I was going to add a link to this on my next post. But the more I think about it, the more important this information is right now.
Damien Newton has put up a great story on Streetsblog on how cyclists can cope with the bad air from the fires in the L.A. area.
It offers advice from C.I.C.L.E.’s Shay Sanchez, as well as Joe Linton, Roadblock and Ron Milam (and you’ll find my 2 cents in the comment section).
Read it before your next ride. Your health could depend on it.
“I declare the war is over; it’s over…” — Phil Ochs, The War Is Over
In case you missed it, L.A. cyclists scored a couple of big victories in the last few weeks.
As you may recall, following the outrage over LADOT’s plans to remove the bike lanes on Reseda Blvd in order to install peak hour lanes, LADOT denied they would ever consider such a thing. As part of that denial, LADOT explained that they were planning to repave a 1-mile section of Reseda, and that maybe that’s where the “misunderstanding” started.
Cyclists, of course, smelled opportunity.
Or maybe we just smelled blood in the water. And insisted that LADOT prove their sincerity by completing the long-delayed bike lanes along the full length of Reseda that we were promised in the old bike plan, starting with that one mile section.
Then, as cyclists continued to press their case at a meeting of the Northridge East Neighborhood Council, Alan Willis, LADOT Principal Transportation Engineer for Valley Traffic Operations, announced that the promised bike lanes would be installed on the section to be repaved. And that the remaining gaps in the bikeway could — maybe — eventually be closed.
Of course, they never admitted their deception. Let alone offered an apology.
Then last week came news that after 5 long years, the city is finally moving forward with a Sharrow test project. Nine streets are under consideration, including one along the current Class 3 bike route on Westholme Ave, just blocks from my home.
This comes less than a year after an LADOT representative gave an update to the city council’s Transportation Committee, claiming that the delay was because they didn’t know what kind of paint to use so that cyclists wouldn’t slip on wet paint when it rained.
Maybe that was a legitimate concern in today’s highly litigious society. Although when I mentioned that to a respected transportation planner at the Bike Summit earlier this year, he just rolled his eyes.
Of course, cities from Pittsburgh to Long Beach — not to mention Portland, Denver, Minneapolis and Seattle, just to name a few — have already put sharrows to use on the streets. And to the best of my knowledge, there have been no rash of injured cyclists in those cities.
But maybe they don’t have wet streets in Seattle, Portland or San Francisco. Or maybe cyclists there don’t come out until the streets are completely dry after a storm.
Or maybe LADOT just forgot to call their counterparts in those soggy cities to ask what kind of paint they use.
Still, the commitment to move forward with a Sharrow pilot project is a major victory. And the LACBC deserves credit for hanging in there and refusing to let them delay it to death. Combined with the bike lanes on Reseda, those are the biggest wins for local cyclists in recent memory.
Of course, the bad news is that LADOT actually considered removing existing bike lanes to squeeze a few more cars onto the already overcrowded city streets. Which means that no bike lane, sharrow or bike route — existing or not — will ever be safe if it stands in the way of what they consider progress.
Which means that we need to remain vigilant, ready to defend what little biking infrastructure we have. Let alone fight for what we deserve.
Of course, there is another alternative.
The city — and LADOT in particular — could start working with cyclists, rather than seeming to fight us every step of the way. They could, finally, start focusing on how they can move more people, rather than just more cars.
And begin building complete, livable streets that work for all their users, as well as the people who live, work and shop along them.
They might just find that we could be the best friends that they — and this city — ever had.
……….
The Anonymous Cyclist spots new ex-parking meter bike racks in Westwood. No Whip discovers a wallride in Mammoth, and Stephen Box discovers a full-service bike station Down Under. Travelin’ Local presents five ways to use your bike while traveling on Metro. LADOT wins an Emmy for a PSA encouraging drivers to pay attention around kids. The Times much-missed transportation beat reporter is now pucking around online. Joe Linton details the latest controversy, this time over a SoCal Gas plan to “fix” the popular fat tire and hiking trail in Sullivan Canyon, while lining portions of the creek bed with rip rap and concrete matting. A writer on Bob Mionske’s Bicycle Law blog challenges car-centric news coverage of a driver arrested for intentionally striking a cyclist, while Bob discusses what “as far to the right as practical” means in real life. A DC cyclist is physically assaulted after pushing a car door to avoid being doored. Town Mouse outrides a herd of migrating Scottish cows. Controversy flares in Korea over a proposed mandatory helmet law. Finally, sex columnist Dan Savage dares drivers to show their contempt for the recent study showing they’re at fault for 90% of car/bike collisions — and they gladly oblige. Of course.
Let’s go back to that buzzing incident with the garbage truck, in which the driver honked loudly as he passed me with only about a foot’s clearance.
What if I hadn’t managed to maintain control over my bike when the horn startled me? As I noted yesterday, I could have swerved to the left, which could have meant going under his wheels. Or I might have swerved right, where I would have bounced off the parked cars, and possibly been thrown back underneath him.
So who would be at fault when the police filed their report?
Would it be the driver who passed too closely, honking his horn in a threatening manner, or the cyclist who responded by losing control and colliding with the truck?
Or would they decide it was just one of those things, and no one was really to blame?
Or take today’s ride, when I was nearly right-hooked by a truck driver who passed me on the left, then made a right turn directly across my path — while I was still beside him.
Fortunately, I try to anticipate such things. So I grabbed my brakes, dropped behind him, then passed him on his left before he could even finish his turn.
But what if I hadn’t?
What if I’d collided with the truck? Would he be at fault because he turned into my path? Or would it be my fault because I hit him?
The law suggests the driver should be at fault. Yet when a Baltimore cyclist was killed recently in collision just like that, the police determined that he was at fault — evidently they felt it was his responsibility to somehow avoid the truck that cut him off.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Bay Area cyclists are responsible for twice as many bike vs. motor vehicle collisions as drivers are. The same article quotes statistics from the California Highway Patrol, which found cyclists responsible for nearly 60% of all statewide cycling fatalities.
Yet a recent study by a Toronto physician found that cyclists were only responsible for less than 10% of local collisions.
So are Canadian cyclists really that much better than California riders? Or does the problem actually rest with who is analyzing the data — and investigating the accidents?
Do you really have to ask?
The problem isn’t that police hate cyclists, despite common perceptions in the cycling community. It’s that most officers receive little or no training in bike law — and none in the mechanics of cycling or investigation of bike accidents.
That’s not just my opinion. Consider this recent quote from a retired police officer:
In virtually every state, bicycles have most of the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicle operators. Many officers don’t seem to know, or care, that they do. Training in bicycle traffic law is virtually nonexistent in police academies and crash investigation courses.
Unfortunately, many serious road cyclists know and understand traffic laws regulating bicycles far better than most street cops. Officers who have received quality bike patrol training, such as the IPMBA Police Cyclist™ Course, have been trained in the legal status of bicycles in traffic, proper and legal lane use, and other pertinent provisions.
When investigating a bicycle-vehicle crash, it may be a good idea to involve a trained bike patrol officer to help get a comprehensive perspective as to the bicycle-related factors and conditions involved. Criminal charges may be warranted. An officer knowledgeable in bike law could be a victim cyclist’s best advocate, or a legal opponent, providing the details for fair prosecution.
The simple fact is that the operation and mechanics of bicycles are different from that of motor vehicles. And unless the investigating officer understands that, he or she won’t be able to accurately determine how the collision occurred and who is actually at fault.
Like the infamous downtown Hummer incident, in which the investigating officer concluded that the cyclist hit the SUV, even though the rear of the bike was damaged and the rider was thrown forward — suggesting that he somehow backed into the other vehicle.
Or my own case, when I was struck by a road-raging driver while stopped at a stop sign. Yet the investigating officer chose to accept the driver’s explanation that I had run the stop sign and fallen while making a right hand turn, even though that would have meant falling to the left while leaning into a right turn — something an officer who rides, or who was at least trained in cycling, would have understood was virtually impossible.
Then there’s the fact that in a car/bike collision, the driver is usually unhurt, while the cyclist can be seriously injured or worse. Which means that the police often hear just one side of the story.
Maybe that’s why, in virtually any repot of a collision at a controlled intersection, you’ll hear that the cyclist ran the red light or stop sign — never that the driver ignored the rider’s right of way or ran the signal themselves.
That also could explain why so many drivers involved in hit-from-behind collisions claim that the cyclist darted out in front of them without warning. Never that the driver was distracted or failed to see the rider in the first place.
In fact, many cyclists refer to that type of collision as an SWSS — Single Witness Suicide Swerve — because the frequency of such collisions would suggest that there must be a lot of death-wish cyclists out there.
That’s not to say cyclists are never at fault. I’ve seen enough riders attempt to pull off stupid life-risking stunts — myself included — to know that’s not true.
But the simple fact is, every cyclist is, and will remain, a 2nd class citizen on the streets until all police officers are trained in bike law.
And every bicycle-involved collision is investigated by an officer who understands the physics and realities of cycling.
………
Next year’s LA Bike Tour won’t be held in conjunction with the new Stadium to the Sea L.A. Marathon. Efforts are underway to ban cars from the annual bike-banning Festival of Lights instead. Where do I sign up? Streetsblog notes the anger over new bike lanes in Santa Clarita, where some residents feel ambushed, while others fault the design. Bike thefts are up across the country, including Downtown L.A.; some victims are using social media to get them back, Lance included. Even with the current budget cuts, Elk Grove gets state funding for a new bike overpass. Minnesota artists create bike racks that salute their Scandinavian heritage. Lebron James leads local kids and cyclists in a charity bike ride; so when can we expect the first annual Kobe Bryant Bike Classic? Even bike-friendly Portland suffers from the fatal hit-and-run plague. Cyclists roll by in a Chinatown bike lane as a NY politician holds a press conference to claim no one ever uses it. Finally, an 81-year old Welsh paperboy has his bike stolen while one of his customers thanks him with a piano recital.
I never get honked at when I ride.
I honestly can’t remember the last time it happened. I go out of my way to ride safely and courteously. Yet the other day, two separate drivers honked at me as I was riding.
Maybe it was the stress of driving crowded L.A. streets. Maybe they were still ticked off about some other cyclist who cut them off or ran a red light. Or maybe Rush Limbaugh or some other bike-hating jerk went on another anti-bike rant and got their listeners riled up once again.
Maybe it was just a coincidence.
But two drivers honked at me yesterday. And not in a friendly way.
The first came about 30 miles after my encounter with the undead dog. I was riding east on Washington, after the bike lane from the beach ends a few blocks before Abbot Kinney.
Even without the bike lane, the roadway is wide enough that I was out of the traffic lane, and riding only a few miles below the speed of traffic. And yet, as a driver came up on my left, he suddenly blared his horn.
Not the friendly tap some drivers employ in a misguided attempt to tell us they’re there. As if we don’t already know. No, this was a loud, long leaning on the horn that could only be heard as “get the f… out of my way, ‘cause I’m coming through.”
No really. I’m quite proficient in horn as a second language. And there was no mistaking his message.
Nor was there any mistaking mine as he went by.
Of course, he was shocked and appalled that I would respond in such a manner. In fact, he wanted to continue the conversation at the next red light. But I’ve had that discussion before, and didn’t see any reason to get into it again.
So I gave my signal, and made a left onto Abbot Kinney as he continued to shout after me.
The next one was more troubling, though.
I was headed north on Ocean, directly in front of the Frank Gehry designed building with the binoculars.
The road is narrower there, although traffic is lighter, so I’d taken the lane since turning off from Abbot Kinney. As I passed the Gehry Building, a huge garbage truck came up from behind.
I moved slightly to the right to give him a little more room. But just as his front bumper came up beside me, he suddenly laid on his horn — a loud, long basso profundo blast that was completely unnecessary, since he was already in my field of view.
Then he buzzed me, passing not more than a foot away, so close that I couldn’t extend my elbow — let alone my arm — without hitting him.
Fortunately, even though I was startled, I stayed in control. Because swerving in either direction could have been fatal.
Had I reacted by swerving left, I would have hit him and probably ended up under his wheels. Swerving to the right would have sent me into the parked cars, and most likely caused me to ricochet back into him with the same result.
Of course, what he did is perfectly legal in California. While other states are rapidly adopting the three-foot passing law, the law here only requires that motorists pass at a safe distance — which is usually interpreted as anything that doesn’t actually come in contact with the rider. And there is no law here against harassing a cyclist, even if that harassment causes an accident.
Sure, other charges can be filed. But they usually aren’t. And calling the police is often a waste of time.
In retrospect, I wish I’d chased the driver down, and gotten enough information to get him fired. Anyone who drives like that doesn’t belong on the street. Let alone behind the wheel of a multi-ton vehicle the size of a small house.
But I was too shaken to even catch the name of the company. And frankly, even though I knew I could catch him, I was angry enough that I didn’t trust what I’d do once I did.
So I rode home, shaken and angry.
And he gets to keep his job, and will likely do it again to someone else — who may not be as lucky.
And he’ll probably get away with that, as well.
……….
The Mid City West Neighborhood Council — covering what the rest of us would call the Fairfax District — took matters into their own hands, and designed their own bike plan. Write your Congress person to support HR 2521, which would create a development bank to fund infrastructure projects, railways and — dare we hope? — bikeways. Stephen Box explains how Melbourne has it backwards, or maybe upside down, compared to L.A. Mark your calendar for the upcoming Bike MS 2009 charity ride, and movie night at the Encino Velodrome (be honest, did you even know there was an Encino Velodrome?). Here’s your chance to tour Pasadena by foot or bike, and discover upcoming bike routes. The Christian Science Monitor asks if bikes and cars can really share the road, while N.Y. Times finds that more bikes lanes fail to bring peace to the city. A paper in Quebec goes on an anti-bike rant — citing a tragic pedestrian-bike collision that occurred nearly 20 years ago — and suggests that all bike lanes in the city center be removed. Paramedics in London — where everyone has medical coverage — have taken to their bikes. Finally, goodbye Teddy. You’ll be missed.
I remember reading a short story years ago, back when I was still in grade school.
I couldn’t tell you now who wrote it, or even what it was called, just that it was about a detective investigating the death of someone killed in a hit-and-run collision.
But it must have made quite an impact.
The reason it stuck with me all these years was that he hated cases like that, because he knew he wouldn’t find a homicidal monster at the end of the case. Just a scared person who ruined two lives in a single irrevocable act.
I was thinking about that today because, as promised, Danny attended this morning’s arraignment of Robert Sam Sanchez, the driver charged with killing Rod Armas and critically injuring his 14-year old son in a drunken hit-and-run collision during the June Grand Tour Double Century.
Here’s what he had to report:
Sanchez pled NOT GUILTY to all charges and denied all affirmative allegations in the criminal complaint.
Criminal Counts:
1)Cal. Penal Code 191.5(a) – gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated
2)Cal. Vehicle Code 23152(a) – driving under the influence
3)Cal. Vehicle Code 20001(a) – failure to stop after an accident involving an injury
Preliminary Hearing is set for Tuesday, Sept. 15 @ 8:30 am in Dept. 1 at the Malibu Courthouse.
A group of 10 people, mostly family I believe, were there in support of Robert S. Sanchez. They all seemed concerned and a little new to the criminal process and courthouse setting. Sanchez appeared calm and clean cut, wearing a dark suit. Nothing about his appearance or his family really compelled me to form a negative opinion about him. He did not speak at all during the arraignment. His attorney James Armstrong spoke on his behalf. At the end of the hearing as Sanchez and his attorney were walking out, Judge Lawrence Mira asked the district attorney what the blood alcohol level was. The D.A. responded, “.05, but that was about 5 hours later.”
I was a little troubled by that. Why the hell would it take the Sheriff 5 hours to get a breathalyzer test from this guy? It’s not like this happened in downtown L.A. or Hollywood where there is a line of drunks backed up at the station waiting to get their breath tested.
I have to admit, I share Danny’s concern about the long-delayed blood alcohol test. Maybe someone out there can explain why there was such a long delay in administering the test to Sanchez, and what effect, if any, that could have on his trial.
In addition, Danny later went down to the criminal courthouse in Downtown L.A., to gather information about the trial of Alejandro Hidalgo, the driver charged with killing Jesus Castillo in another DUI collision, this time in Echo Park:
Later in the afternoon, I took a trip to the Downtown L.A criminal courthouse. The clerk’s office filled me on the details in this case.
Arraignment took place May 15, 2009. The clerk seemed a little confused about the plea, but she “thinks” it was a NOT GUILTY plea.
Charges:
1)Cal. Penal Code 191.5(a) – gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated
2)Cal. Vehicle Code 23152(a) – driving under the influence
3)Cal. Vehicle Code 23152(b) – driving under the influence with a B.A.C. over .08
Preliminary Hearing is set for Friday, August 28, 2009 @ 8:30 am in Dept. 35 at the Downtown L.A. criminal courthouse (Clara Foltz Criminal Justice Center).
This one also made me wonder. Why the hell wasn’t a hit and run charge added? I thought there was a witness that saw it all happen and followed the car to get the plates.
Similar cases at first glance, but we’ll see if there are similar results.
Once again, a good question. Why wasn’t Hidalgo charged with leaving the scene? And was that 5-hour delay the reason Sanchez wasn’t charged with having a BAC over .08, as Hidalgo was?
Two cyclists are dead, another seriously injured. Their families face a lifetime of loss, a hole in their lives that can never be filled.
Meanwhile, two drivers face years of imprisonment, their lives forever ruined.
Because they each got behind the wheel after drinking.
Took the life of a total stranger.
And ran.
……..
Will introduces the world to his sort-of-new bike, 8-Ball. Russ and Laura offer striking photos from their journey through the Northwest, and relate a visit from a formerly cycling Father Time. Bicycle Fixation offers a solution to the problem of what to do with your helmet when you lock up your bike. The Tucson Bike Lawyer goes head over handlebars on a Colorado mountain bike run, but fares better than some of the others. A Florida cyclist is killed in a hit-and-run, after losing his own license for a DUI. A Wisconsin legislator injured a cyclist after running a red light. Finally, while we struggle to get — and keep — a patch of paint on Reseda, Copenhagen gets bicycle superhighways.
As we drove through the Westside this past weekend, my wife and I watched in amazement as one driver after another attempted maneuvers you won’t find in the driver’s manual, with varying degrees of success.
We agreed that the overall quality of driving in L.A. was worse than we’d ever seen it. And it clearly hasn’t gotten any better since.
Take yesterday’s ride, for instance.
It started before I could even get out of the alley behind my building. A driver was trying to back his van around a blind corner from the street into the alley. His view was completely blocked by the building next to me, so he had no idea what, if anything, was behind him — yet he did it anyway.
And what was behind him was me.
So I hugged the side of the building and waited until he finally stopped, then pulled around him, shaking my head as I passed.
Just two blocks later, I waited at a stop sign as a trash truck crossed the street in front of me. Instead of clearing the intersection, though, the driver stopped part way, then backed around the corner onto the street I was on. It wasn’t until he finished backing up and was facing me that he finally saw me there, waiting to cross.
Most drivers would have recognized that I had the right-of-way, and let me go first. Instead, he looked directly at me as he cut me off to complete his three-point U-turn.
A few minutes after that, I crossed Wilshire Blvd on a green light. Just as I reached the other side, a car lurched out from the curb just ahead of me, then stopped, blocking the lane, and cut me off again as he turned left into a driveway. All without signaling, of course.
I don’t know if he didn’t see me, or just didn’t care.
Then at the very next intersection, I pulled up to a four-way stop at the same time that two cars came up to the intersection on the cross street, one behind the other. The first driver looked my way, so I nodded for her to go, then started across the street.
As I was crossing, the second driver looked directly at me, gunned her engine and cut me off as she zoomed through the stop sign just feet in front of me. But evidently, it was okay — in her mind at least — because she gave me the dismissive “so sorry” wave as she passed.
I responded with another kind of wave. And forty-two days of middle-finger sobriety went down the drain.
And that was just first mile of my ride.
By the time I got back home, I’d also encountered a Range Rover — without plates, of course — who cut into the bike lane right in front of me so he could pass a long line of cars that weren’t speeding quite fast enough for him.
Then there was the driver who pulled out from a cross street right in front of me — which another driver waiting to cross in the opposite direction took as her signal to go, even though I was directly in front of her. Fortunately, she stopped just in time, as I braced for the impact.
The winner, though, had to be the driver I encountered on the last leg of my ride as I rode east on Ohio.
I took the lane soon after crossing Westwood Blvd, like I always do. The street is too narrow for cars to pass safely there, while the steep downhill lets me to go as fast, if not faster, than the speed of traffic.
This time, however, the driver behind me tried to pass on the wrong side of the road, even though I was riding at least as fast as the 25 mph speed limit — and common sense — allowed.
We were side-by-side as we went through the intersection at the bottom of the hill. Then she zipped up the next hill and turned left at the next corner, running the stop sign in the process — all without ever coming back to the right side of the road.
Of course, not everyone drives like that.
Even though it seems like a lot, these were just seven drivers out of the thousands I encountered that day — many of whom went out of their way to pass safely or wave me through a challenging intersection.
But the next time someone complains about all those damn law-flaunting cyclists, remind them that we’re not the only ones who do stupid, illegal and extremely dangerous things on the road.
Sure, there are cyclists out there who treat traffic laws with an excessive degree of flexibility.
But safe operation has nothing to do with the number of wheels you travel on.
……..
Brayj gets a neighborhood council to endorse the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights, after biking to the wrong meeting. The Anonymous Cyclist explains how to address the problem of putting 135 mm disk hubs on a 130 mm road bike frame. Santa Clarita ambushes drivers with unannounced bike lanes. Now Hollywood celebs can finally afford to ride along with their dogs; poor people will have to continue holding the leash. Santa Rosa experiments with a Bike Boulevard, proving a city can move forward without making a permanent commitment. A Silicon Valley cyclist bounces back from a near-fatal collision with a drunk driver. Even in Baton Rouge, where I was once regarded as a two-wheeled freak, they’re making room for bikes — maybe there’s hope for L.A. after all. Cycling deaths are up in Seattle despite increased spending to make cycling safer because drivers fail to yield — a $101 ticket. Cyclists attack a Boca Raton driver for passing too close; witnesses say he hit one of the riders. A Staten Island driver faces charges for assaulting a cyclist who tried to make a point by blocking cars from a bike lane. A Texas cyclist gets shot with a pellet gun, and assumes it’s a prank. Finally, it appears to be legal in New York to ram your car into a bicycle and drive 200 feet with the rider clinging to the hood, as long as he isn’t seriously injured. Gentlemen, start your engines — it’s open season on Gotham cyclists.
A couple of quick notes.
A reader named Danny sends word that Robert Sam Sanchez, the driver arrested in connection with the hit-and-run death of cyclist Rod Armas, will be arraigned this Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court.
As you may recall, Rod and his 14-year old son Christian were nearing the finish of the L.A. Wheelmen’s Grand Tour Double Century when they were struck by an alleged drunk driver on PCH near Malibu early in the morning of Sunday, June 28; Rod was killed and Christian was seriously injured. The driver ditched his truck about a mile away and was arrested by sheriff’s deputies a short time later.
According to Danny, the arraignment will take place in Dept. 1 of the Malibu Courthouse this Thursday, August 20, at 8:30 am. He says he plans to be there and will fill us in on any details. If anyone else plans to attend, feel free to forward observations you may have (you can find my email on the About BikingInLA page.
My prayers go out to the entire Armas family; if anyone can provide an update on Christian’s condition, let me know. And you can still make a donation to the Armas family online through the Talbert Family Foundation.
On another note, on the heels of last week’s successful turnout at the Northridge West Neighborhood Council meeting to fight the “rumored” peak hour lane proposal, BAC Chairperson Glenn Bailey sends word that the subject will be taken up by their Northridge East counterparts on Wednesday:
Fellow bicyclists and other interested persons:
This morning I received the attached agenda for the Northridge EAST Neighborhood Council meeting for 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, August 19 which includes Item 7d:
7. Old Business
d. Proposed Peak Hour Lane Reseda Boulevard
[Possible Action]
The meeting will be held at CSUN’s University Club located northwest of Nordhoff and Zelzah, enter from Dearborn St. Doors open at 6:30 p.m. and refreshments are usually served. (NOTE: When I called the University Club (818-677-2076) inquiring about bicycle parking I was told to “Tie it to a tree.” <sigh> I requested that they get a bicycle rack by tomorrow night’s meeting.)
FYI, I made a presentation at the Northridge East NC’s July meeting as to the information I had obtained as of then and I was well received. This morning I emailed the NENC board recommending that they vote to OPPOSE the Reseda Boulevard peak hour lanes and SUPPORT the installation of the long planned bicycle lanes between Nordhoff and Rinaldi streets. (The bicycle lanes would assure that no peak hour lanes would be installed in the future, or at least that it would be a much more difficult process.)
I am hoping you might be able to attend this meeting and inform others. As you can see, this time there is no motion listed on the agenda so it could go either way.
I will not personally be able to attend this meeting as I have a previous commitment out of town.
If you have any questions, please feel free to email and/or telephone me,
Thank you for your interest and assistance.
Cordially,
Glenn Bailey, Chairperson
Bicycle Advisory Committee
City of Los Angeles
If you live or ride in the area, I urge you attend the meeting if you can. LADOT may claim they don’t have any current plans for peak hour lanes on Reseda, but that could change as soon as we turn our backs. Let’s keep up the fight until we get those long-promised bike lanes painted on the street. (And thanks to Joe Linton for providing a link to the NENC agenda).
………
Evidently, Stephen Colbert reads Streetsblog LA, at least when it’s about him. Mikey Wally announces a party at Orange 20 to celebrate his return, along with two other SoCal cyclists, from a NY to LA cross-country ride. C.I.C.L.E. and the Santa Monica Museum of Art join together for an art ride this weekend, promising a slow pace and observance of all traffic laws. The Springfield Cyclist can now legally run red lights. A Colorado jerk motorist says bikes have as much right on the road as sheep, but at least sheep have enough sense to get out of the way. Athletes from the University of Colorado come to the aid of a fallen cyclist. Tucson unveils the Bike Church, a memorial to fallen cyclists made entirely of bike parts. Graphic evidence that cycling casualties go down as ridership goes up. A Toronto cyclist returns to find her bike ticketed for excessive awesomeness. Ireland agrees to pay for bike parking facilities; one of their top amateur cyclists is killed in a single vehicle car crash. Finally, in what may be the most vile incident in recent memory, a cyclist in Texas is killed by a hit-and-run driver who pulls the victim inside his back seat and drives home, leaving him in the car to die.
Earlier this evening, Joe Linton left the following comment on today’s post — about LADOT’s official denial of any plans to put peak hour lanes on Reseda Boulevard — which I’ve moved up here to give it the attention it deserves:
The LADOT owes you an apology, Ted! Bicyclists were responding to an earlier document from LADOT that pretty clearly states that they intended to implement the peak hour parking restrictions, and put the bike lane project on hold. From the June report from the LADOT bikeway engineer to the LA Bicycle Advisory Committee – regarding the status of the Reseda lanes: “West Valley District does not concur with the [Reseda bike lane] project, cites peak hour lane usage in near future.”
See the original LADOT report document here: http://glatwg.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/bike_lane_projects_in_progress1.pdf
Cyclists deserve an apology from the LADOT for their lie… and the immediate implementation of the long-delayed Reseda bike lanes.
Note item #8 from the LADOT document:
And note the status report:
The question is, did LADOT intentionally lie to us? Or do they honestly not know what their various divisions are doing?
I don’t know which possibility scares me more.
Thanks, Joe. I owe you one.
But I’m not going to hold my breath on that apology.
Update: 8-14-09, 3pm:
BAC Chairperson Glenn Bailey has written a detailed rebuttal to LADOT’s denial of their plans to install a peak hour lane on Reseda Blvd. Damien Newton has put the full text of Glenn’s letter online at Streetsblog — and says he doesn’t believes that LADOT intentionally misled him.
