride. And if you have any comments you want to offer, feel free to email me at bikinginla at hotmail dot com.

……..

Dave Moulton suggests that a more positive attitude can result in a more positive cycling experience. The four most common causes of single bike crashes; not listed is a Connecticut bridge that has repeatedly taken out unsuspecting riders. Columbia, MO’s mayor sets out to set the standard for cycling cities. For once, police offer advice for safe cycling that focuses on drivers as well as cyclists. A Philly reporter asks if cyclists have been given too much of the road, while the St. Louis Post-Dispatch demonstrates just how low journalistic standards have fallen. Tampa Bay cyclists want sharrows. An Indian man is injured in a bike-on-bike collision, then disappears from the hospital without a trace. London cyclists are give the green light to ride the wrong way. After being bitten while riding on the Scottish moors, will Town Mouse transform into a werejackrussel on the next full moon? Finally, thanks to reader TricksterNZ for calling attention to a bad weekend in New Zealand in which two riders were killed — including one in which a driver went through a stop into a group of passing cyclists. As usual, the comments blame the victims.

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