You’re not required to ride to the right when sharrows are present
It’s said that ignorance of the law is no excuse.
But what if the ones who appear to be ignorant of the law are the same people charged with enforcing it?
It looks like cyclists in San Diego’s North County may be about to find out.
In a case reminiscent of the West Hollywood Sheriff’s deputy who was captured on video demonstrating his lack of knowledge about sharrows recently, a San Diego County Sheriff’s Captain spoke — or rather, misspoke — on the subject with community members last month.
According to the Coast News,
Sheriff Capt. Robert Haley said sharrows are a great concept but there has been some confusion on the proper way to use them.
Problem is, he’s the one who seems to be confused.
“Some people think it’s a giant bike lane,” he said, adding that, according to the law, cyclists are always supposed to ride as far to the right as possible anytime they are on a roadway, even in a sharrow or bike lane.
Uh, no.
Excuse me. Hell no.
Bike riders are not required to ride to the right within a bike lane, which in most cases would put you in the door zone. Or in the gutter.
Instead, bicyclists are legally allowed to ride anywhere between the two lines they feel safest or most comfortable. And a sheriff’s captain should know that.
He should also know that cyclists can leave a bike lane anytime, for any number of reasons. And that they aren’t required to ride in a bike lane unless they’re travelling below the speed of traffic.
Which means that if you’re riding as fast or faster than the cars around you, the requirement to ride to the right doesn’t even apply, and you can ride anywhere in the roadway you damn well please.
And it doesn’t apply at all within a bike lane.
Any officer foolish enough to ticket a cyclist for not riding on the far right of a bike lane can, and should, be laughed out of court.
The same goes for anyone who tries to ticket a bicyclist for riding on sharrows.
Sharrows, or shared lane markings, are intended, among other things, to indicate where a bike rider should position him or herself on a lane that’s too narrow to be safely shared by a bike and a car travelling side-by-side in the same lane.
And that’s the key point.
Sharrows are intended for use on substandard-width lanes, which is generally considered any right-side traffic lane narrower than 14 feet.
Think of it this way.
You take up about three feet on your bike, and need a three foot cushion for an eight-foot wide vehicle to pass you safely.
And that’s if there’s no parking on your right. If there is, add another four to five feet to keep you safely out of the door zone.
Which means that, according to CVC 21202, the requirement to ride as far right as practicable — not as possible, despite what Capt. Haley said — does not apply on any lane less than 14 feet wide, or 18 if it contains parking.
So sharrows not only indicate that the lane is to be shared between bikes and cars, they should serve as an indication to everyone concerned that the requirement to ride to the right does not apply on that street.
Then again, it doesn’t apply on many, if not most, right hand lanes in Southern California, sharrowed or otherwise, where a 14 foot lane would be a luxury.
You’d think those charged with enforcing our laws would get that.
Of course, you’d also think that police, sheriffs and CHP officers would know that there is no requirement to ride single file under California law. In fact, it’s not even mentioned anywhere in the California Vehicle Code.
And one of the basic precepts of English Common Law, which forms the basis of the American legal system, is that anything that isn’t expressly prohibited is therefore legal.
But like Capt. Haley’s, many police agencies — including the CHP and at least some sections of the LA County Sheriff’s Department — frequently misapply CVC 21202 to ticket cyclists who are legally riding side-by-side.
“If a person is riding to the left of someone else, he isn’t as far to the right as possible,” he added.
Haley said he verified the law with Traffic Commissioner Larry Jones, who confirmed that cyclists must ride in a single line while on a street.
As one cyclist I know put it, “I couldn’t ride any further to the right, officer. There was another bike there.”
Except, as pointed out above, CVC 21202 doesn’t apply on substandard lanes.
Which means that bike riders can legally ride side-by-side — or side-by-side-by-side, or more — on any lane that’s less than 14 feet wide, or 18 to 19 feet wide if there’s parking on the right.
And again, that’s virtually every right lane in Los Angeles, and most in Southern California.
Or, as pointed out above, if you’re riding at the speed of traffic. Which means if your double paceline can ride at the speed limit for the roadway you’re riding on, you are perfectly within your rights.
Of course, it’s not just the police that get it wrong.
As David Salovesh pointed out, the DMV’s own training materials (top of page 17) get it wrong, too.
Bicyclists may ride side-by-side (two abreast) on roadways, but they must ride single file when being overtaken by other vehicles. Bicyclists may only travel more than two abreast on a shoulder, bike lane or bike path intended for bike use if there is sufficient space. However, they must be in single file when passing vehicles, pedestrians, or other bicyclists.
None of which appears in CVC 21202, despite their citation. Or anywhere else in the Vehicle Code, for that matter.
Not the part about being allowed to ride two abreast, or being required to ride single file when passing or being passed.
Which makes you wonder just how they came up with it. And how they justify spreading false information with no basis in the law in an official publication.
But back to our sheriff’s captain from San Diego County.
Haley said cyclists who don’t like the laws can work to get legislation enacted to change them.
Or he, and other police officers, could just try enforcing the laws as they are actually written, rather than misinterpreting and misapplying them to prohibit behaviors they were never meant to address.
Fortunately, Haley says his department doesn’t intend to target riders for violating their misinterpretation of the law.
But anyone who does get a ticket for riding abreast or not riding far enough right — with or without sharrows, in San Diego or anywhere else — should measure the lane they were riding in.
Then get a good lawyer.
Let’s catch up on a couple items I haven’t had a chance to mention this week. As well as frightening news from this week’s commute.
……….
I’ve just gotten word of a violent road rage attack against a cyclist in the Valley Wednesday night.
The car’s license plate has been blurred to avoid interfering with the investigation
I’ll let the victim, John, tell his story; I’m withholding his last name to protect his privacy and help prevent possible retaliation.
I left my work on Owensmouth in Chatsworth around 5:20 pm Wednesday, riding north towards Lassen. It’s two lanes there; I take up the right lane, since there’s no room and the street is messed up on the shoulder.
A white car passed me very close and very fast. He had to almost immediately slam on his brakes because there were 10 stopped cars in both lanes in front of him. I passed him while he was stopped, then as traffic started moving I was now in front of him again. He started laying on his horn and yelling for me to get out of the road, so I stopped in front of him and asked him what his issue was.
He told me bikes can’t be in the road and I needed to be on the sidewalk. We argued back and forth, then he said he would call the police if I didn’t get out of his way. I told him to please call the police. He then threatened to come move me himself, so I said go ahead (I’m 6’5” and 300 pounds).
After that, he got back in his car and honked awhile longer. I was trying to explain to him my rights as a cyclist but he would not listen to me. He then drove slowly forward, making contact and slightly pushing my bike. I yelled at him, then he just nailed the gas. He knocked me to the ground and ran over my bike and right leg, then had to stop because there were two cars in front of him at the light.
As I got up, he got out of his car and told me that I am an asshole and I’m the reason people hate cyclists. I took the pic of him and his car about that time.
He then got back in his car, made a left on Lassen and drove off. I tried to get witnesses from the over 20 people there, but only got two to stop. Then I called 911. My leg looked like I had 2 tennis balls under my skin on my mid and lower shin, as well as a few cuts and both chain and tire marks; after a minute or two it was hard to walk.
They took me to Northridge Hospital. There is a possible fracture of one of the bones in my foot and crush injuries to my leg. I need to see another doctor in a couple days when the swelling goes down, but meanwhile, I can’t really walk because it hurts to put any pressure on my leg. The reporting officer said he went to the guy’s address but he was not answering the door and it appeared his car was in the garage. Now I guess the case is in limbo between that officer and the detectives.
Hopefully, John will be okay. And hopefully, the police will take this case seriously and get a dangerous driver — one willing to use his car as a weapon — off the streets.
And that’s exactly what the charge should be, assault with a deadly weapon. It doesn’t matter that they were arguing before the impact, any more than it would matter if two men were arguing outside a bar when one took out a gun and shot the other.
But as this case clearly shows, it’s almost always a mistake to stop and argue with an angry driver, no matter how wrong or how much of a jerk he or she may be. Let alone stop in front of them.
I learned that lesson myself. The hard way.
Your best move is to get out of the way, and photograph — or better yet, video — the driver’s actions, and get the names and numbers of any witnesses.
Then let the police deal with it.
On the other hand, this could also be a good test case for LA’s bicyclist anti-harassment ordinance.
Correction: I originally wrote that this incident occurred on Thursday; it actually took place on Wednesday.
………
A few months back, I ran into a guy with a brilliant idea for a web-based video series.
Steve Isaacs told me about Sweet Ride USA, devoted to exploring the sweet side of life by bike.
If you ask me, the only thing that goes better with bikes than dessert is beer. And it’s a lot easier to ride home after a few pastries than it is a handful of beers.
He promised to send me more details. And then… nothing.
At least, until I went online the other day to dig through my email server’s spam filter looking for another message that didn’t get through. And found the one he’d sent me over two months earlier.
Sorry about that, Steve.
For the last few months I’ve been developing a new web series called Sweet Ride USA, about exploring a city by bicycle with friends, seeking out delicious desserts and ultimately burning off every calorie we consume on the ride. It’s a homemade effort, all done with a partner and a bunch of friends donating their time & talent, and we just launched our first episode!
WATCH EPISODE 1 http://bit.ly/srusaep1
The bike culture and its people have been very good to me, and I wanted create a show that would bring viewers into the unique thrill of checking out a city on two wheels and use the sampling of desserts as a universal hook, for the non-biking folks.
The long view for the show is to eventually travel the world and find out what their bike cultures have to teach us… while eating their donuts.
I’d love it if you’d check out the show – http://bit.ly/srusaep1 and if you like it – please subscribe, follow, like or share with your audience.
Steve Isaacs Facebook Twitter Check out our Teaser Trailer http://bit.ly/srusateaser Subscribe to the Sweet Ride USA YouTube Channel http://youtube.com/sweetrideusa
………
Former LACBC board member, and UCLA and Cambridge lecturer Dr. Michael Cahn writes about the revival of an erstwhile bike group on the Westwood campus.
There used to be a little group called UCLA Bicycle Academy. We had a blog http://www.bicycleacademy.blogspot.com/ and a monthly lunch appointment, the first Friday every month.
This Friday, 6 September, we will resume this little routine. Donald “High-Price-of-Free-Parking” Shoup is joining us for a little update about campus developments and opportunities. Do join us for a good start to the new term! We meet at Lu Valle Commons on Friday 6 September at 12 noon.
………
Finally, Mark Goodley forwards a photo of the Ghost Bike for Debra Deem, killed in a collision while riding in Newport Beach last week.
Beautiful. And just too sad for words.
We can all look forward to the day when the last bike rider killed on our streets is the last bike rider killed on our streets.
Photo by Mark Goodley
Call it a case of miscommunication.
Last week’s failure to ticket the driver who right hooked Melanie Freeland as she biked to work — despite being witnessed by two police officers — quickly went from bad to worse.
As Freeland questioned why the driver wasn’t ticketed for failing to signal and yield the right-of-way as required by law, it quickly devolved into a desk officer arguing with her and refusing to put through her call to the bike liaison for the Central Traffic Division.
And led to an explanation from the Watch Commander on duty at the time of the collision that made it appear that most police officers are prohibited from writing traffic tickets, even if they witness the incident.
Or maybe not.
That bike liaison in question, LAPD Central Traffic Division’s Sgt. Laszlo Sandor, went to great lengths to clarify matters at last night’s regularly scheduled bike liaison meeting, which evolved from the department’s long-standing bike task force.
First off, the officers who witnessed the collision could have written a ticket on the spot. The reason they didn’t wasn’t that they didn’t have specific training in traffic law, as Freeland had understood from the Watch Commander’s explanation. It was that they were due in court, and had to hand the case off to someone else to avoid the wrath of an angry judge.
Or worse, having their case dismissed.
Secondly, Freeland reported that the Watch Commander had described a Catch 22 that would seem to prevent most patrol officers from writing a ticket in virtually any situation.
She stated that in order for a traffic citation to be issued two criteria must be met. An LAPD officer must witness the incident and be trained in traffic laws (taken the special course in traffic). Because the [traffic officer] didn’t witness the incident it did not meet the two criteria. Secondly, the officer who did witness the incident is not trained in traffic laws, so again it does not meet the criteria.
In other words, as she understood it, in order to issue a ticket at the scene, an officer must 1) actually witness the infraction, and 2) have specialized training in traffic investigations.
Which counts out the overwhelming majority of officers on the street.
Well, almost.
As Sgt. Sandor explained, there are two ways a driver — or a bike rider or pedestrian, for that matter — can be held accountable for an infraction.
The first is the one we’re all familiar with.
Someone commits an infraction, like running a red light, for instance. An officer sees it, fires up the lights and sirens, and tickets the violator on the spot.
Or in this case, can write a ticket after actually witnessing a collision. Which these officers could have done, but didn’t, for the reason explained above.
The second way is what the Watch Commander evidently tried, and failed, to explain. A driver can be ticketed after the fact if the investigating officer can conclusively determine what actually happened based on witness statements and the evidence at the scene.
But in order to do that, the officer must have specialized training in traffic investigations.
So any officer can write a ticket for any infraction they witness. Or an officer with specialized traffic investigation training can write a ticket or make an arrest after the fact, based on the totality of evidence.
In addition, there are two ways a driver can be held accountable for an infraction.
Again, he or she can be ticketed or arrested, depending on the severity of the infraction. Or the investigating officer can find the driver at fault in the traffic report, in which case the driver won’t face a fine or jail time, but will be charged points against his or her license by the DMV.
That appears to be what happened in Freeland’s case.
So justice was, apparently, won, despite a full week’s worth of aggravation and confusion.
The officers at the meeting suggested that, in some ways, it’s better to have the driver found at fault and have points charged by the DMV, since, unlike a ticket, it can’t be fought in court or dismissed if the officer is unable to attend the hearing.
Although if the driver is convicted, he will still have points charged against his or her license, as well as face additional penalties from the court.
As for the argument with the desk officer, Sgt. Sandor suggested that the officer was actually trying to help, since he — Sandor — was out of the office for several days.
But in the end, we all agreed that it would have been better to simply send the call to his voice mail, rather than appear to screen the bike liaison’s calls.
On the other hand, all of the department’s bike liaisons at the meeting agreed that email was the best way to contact them, rather than calling. Email leaves a written record of the conversation that they can refer to later. And they receive emails on work computers as well as on their personal devices, regardless of whether they are in the office.
And one more thing.
This morning I received an email from Melanie Freeland, who reported that she was back on her bike and once again riding to work, exactly one week after she was hit by the car.
Now that’s good news.
………
Thanks to Sgt. Sandor for looking into the matter and clarifying a very confusing situation. And thanks to the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition’s Colin Bogart, who worked with the LAPD and city officials to assist Freeland in this case.
The LACBC doesn’t often trumpet its victories or the work it does to help individual bike riders — perhaps to its detriment.
But as in the case above, I’ve often witnessed their staff members fighting behind the scenes for the rights of bike riders, whether collectively or on an individual basis. And whether or not they’re members of the coalition.
It’s an organization I’m proud to support and be a part of.
Meanwhile, writing on LA Streetsblog, an LA attorney offers advice on what to do if the police fail to adequately respond to a collision.
We’ve got a lot of news to catch up on. So let’s not waste any time.
………
In still more tragic news, a teenage Long Beach girl loses a leg, and nearly both, when her bike is struck by a Lexus and she’s pushed through a plate glass store window Monday afternoon.
According to the Long Beach Post, the girl was riding to the beach with her adult nephew when the Lexus allegedly ran a red light and struck another vehicle. The collision caused the Lexus to veer into the riders, who were standing with their bikes waiting for the red light to change.
Both riders were struck, though the other rider suffered less serious injuries.
In a sign of just how trivially traffic laws and dangerous drivers are treated, the driver was cited and released.
Meanwhile, his or her victim has been sentenced to a lifetime on one leg.
………
AB 184, which would add one year to the statute of limitations for prosecutors to file charges once they identify a suspect in hit-and-run cases, moves forward in the state Senate.
Meanwhile, California’s third attempt at passing a three-foot passing law once again sits on Governor Jerry Brown’s desk, awaiting his signature — or perhaps a chance to veto it a third time. Texas Governor Rick Perry is the only other governor to veto a three-foot bill, and he only did it once.
There is simply no reason left to veto this watered down bill, after every objection Brown expressed to the previous versions has been addressed or removed.
So when if he vetoes it once again, I hope he’ll be honest with us and say he just doesn’t like bikes.
………
Opus the Poet’s Witch on a Bicycle has long been one of my favorite bike-related websites, tracking cycling collisions and other bike news from around the world — and offering advice on how to avoid them yourself.
The collisions, not the news.
What many readers may not realize, though, is that he himself was briefly a bicycling fatality, brought back to life only by the miracle of modern medicine.
And, as he movingly explains, as a different person than he was before. Not necessarily better or worse, but very different.
It can be a damn long road back from a devastating collision, and not everyone has the courage to do it. He did, and does.
I can’t even begin to tell you how much I admire that guy.
………
Just heartbreaking.
Some despicable low life has stolen the bike that would been used by a San Pedro man in the cycling portion of last June’s Redondo Beach Triathlon — if he hadn’t died of a heart attack in the swimming leg that proceeded it. His adult son had been planning to ride the yellow Specialized Allez in next year’s race in his father’s honor.
If the schmuck who took it has any human decency left, he’ll put it back where he found it. If not, hopefully we can find some room for a lengthy stay behind bars for him.
………
First the good news about the news, then the bad.
In a must-watch news report, an eight-year old journalist reports on Caltrans’ dangerous installation of K-rail along the shoulder of north/westbound PCH above Malibu.
The concrete barrier, installed in response to a recent brush fire in the area, dangerously forces riders in front of high speed traffic on a bend in the roadway. Funny how a child has a better sense of bike safety than the state Highway Department charged with keeping us all safe.
That is their job, isn’t it?
Then again, a group of riders recently took the lane on PCH instead of hugging the shoulder. And declared it the best bike lane in the world.
………
Yellow journalism lives, as the anti-bike publisher of NELA’s Boulevard Sentinel accuses the LACBC of planning to pad the planned Eagle Rock bike count on September 14th.
Tom Topping, who has led a vociferous, if somewhat biased, opposition to planned road diet and bike lanes in Northeast LA, writes that a planned Sept. 14th bike safety class in Eagle Rock, as well as additional classes in Glendale and Pasadena, exist only so the Coalition can get unsuspecting participants to ride past the Eagle Rock bike count location scheduled for the same day.
Never mind that the two events are completely unrelated, or that the planned route for the Metro-sponsored safety classes go nowhere the bike count location. Or that the dates and times for the citywide bike count co-sponsored by the LACBC and Los Angeles Walks are the same for every neighborhood in the LA area, regardless of whether they face opposition from a local newspaper publisher intent on keeping bike lanes from besmirching his neighborhood.
Of course, by calling advance attention to this paranoid conspiracy theory, he’ll later be able to claim that he stopped the Coalition from cheating on the count when the class participants don’t go anywhere near where they never going to go in the first place.
Just like I can keep tigers away by snapping my fingers.
No, really. Haven’t seen one yet.
………
Somewhere in between those two journalistic efforts, the Los Angeles News Group’s Summer of Cycling comes to a disappointing end.
The parent group of the Daily News, Press-Telegram, Daily Breeze, et al, finishes its short examination of bicycling in the Los Angeles area with a positive look back at the last 20+ years. Along with unexamined — and unchallenged — readers comments, including a call for every bicyclist to ride facing traffic.
I kid you not.
And a “can’t we all just get along” summation of the lessons learned in their feeble efforts over the past few months. One that mistakenly says bike riders must dismount and walk at crosswalks, ignoring state law that, confusing though it may be, allows bicyclists to ride along crosswalks.
The LAPD’s current interpretation of that law is that bike riders can ride in the crosswalk as long as they go in the direction of traffic; ignoring the bi-directional nature of both crosswalks and the sidewalks of which they are an extension.
Los Angeles cyclists and drivers could have both benefitted from an in-depth examination of the issues facing local cyclists and the impact of bikes on our communities. Instead, we got a series that barely skimmed the surface, offering less depth than the investigative efforts of a typical high school newspaper.
They apparently didn’t even contact any of the many bicycling advocates and city officials fighting for greater safety, acceptance and improved infrastructure for bicyclists on SoCal streets. Any series on local cycling that doesn’t mention Long Beach’s Charlie Gandy, CICLE or the LACBC, or examine the progress in Long Beach or Santa Monica, just to name a few, is a failure from the outset.
If this is the face of LA journalism, count me out.
………
I’ve always wondered how any bike rider — or anyone else — could get hit by a train; a new Metro video dramatically drives it home. The Source talks with bike commuting LADOT employee Jon Overman, who helped the city score a grant for 43 miles of new bike lanes; when I started this blog, I don’t think most of the city’s traffic planners and engineers knew what a bike was, let alone actually rode one. LA’s city council takes a big step towards livability by voting to cap the 101 Freeway in Downtown LA with a park. A call for entries for Ghost Bikes of LA, a multi-media exhibition exploring the ghost bike phenomenon, hosted by red35 yellow#7. LAist offers tips for drivers and cyclists on how to survive around one another. Gary Kavanagh offers his input on the planned redesign of Santa Monica’s Michigan Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (MANGO); loss of parking is a concern. A September 15th ride around the Santa Monica Airport is planned to consider its future after the city’s agreement with the FAA expires in 2015. Ten reasons to complete the survey for the Malibu PCH Safety Study. Pasadena police arrest two suspects for knocking a cyclist off his bike in an attempted robbery. The Pomona Valley Bicycle Coalition is hosting a barbeque on Saturday, Sept. 21st to thank everyone for their support.
Cycling in the South Bay writes movingly about fallen Newport Beach rider Debra Deem. Four hundred competitors take part in the inaugural Temecula Grand Prix. A Cayucos CA driver is under arrest after allegedly running down two cyclists, killing one and critically injuring the other while under the influence; she already had an outstanding warrant for reckless driving, but apparently was allowed to remain on the road until she succeeded in killing someone. In a case that sounds like a surreal scene from a David Lynch movie, a Stockton man riding with his son is wacked eight times with a cane by a 20-something Asian man. Petaluma brothers repair bikes for the homeless. Bike riders go just partway on the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge.
Twenty-nine riders have been named to the US World’s team. Family members say ‘70s cycling legend Dale Stetina is showing improvement. This is why you always carry ID with you on your bike, as an unidentified rider is killed in Wyoming. Eight months later, not a single citation has been issued under the new Dallas vulnerable road user law. A Lincoln NE bike rider ignores his injuries to aid the driver of the SUV that hit him. An Arkansas driver faces charges for the alleged distracted driving collision that took the life of a high school student on a cross country bike tour. Chicago’s bike friendly mayor shows just how friendly he is by aiding a rider who was injured in a collision. Evidently, she’s a Ramones fan, as an Ohio woman proceeds to beat on the brat with a baseball bat, oh yeah, after a 14-year old bike rider hits her in the face when she yelled an obscenity at him from her car; both were — deservedly — cited for assault. A New York state man is charged with hit-and-run after a road rider is found dead on the side of a street Sunday morning. New Jersey cracks down on New York bike riders. Boston wants to be the nation’s leading city for bicycling. If you think there’s been an increase in road raging drivers, you’re probably right. Florida confronts the state’s well-deserved killer reputation with protected and buffered bike lanes; it comes too late to help a tandem-riding couple critically injured by a hit-and-run driver.
A Vancouver area man is arrested in a fatal hit-and-run after his license plate is found next to the victim’s body; passersby tried heroically to save the victim’s life before paramedics arrived. Protesters surround the UK Parliament to protest cycling conditions; MPs respond by voting to Get Britain Cycling. Could a new London building be the ultimate weapon in the war on cars? Spandex — or rather, Lycra — clad thieves simply ride off on high-end bikes. A big hearted Liverpool cop teams with Walmart to replace a boy’s stolen bike. Clearly, hit-and-run is not just an LA problem. Tour de France riders live an average of 6.3 years longer than the general population; maybe because they get all the good drugs. Formula 1 star saves unpronounceable Spanish Euskaltel Euskadipro cycling team. New Varibike can be pedaled with feet or hands. A teenage Delhi boy is killed in a fight over bicycling courtesy; seems needlessly rude if you ask me. A young girl’s collarbone is broken in a collision with an Aussie cyclist on a shared pathway.
Finally, what it’s like to live in a town so bike friendly, even the chef at your soon to be ex-favorite restaurant can recognize a bike part in your food. You can now ride your bike up a tree. And if you’re going to walk off with the bike you just stole — complete with U-lock still attached to the rear wheel — don’t cross against the light.
I’ve got a long list of things to catch up on after a busy week filled with too much breaking news.
So let’s see if we can clear out the inbox, along with a long list of backed up links.
………
Last February, cyclist Damian Kevitt barely survived a horrifying hit-and-run in which he was dragged 600 feet onto the 5 Freeway under the van that hit him, losing a leg and suffering what a good Samaritan doctor described as the worst non-fatal injuries he’d ever seen.
Yet remarkably, Kevitt is back on his bike just seven months later.
I just hope I get the chance to shake his hand someday. That guy is amazing.
Meanwhile, the heartless coward who left him for dead is still walking free, presumably on two functional legs. Anyone with information is urged to call the CHP at (800) 835-5247; there’s a $25,000 reward for information that leads to a conviction in this case.
………
More details on the bike rider critically injured on OC’s Santa Margarita Drive.
Rancho Santa Margarita Patch reports the 34-year old rider remained in critical condition with life-threatening injuries after apparently bunny hopping the raised concrete median before darting into the path of an oncoming truck.
Patch notes that the rider wasn’t wearing a helmet. Not that it likely would have made a difference in a 45 mph collision with a delivery truck.
Thanks to Danny Gamboa for the link.
………
The LACBC and Los Angeles Walks are still looking for volunteers for next month’s bike and pedestrian count. Counters are especially needed in South LA, San Fernando Valley, Westwood and USC area.
………
Matthew Gomez writes that new bike lanes are hitting the street in Arcadia, in both directions of Colorado Blvd from Colorado Street to San Antonio Road, west of the newly remodeled bridge for the coming Gold Line extension.
Looks like they’re wisely getting ready for an increase in ridership once the trains start running.
………
Manhattan Beach will hold a meeting to discuss the city’s General Plan Mobility Plan update on September 24th from 6 pm to 8 pm.
The Mobility Plan update will provide goals and policies for a balanced, multi-modal transportation system for the movement of people and goods in Manhattan Beach. A balanced system uses multiple modes of travel to meet the needs of all users to include motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, seniors and users of public transportation.
Thanks to Paiwei Wei for the heads-up.
………
I received an email from Craig Kobayashi complaining about the dangerous conditions that have resulted from the closure of the popular Coyote Creek Trail.
I’m writing to try and enlist help on focusing attention to a dangerous detour generously provided to us by our good friends at CalTrans. I posted a comment on one of your blog entries regarding the Coyote Creek Trail. It has been closed due to the I-5 widening project since mid-2012 and projected to be closed until 2015! The closure can be seen here: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/bikepathclosures The bypass route they have provided includes the Carmenita Blvd bridge overpass, which is incredibly narrow with no provided shoulder. I’ve included a picture of the southbound portion of the bridge as taken from my GoPro. This is the detour CalTrans expects us to tolerate until 2015.
The Coyote Creek Trail was previously a staple on my daily commute route and I’ve simply grown fatigued of fighting this traffic. I fear that being forced into traffic lanes will inevitably result in a collision and we know how well cyclists fare vs. cars.
He notes that he contacted Caltrans about the project, and got a typical canned response. Hopefully they can do better with his follow-up.
Update: Craig reports he’s received a response from a Caltrans representative saying they are working with the County of Los Angeles to create a safer detour while the construction work goes on. And he offers a video of his commute through the work zone. For some reason, the video won’t embed, but you can click on the link to view it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aePC_W5-tI&hd=1
………
The first ever Rose Bowl Legacy Cycling Challenge is scheduled to roll on October 20th to celebrate the iconic Rose Bowl Stadium and the cities of the San Gabriel Valley, and benefitting City of Hope on its 100th anniversary.
The non-race rules-of-the-road ride will feature three routes ranging from 38 to 100 miles, with a $75 entry fee and a $350 fundraising commitment.
………
A new crowdsourcing website has been launched to express Angeleno’s concerns with the seemingly endless 405 expansion project.
The founder is especially concerned about the impact the project has had on city bicyclists and wants to hear from members of the bike riding community how the project has affected your life and safety, and what your concerns are going forward.
………
Maybe the reason LA is the nation’s leader for hit-and-runs is we’re also a world leader for massive SUVs and over-stressed drivers. LA has the second most collision — not accident — prone drivers in the US; turns out my hometown has the best. Great photos from last weekend’s inaugural Active Streets LA. Keep an eye on this proposed City Council ordinance which would require better workmanship on street repairs affecting crosswalks and bike lanes; it’s been continued for two more months. Streetsblog looks at last weekend’s second annual Clitoral Mass; men weren’t invited, but then, we probably wouldn’t have been able to find it anyway. Where to live car-free or car-lite in LA. Flying Pigeon hosts their next Brewery Ride on Saturday, Sept. 7th. Better Bike proposes a bike corral for the Biking Grey Hole of Beverly Hills; they’ve been upgraded to grey because they now have a great bike lane on Burton Way, even if you still have to risk your life just to get to it from either direction. Long Beach sharrows seem to show a drop in bicycle crashes.
Calbike offers their August update. Cynergy Cycles invites you to join in on the California Coast Classic Bicycle Tour next week. Bike Newport Beach looks at cycling’s invisible constituency, and says three deaths in the last year are three too many. You’re invited to San Diego’s Pedal for the Cause in October. A Fresno bike rider’s bike cam catches the hit-and-run van that knocked him over; needless to say, the owner’s wife blames the cyclist. Bike share officially begrimes the Bay Area. San Francisco’s bike progress leaves some neighborhoods behind. The chief of the SFPD says the driver who killed cyclist Amelie Le Moulac has been found at fault, after the city’s Bike Coalition uncovers security cam video the department didn’t care enough to find. Meanwhile, a local columnist says everyone needs to ease up a little. It takes a real schmuck to steal bicycles from Watsonville special ed students.
Seven tips for first time bike commuters. Bicycling looks at the state of bike commuting across the US. Modern American bike shops feature beer, coffee and wedding cake; sounds like our own Pedalers Fork fits right in. Unemployment doesn’t explain the nation’s drop in driving rates. A cyclist dies over a week after he’s apparently right-hooked by a Nevada judge. Portland dentist offers to fix a local cyclist’s teeth after they’re broken by traffic cone-wielding thugs. Sadly, a two-and-a-half pound Chihuahua survives a bike trip across the Rockies in his owner’s saddlebag, but succumbs to a collision with a Denver bicyclist. A Boulder CO bike shop calls on its customers to stop for stop signs. Tulsa OK considers a new law that would restrict cars from sharing a lane with bicycles. Columbus OH police shoot and kill an unarmed suspected bike thief after first knocking him off his bike with their patrol car, then it turns out it was his bike after all. New Hampshire police chief gets into videoed confrontation with racing cyclists. A second look at bicycle signal activation signs. Good things happen when towns put people ahead of cars. Bike share means more bike riders, more bike riders means more collisions, more collisions means more injuries, and more injures means more money for New York liability lawyers; did I get that right? If you’re going to run a stop sign, don’t do it in the path of a Virginia Tech campus cop. NASCAR racer Bobby Labonte breaks three ribs in a bicycling accident.
Your next helmet could be made of paper pulp, even if it looks like recycled paper salad bowl. Edinburgh drops speed limits to 20 mph to encourage bike riding; I’d be happy if we could keep LA drivers below 40 mph, or even 50, for that matter. Germany’s Chancellor Merkel calls bikes an important part of the mobility solution; I’ll be impressed when, and if, our bike-riding president ever says something like that. Check out these underground bike parking facilities in Japan; thanks to Phillip Young and Allyson Vought for the tip. Russian bike vs car collision caught on video; clearly, it’s the bike rider’s fault for like, being on the planet.
Finally, Bertrand Russell and George Bernard Shaw may have had history’s most intellectual bicycle crash. And new bike panties promise to protect women’s sensitive parts while you ride; wish I’d had the concession for the Clitoral Mass ride.
Evidently, cops aren’t credible witnesses.
At least as far as LAPD traffic officers are concerned.
Imagine you’re riding along when a driver right hooks you — not just turning across your path, but illegally making a right turn from the left lane — and in the process, not only violates your right-of-way, but causes a collision.
And for once, not just one, but two cops witness the whole thing.
And then…
Nothing.
………
That’s exactly what happened yesterday morning, when Melanie Freeland was making her regular bike commute from Highland Park to Downtown LA.
She was riding on North Broadway through Chinatown around 8:40 am, in the right peak hour lane — that is, what would normally be the parking lane, but converts to a regular traffic lane to accommodate rush hour traffic.
As she was passing the Far East National Bank at 977 N. Broadway, the Lexus traveling in the lane on her left — what was, in effect, the center of three lanes — suddenly turned into the building’s parking lot. The driver cut across the lane Freeland was riding in, without warning, forcing her off the roadway and causing her bike to collide with the car’s door and front panel.
A classic right hook, with the extra added benefit of an illegal turn from the wrong lane. Without signaling, no less.
If that’s not clear, just imagine you’re in the right lane of a two lane street, and the driver on the left suddenly makes a right turn directly in front of you.
And for once, a cop saw the whole thing.
Two police officers — one in uniform, the other in plain clothes — were on their way to court when the collision occurred right before their eyes. They pulled over to offer assistance, calling for an ambulance and staying with her until a regular traffic officer arrived to investigate.
Both officers — I’m leaving out the names of all the cops involved, though Freeland provided their names and badge numbers* — said the driver failed to signal or yield the right-of-way. But even though they were the ones who witnessed the wreck, it would be up to the traffic cop to actually issue a ticket.
The officers gave their report to the traffic investigator, then left for the courthouse.
………
And that’s when everything went to hell.
The investigator told Freeland he couldn’t issue a ticket or determine fault in the collision because he did not actually witness it, saying he “could not issue a traffic ticket for something he did not see.”
Never mind that two sworn officers did. As well as a security guard for the building, who supported the first officers’ version of events.
So Freeland smartly asked to speak with the traffic officer’s supervisor. Yet when the Sergeant arrived, she repeated the exact same sentence.
And added that “It is not a crime to hit a pedestrian.”
Note to police: bike riders are not pedestrians. We have all the rights and responsibilities of motor vehicle operators, and are allowed on every public street cars are allowed to use, with the exception of some limited access freeways. Calling us pedestrians implies we belong on the sidewalk and belittles our legal right to the roadway.
While it’s true that police officers are generally prohibited from writing citations for traffic violations they don’t witness, I’ve been assured by officers that they can write a ticket or make an arrest based on clear evidence pointing to responsibility for a collision or other violation.
And if the testimony of two cops who witnessed the whole thing — as well as a third independent witness — isn’t clear evidence, I don’t know what the hell is.
Instead, the officers sent just as clear a message that, as far as they’re concerned, bikes don’t’ belong on the street. And good luck getting justice.
Just like the bad old days of LAPD’s anti-bike, windshield bias I thought we’d left long behind us under Chief Beck’s more enlightened leadership.
As Michael MacDonald put it in an email informing me of the case,
There are a lot of things wrong in this picture, not the least of which is that LAPD has again made it clear that cyclists are essentially fair game. I am particularly frustrated that someone I know that had made a concerted effort to make a mode shift towards cycling and to educate herself to ride safely now feels no degree of protection on the road, and is deterred from ever commuting by bike in Los Angeles again.
Fortunately, Freeland does not appear to have suffered any serious injuries, although she was due to be examined by a physician late yesterday.
She’s following up with the original officers, and contacting the department’s bike liaison for the Central Traffic Division. And she plans to reach out to Councilmembers Gil Cedillo and Jose Huizar to express her disappointment and call for safety improvements on Broadway.
Police officers also tell me you should contact the Watch Commander overseeing the officers involved as quickly as possible after an incident like this.
But make no mistake.
Yesterday the LAPD failed Melanie Freeland.
Tomorrow, it might be you.
*My purpose here is not to embarrass the officers. The LAPD was been provided with all the names and badge numbers; it’s up to them to deal with the individuals involved.
Update: Okay, now I’m pissed. Melanie Freeland emailed this morning that she tried to call the bike liaison officer for the Central Traffic Division after I passed his contact information on to her. Except the desk officer who took the call initially refused to put the call through, significantly misrepresenting her case and saying “I know the same laws he does.”
She was finally able to leave a message, but hasn’t heard back yet.
Under former LAPD bike liaison Sgt. David Krumer, the department made great strides in improving relations with the bicycling community. But the expanded bike liaison program is absolutely meaningless if self-appointed gatekeepers are allowed to screen their calls.
And no one should ever have to face an argument when reaching out to anyone in the department for help.
I’ve praised the LAPD as one of the most progressive and bike-friendly police departments in the county since Chief Beck took over. But this is starting to feel like a huge step back to the bad old days.
Update 2: Freeland reports she spoke with the Watch Commander on duty at the time of the incident. Who turned out to be the same Sergeant who came to the scene and backed up the original traffic officer.
In the course of a long conversation, the officer described a Catch 22 that makes it almost impossible for the department to issue a ticket to anyone. Which goes a long way towards explaining the wild west mentality of LA streets, where drivers feel entitled to do virtually anything without fear of consequences.
I called the Central Traffic Division and asked to speak with the Watch Commander on duty yesterday. As I probably should have guessed it was [the Sergeant she’d spoken to at the scene]. I explained to her my phone conversation with [the desk officer] and she stated she did not know why he would state it was a rear end incident when it wasn’t. We talked at length about why a citation would not be issued for this offense. She stated that in order for a traffic citation to be issued two criteria must be met. An LAPD officer must witness the incident and be trained in traffic laws (taken the special course in traffic). Because the [traffic officer] didn’t witness the incident it did not meet the two criteria. Secondly, the officer who did witness the incident is not trained in traffic laws, so again it does not meet the criteria. Thus it is now my understanding, due to the letter of the law that it is not possible for the LAPD to issue a citation to the driver who hit me.
But aren’t all officers trained in traffic law at the Academy?
And are you seriously trying to tell me that a uniformed LAPD officer lacks sufficient judgement and training to determine that a driver failed to signal and violated the right-of-way of another road user?
Sorry, but this explanation sounds like BS.
And if it isn’t, even worse.
Yesterday I received the following email from Glenn Bailey, Vice-Chair of the LA Bicycle Advisory Committee.
Dear Valley Bicyclists:
At the request of LAPD Deputy Chief Jorge Villegas, commanding officer of LAPD’s Operations-Valley Bureau, an important meeting with Valley bicyclists to discuss and improve the handling of:
- traffic enforcement to ensure cyclist safety
- hit and run collisions/crimes
- bicycle thefts
- improving safety on the Orange Line and other bicycle paths in the Valley
- safety education for motorists and cyclists
- and other topics of interest to bicyclists
The LAPD Valley Traffic Division will be participating and the County Sheriff (Metro Orange Line enforcement) has been invited as well.
You are cordially to invited to attend:
Tuesday, September 3, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. LAPD Van Nuys Division 6240 Sylmar Avenue
Van Nuys, CA 91401So that there is adequate seating and copies of handouts, please RSVP via email to glennbaileysfv@yahoo.com if you are attending OR may be attending. Also, if you have additional topics you wish to be considered for this or a subsequent meeting, please forward those as well.
I encourage you to forward this invitation to other interested Valley cyclists.
Hope to see you there.
Thank you.
Glenn Bailey, Vice-Chair Bicycle Advisory Committee City of Los Angeles
Having worked with both Bailey and Deputy Chief Villegas as part of the department’s bike task force, I can assure you this is one meeting that will definitely be worth your time.
Especially given the subject matter.
I originally wrote this story earlier today for LA Streetsblog. Thanks to Streetsblog editor Damien Newton for allowing me to repost it here.
………
Maybe the third time is the charm.
Or it could be three strikes and you’re out.
Only the veto pen on Governor Brown’s desk knows which way he’s leaning. And like the Corgi at his feet — and the governor himself — it isn’t talking.
Yesterday, the state Senate approved AB 1371, the Three Feet for Safety Act. This is the latest attempt at creating a minimum three-foot distance to pass a cyclist on California streets, after Brown vetoed two previous attempts in the last two years — joining Texas governor Rick Perry as the nation’s only state leaders to veto three-foot bike safety legislation.
Or rather, surpassing Perry, who only wielded his veto pen once in opposition to safe cycling legislation.
Twenty-one other governors have already signed similar legislation; Pennsylvania mandates a minimum of four feet.
The bill, sponsored by Assembly Member Steven Bradford of Gardena, would replace the current requirement that drivers pass bicyclists at a safe distance without specifying what that distance is. Instead, it would require a minimum three-foot cushion between any part of the vehicle and the bike or its rider.
The act passed the Senate yesterday by a vote of 31-7. It will now go back to the Assembly for a vote to concur with the amendments made following its approval by that chamber earlier this year.
And then it’s back to the governor’s desk, where he’ll have 12 days to sign it.
Or not.
There should be no reason for him to say no this time, however. The bill addresses his expressed, if questionable, reasons for vetoing the previous bills.
This time around, there is no provision requiring drivers to slow down to 15 mph to pass a bike rider if they are unable to give a three foot passing distance as mandated in the 2011 version, or to slow down to 15 mph more than the speed of the rider, as contained in the 2012 version.
And unlike the 2012 version, it does not give drivers permission to briefly cross the center line in order to pass riders safely, even though that is exactly what many drivers already do, legally or not.
In fact, that’s one of the problems with the current bill.
The primary reason Brown gave for vetoing last year’s bill was a fear of lawsuits stemming from drivers unsafely crossing the center line, even though the state is already largely exempt from such suits, and the bill required drivers to do so only when safe.
The current bill, which was very smartly written by Bradford’s staff in a attempt to address the governor’s concerns, originally included language that would specifically exempt the state from being sued if someone was injured by driver who ignored the provision to cross the line safely.
Unfortunately, that language was removed from the bill, along with the section permitting drivers to cross the line. So many motorists will continue to attempt to unsafely squeeze past riders in the same lane, or follow angrily behind until they have a chance to pass.
Or they’ll just do what many already do, and break the law by going onto the other side of the roadway to pass at a safe distance.
The other problem with the bill is that it contains a provision that takes much of the teeth out of it, allowing drivers to pass at less than three feet if they decide, for whatever reason, that the three-foot margin isn’t safe or practical. Even though nothing says they have to pass in the first place.
(d) If the driver of a motor vehicle is unable to comply with subdivision (c), due to traffic or roadway conditions, the driver shall slow to a speed that is reasonable and prudent, and may pass only when doing so would not endanger the safety of the operator of the bicycle, taking into account the size and speed of the motor vehicle and bicycle, traffic conditions, weather, visibility, and surface and width of the highway.
The requirement to take into account the size and speed of the motor vehicle could help prevent the too frequent buzzing of bicyclists by trucks and city buses, though.
However, this bill is a big improvement over last year’s, which would have applied only to vehicles traveling in the same lane. Which means that if you were riding in a bike lane, the vehicle next to you could legally pass at significantly less than three feet — something that happens with far too much frequency already.
Instead, AB 1371 simply mandates a three-foot passing distance for any motor vehicle traveling in the same direction as the bike it’s passing. So the law applies whether you’re in a through lane, bike lane or turn lane, or any other situation when you’re headed the same way.
Of course, not everyone is in favor of the bill.
The San Jose Mercury News quotes Senate Minority Leader Bob Huff of Diamond Bar, presumably one of the seven who voted against it.
“It’s just impossible to gauge what three feet is and so I don’t think it really accomplishes what you want,” Huff said. He said the state should instead focus on educating people about sharing the road with non-motorized vehicles when they renew their driver’s licenses.
“To create outlaws of everybody because you can’t judge the distance is nuts,” he said.
Then again, anyone who ever played football knows exactly how far a distance three feet — aka one yard — is.
And to argue that no one can judge that distance is absurd.
No one is going to pull out a tape measure to determine if a driver passes a vehicle at 34.5 or 37 inches. But anyone without serious depth perception issues can tell if they’re significantly less than three feet away from a rider.
Also, that three foot margin is a minimum passing distance, not a maximum target drivers are expected to adhere to. There is no reason why a motorist can’t pass with a four or five foot margin when it’s safe to do so, as many drivers already do.
“I have been riding for 25 years, and I have seen my share of run-ins and close calls,” Bradford said. “Too many people just don’t realize that cyclists are legally allowed in the street. This bill gives everyone clarity as to what is safe behavior.”
The bill should have no problem passing the Assembly once again, especially in the watered-down version passed by the Senate.
What happens once it reaches Governor Brown’s desk is anyone’s guess.
Sometimes there’s just too much swirling around my head to focus on any one thing. And not enough coffee in all the Starbucks in all of LA to clarify things.
Which is exactly where I am this morning.
A day when I can breath a sign of relief that my morning search for bike news didn’t turn up any major bad news for SoCal cyclists. Although the word from other places near and far isn’t nearly as good.
And you’d think that an old man using a walker would be able to cross a damn LA street without getting run down by some jackass who doesn’t have the basic human decency to stop his or her goddamn car after killing another human being.
Drivers continue to flee the scene of collisions because current law means even if they do get caught, they’re better off getting charged for hit-and-run than DUI, or may not have a valid license and insurance for whatever reason.
Then again, some drivers just bet that they can get away with it.
And usually do.
Not to mention we seem to live in a society that has lost sight of the value of human life.
And all of those things have to change before anything else will.
Then again, it would help if the press took the matter more seriously. Or at least cared enough to dig a little deeper and get the story right.
As for insurance, there was a proposal several years back to include basic state-run liability coverage for every motorist in the cost of gas. Whenever you paid at the pump, a fee would be added to ensure that every victim of every collision would be protected from every driver.
Which means you’d never again have to worry how you’re going to pay your mounting medical bills after some driver ran you into the ground.
Needless to say, it didn’t go anywhere, for any number of reasons, valid and otherwise. Not the least of which was that bad drivers would pay the same rate as good ones, even though they could receive supplemental billing to make up for a lack of driving ability. Never mind that the state should be focused on getting bad drivers off the streets.
Plus some provision would have to be made for electric and hybrid vehicles. And state run auto insurance sounded a lot like communism to some people.
Then there’s the news from our neighbor to the south that scumbag Mayor Bob Filner is stepping down at the end of this week.
Political leaders have long felt entitled to do anything they damn well pleased when it came to sexual behavior. Mostly because no one held them accountable for much of American history.
Though you’d think the long line of embarrassed elected leaders stretching from Gary Hart through Bill Clinton and onto New York’s Anthony Weiner would convince them to keep their damn zippers closed in inappropriate situations.
All of which would appear to have little to do with bicycling.
Except Weiner had tried, with varying success, to reposition himself as a bike-friendly candidate after earlier threatening to tear out New York’s bike lanes. And appeared to be winning some support before the latest round of sexting revelations.
And San Diego has been making great strides under Filner’s leadership to reverse decades of benign — and sometimes, not so benign — neglect of bicyclists.
Which may, or may not, continue under the next administration that replaces him.
Thanks, Bob.
No, really.
At least there’s better news from my home state, where a new generation of bike racers took center stage. Colorado’s Tejay van Garderen took first place and Peter Sagan won four of the seven stages, while Christian Vande Velde called it a career at yet another successful USA Pro Challenge.
Even though the race continues to allow women just token participation, while demonstrating that the best way for a woman to get on a racing podium is to put on a tight dress and kiss the winner when the race is over.
And if any local bike shops are thinking about using podium girls at any races you might sponsor, don’t.
Just don’t.
And yes, I’m talking to you.
Think of the message you send women riders — and your potential customers — when you treat them like trophies instead of handing them one.
And the mixed message you send more than counteracts any good will you might earn by sponsoring women’s races.
Keep sponsoring competitions for both sexes. But drop the podium girls, already.
After all, it’s hard enough for women riders to get the respect they deserve — let alone compete on equal terms with male riders — when you treat them with as much respect as Bob Filner might.
Don’t get me wrong.
I enjoy looking at an attractive woman as much as any man.
But what really makes a woman attractive, to me at least, is knowing she could drop me on a steep uphill ride anytime she damn well feels like it.
Now that’s hot.
Almost as hot as watching a woman receive a hard-earned prize for outracing the world’s best riders, instead of just being one.
