Tag Archive for Los Angeles

This is why cyclists need to vote

Let’s go back in time a bit.

Back in the dark ages, when dinosaurs roamed the earth and I was still in high school, I edited the school newspaper.

One day, our staff photographer noticed a police officer approach a car stopped in front of the school and begin to search of the vehicle, without permission or probable cause. So he grabbed his camera, ran outside and started taking photos.

The officer, no doubt aware of the illegality of the search, threatened to arrest him and confiscate his film. So he put the camera way and slunk back to class as the officer continued his fruitless search.

But rabble-rouser that I was, even at such a tender age, I was damned if that would be the end of it.

The next day, I placed a phone call the state headquarters of the ACLU. And soon we were represented, pro bono, by a lawyer who leapt at the chance to protect our 1st Amendment rights.

The result was a written statement from the chief of police apologizing for the officers actions. He went on to add that even student journalists were legitimate members of the press and had every right to take photos of the officer’s actions; and further, that since it had taken place in plain view on a public street, anyone with a camera had a 1st Amendment right to do so.

In other words, we won.

Now fast forward a few decades.

A fellow blogger and friend crosses the street to take photos of a police officer conducting what was probably an illegal search of a cyclist, and finds himself handcuffed and eventually ticketed for a moving violation — even though he was on foot and crossing in the crosswalk, with the light.

It happened during Saturday’s C.R.A.N.K. MOB event, when the citizenry of Hollywood panicked upon being invaded by a horde of bicyclists, and the police responded in force.

Now, I’m not a fan of these rolling raves.

While I’m a whole-hearted supporter of the right to ride, even in large, semi-spontaneous groups, I believe we need to be considerate of other people — whether that means maintaining a reasonable level of sobriety, keeping the noise level down so residents can sleep, or allowing drivers to get where they are going without undue interference.

Because when you ride with no consideration for the rights of other users of the road — in other words, exactly the way too many drivers do — you become the problem, not the solution.

As Los Angeles Cyclist put it:

…Unfortunately, I was in the back half of the group, so by the time we got toward the Ralph’s which was our destination, someone who had arrived earlier had apparently decided not to pay for his items, and caused the police to be dispatched. (Apparently one of the ride organizers helped apprehend the thief. WELL DONE SIR.)

Lots of police were dispatched.

Who, by strategically blocking intersections directed the group out of West Hollywood and up toward actual Hollywood.

Then we headed East on Hollywood Blvd., which was pretty much a total fiasco.

Poorly corked/run intersections, irate motorists, cyclists not used to riding in groups, made for a BIG mess. I tried to time the intersections so I entered them on a green light, but with a group of close to 1,000 cyclists, some of the motorists were getting impatient, especially if they’d waited through the previous few lights and were trying to make a left turn.

So the police may have had good reason to break up the ride. Unfortunately, a few seem to have crossed the line, by breaking the law in order to enforce it.

LA Cyclist goes on to describe a young woman who was intentionally doored by an officer, in a highly questionable use of force. If a civilian hit a cyclist with his door in such a manner, he could be charged with a felony; yet an officer used exactly the same dangerous technique to apprehend a scofflaw for the heinous crime of failing to stop quickly enough after running a red light.

That same officer, evidently feeling a need to protect homeland security from the dangers of two-wheeled citizens, wanted to know if the cyclists patiently waiting to be ticketed were anarchists. No, seriously.

Meanwhile, Alex spent 20 minutes in handcuffs because a police officer claimed he crossed the intersection while the red hand was flashing — not because he was attempting to take photos of the officer while he searched a cyclist after a minor traffic stop, something that would be illegal if done to a motorist. This despite the fact that the courts have held that bloggers have the same 1st Amendment rights as any member of the mainstream press.

And the other cyclist was ticketed for an offense that both the city council and chief of police have agreed should not be enforced.

As Zach Behrens points out on LAist, the use of cuffs is at an officer’s discretion. Yet it can hardly be argued that any officer should feel threatened by a camera, or the person using it.

Or as Damien Newton put it:

Handcuffing someone for not having a bike license?  For crossing the street against a flashing red hand?  What country am I living in?

Senate District 26 Candidate Statements: Saundra Davis

Here is the third response submitted by one of the eight candidates for the March 24th primary for California Senate District 26, from Saundra Davis. Since she requested comments, you can click on the link her name to visit her website, then click the “contact” tab for her email address.


Saundra Davis

Mrs. Davis is very supportive of bike riders’ issues.  She often addresses issues regarding the environment, air quality and road conditions. Now that you apply those concerns to your group, it is even more vivid. Of course if there are specific issues you would like to address or if there are suggestions that you wish to apprise Mrs. Davis of, it would be helpful to hear from you. Mrs. Davis would love to know what those concerns are and what ideas you have that would address the issues. It is her desire to listen and become more informed about specific issues by you the experts.

Senate District 26 Candidate Statements: Curren Price

As I indicated yesterday, I’ve offered each of the eight candidates in the primary for California Senate District 26 an opportunity to address the cycling community through this blog. So far, only two candidates has accepted my offer. This statement is from Curren Price; you can see the first statement, from Nachum Shifren below.


Curren Price

Thank you for the opportunity to share with you my views related to cycling and, among other things, the role that it plays in improving air quality, health, traffic congestion and the overall environmental quality of life in the 26th Senate District.

cp-photo-webAs you likely know, the 26th Senate District is one of the most ethnically, economically and environmentally diverse districts in the state of California. Stretching from Culver City to Koreatown, Silverlake to Larchmont, Cheviot Hills to South Los Angeles, the 26th District is home to many of the environmental treasures in the County of Los Angeles including the Baldwin Hills Conservancy/Parklands and Griffith Park.  While these parks provide a refuge for many Angelenos with their bike paths and walking trails they are also surrounded by some of the most congested freeways and roads in the LA County basin. As a result the 26th District faces tremendous environmental challenges related to air quality and the resulting health impacts from air pollution.

Air pollution doesn’t discriminate and the air quality of the 26th District is impacted by LAX, the ports and equally detrimental the District’s proximity to the 10, 405, 110 and 105 freeways. The harmful effects are felt throughout the district from Culver City to South LA. A lack of investment in mass transit, infrastructure and Class One BikeWays, coupled with the “love affair” that Angelenos have with their cars and a jobs housing imbalance which has residents commuting on average between 15-20 miles roundtrip each day has contributed to the district’s inability to realize higher air quality standards. These reasons, among others, is why transit, transportation and air quality are at the top of my environmental agenda, why I have earned the endorsement of the California League of Conservation Voters and why I will continue to support increased investment in mass transit as well as alternatives such as cycling, full enforcement of the Clean Air Act, incentives for cleaner technologies and penalties for gross polluters.  

These issues are more than “niche” issues. Having represented largely urban areas throughout my tenure in public service both on the Inglewood City Council and in the state legislature, I view these as environmental justice issues which impact everything from healthcare to education and our workforce. Young people who can’t cycle or exercise outdoors are not only likely to have higher rates of asthma and obesity but to underperform in school.  Cost-prohibitive gas prices, 40 mile trips to and from work and lack of mass transit options limit working and middle class employment options. And, to resolve these challenges we must identify ways to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by investing more resources in transit, creating live/work spaces to increase the jobs/housing balances, reducing fixed-route services and moving to door-to-door services by the MTA and encouraging employers (public and private) to incentivize their workforce towards carpooling, cycling, telecommuting and using mass transit.

However, this is only half of the battle. Whether one cycles for business, for pleasure or for the environment, cyclists and, more correctly, support for cyclists plays a crucial role in creating a more livable 26th Senate District. Improvements and expansion of Class One Bikeways via increased public/private partnership funding and incentives for those who build bike-friendly developments supported by ancillary City street improvements are among the priorities I would have in developing a cycling/environmental agenda. A continuous Class One Bikeway along the Exposition Light Rail Line which extends through the 26th District is another.  And, cyclist-safety is the last component which we must prioritize to protect cyclists and underscore the viability of cycling en masse as a means to reducing air pollution and improving our environment.

I grew up riding my bike in the 26th District in South LA, Leimert Park and the Crenshaw District. I did it for pleasure. As state Senator, I would like to support a climate which allows cyclists to choose their own reason and create an environment which makes it possible. If you have ideas on how this can be achieved, please email me at info@currenpricejr.com or visit my website at www.currenpricejr.com for more information.

Thank you.

Curren Price

Assemblymember 51st District  

Senate District 26 Candidate Statements: Nachum Shifren

Here is the first response from one the candidates for the March 24th primary for California Senate District 26, submitted by Rabbi Nachum Shifren. 

I promised each candidate that I would post their comments without comment or edits, however, I feel compelled to make one correction:  In his comments, Rabbi Shifren thanks me for my endorsement; I have not, and will not, endorse any of the candidates in this election, in order to provide a fair and unbiased forum for all the candidates to state their views.

Also, Rabbi Shifren has asked if it would be possible to meet with cyclists prior to the election to discuss his views. If anyone is planning a meeting or event and would like to hear from the candidates, I will be happy to invite him and the other candidates on your behalf.

Nachum Shifren

Dear Ted

Let me say at the outset that I am a 3-time triathlon participant, 3-time marathon runner, innumerable 10-k’s, have been a surfer and lifeguard since 1962.
 
Let me speak frankly: I am angry at the abuse and peril thrown at cyclists, some of our best citizens. We need to make more cycling  accessible , not limit or obstruct it! The traffic has become unbearable. Not one of the politicians supports augmenting bike lanes or developing new ones. I will, to the best of my ability upon election, commit to this endeavor.
 
I will never capitulate to the automobile! I have traveled and lived all over the world, and never have I seen a society so indolent or addicted to the automobile, even at the price of our health and our economic development!
 
Ted, you and all cyclists will have a friend in Sacramento who cares about raising the consciousness of physical fitness of our youth, attacking the congestion on our roads through greater biking alternatives, and removing the stranglehold of the autos in our communities and workplaces.
 
I am grateful for your endorsement and hope we can meet in the future to implement some of the ideas I’ve expressed.
 
Call me anytime if I can be of  help.
Here’s to clear skies above and a an inspirational road ahead!
Rabbi Shifren

Senate District 26 Update: Maybe they just don’t want our votes

As I wrote last week, I emailed each of the eight candidates in the primary for California Senate District 26 to ask for their comments about bicycling and transportation issues, just as I did for the recent city council election.

You’d think that a group of relatively unknown candidates would jump at the chance to reach local voters — especially when they can do it for free. And as we’ve seen, it doesn’t take much to influence a local race with so many candidates.

Yet as of today, I haven’t received a single response.

As a result, I’ve emailed each of them again today; you can read the full text of the email below. But it does raise an interesting question:

If they won’t respond to us now when they need our votes, just how responsive will they be once one of them gets into office?

 

Dear (Candidate),

You may recall that I contacted you last week to offer you an opportunity to discuss bicycling and transportation issues with voters in the 26th District.

As you may be aware, there are nearly 379,000 registered voters in this district. Of these, statistics suggest that at least 46,996 — and possibly as many as 144,000 — ride bikes.

Many of these cyclists are very concerned about current state laws and regulations that put the safety of riders at risk and needlessly inhibit riding levels. These riders are highly motivated to vote in the upcoming election — and they are looking for a reason to vote for you.

As I indicated before, I write a popular blog about bicycling in Los Angeles, and I am offering you, as well as the other candidates in the race, an opportunity to address these voters directly — at no cost to your campaign — by turning this forum over to your campaign for one day.

You can discuss anything you want, from reforming state law to mandate a minimum safe passing distance, or revising California Government Code Section 831.4 to protect cyclists and pedestrians from known hazards on off-road (Class 1) trails. Or you could discuss the role bicycles can play in reducing traffic congestion, improving air quality and reducing the high level of obesity, diabetes and heart disease, or any other subject you think will be of interest to the cycling community.

I will publish whatever you send — unedited and without comment — in the order that it’s received. All I ask is that you send a statement in the body of your email or as a Word attachment. You may also submit a small photo or campaign logo to appear along with your comments.

It may only be seen by a few hundred voters; yet in a race with eight candidates and an expected low turnout, that alone could be enough to determine the outcome. More likely, however, your statement will be linked to by other sites and forwarded to countless readers, with the potential to be seen by thousands of local voters.

Of course, nothing says you have to participate; as cyclists, we’re used to be ignored by politicians and our elected officials. But we care about this election, and most of us are still uncommitted, even though this election is less than one week away.

All I’m asking is that you give us a reason to vote for you.

Sincerely, 

In 1986, my sister saved my life 18 months ago

Twenty-three years ago, I was, to paraphrase an early Jimmy Buffet song, God’s own cyclist and a fearless man.

I was living in Denver at the time, and biking was my life. By then, I’d been riding for 6 years and considered myself an expert on all things bike.

I rode a minimum of 50 miles a day, every day, rain or shine. On the rare occasions when something kept me off the bike, I obsessed about it all day, then rode that much harder the next day. Once I even bombed down a mountain pass, passing cars on the shoulder at over 60 miles an hour — without a helmet — well aware that the first mistake I made would be my last.

But then, hardly anyone wore helmets in those days. I certainly didn’t think I needed one, since experienced riders like me just didn’t hit the pavement.

The only risk, in my overly confident mind, was if I was knocked there by a car or another rider. And I’d made a careful study of traffic and defensive riding techniques to make that didn’t happen, priding myself on my ability to read the streets and anticipate the actions of everyone on it.

Pride, as they say, goes before a fall.

This particular day, I was riding fast as I approached a major three-way intersection. To this day, I could still tell you the exact location of every single car as I carved a perfect a turn, leaning hard to the right as my knee barely cleared the pavement.

The only thing I didn’t see was the large puddle of water directly in front of my wheel, left over from a brief thunderstorm earlier in the day.

As soon as my bike hit the water, I hit the pavement, sliding across six lanes of traffic until I hit the curb on the far side with enough force to pancake both wheels.

My clothes were shredded, leaving me no more than a few threads from an indecent exposure charge. Fortunately, one of the drivers who had miraculously avoided me wrapped me in a blanket, secured my bike and drove me to the emergency room, where I was diagnosed with a broken bone in my elbow and severe road rash from ankle to chin.

Somehow, my speed and the angle I hit the road kept my head off the pavement, confirming my belief that a helmet was unnecessary.

My sister, though, was not so convinced. The next day, she bought a helmet and made me promise to wear it. Once I was able to get back on the bike, I put it on just to humor her.

And I’ve worn one every time I’ve been on a bike since.

Because as I recuperated, it finally dawned on me that overconfidence is more dangerous than anything I might find on the road. And that every rider hits the pavement sooner or later.

Yet it took two more decades of riding before I used my helmet for more than hair net.

Then in September of 2007, I was riding along the bike path north of Santa Monica, just approaching the new L.A. County Lifeguard headquarters at Will Rogers State Beach, when I encountered a massive swarm of bees.

I’ve told the story before, so I won’t bore you with the details (you can click here if you missed it). But the next thing I knew, I was stretched out on the bike path as a lifeguard pulled an oxygen mask over my face, with no idea how I got there.

The doctors in the ER said I’d suffered a moderate concussion, and the fact that I’d been wearing a helmet had probably saved my life. And as I looked at the cracks veining through its foam lining, I realized they probably were right.

So if someone tells me they started wearing a helmet because of something I said or wrote, it means more to me than they will ever know. Because an accident like that, in a place like that, pretty pretty much confirms that anything can happen, anytime. And anywhere.

I hope they — and you — never need it.

But I can honestly say that my sister’s insistence that I wear one has a lot to do with why I’m still here, and writing this, today.

 

Police in Pasadena are encouraging kids to wear their helmets — something state law requires. A writer in Seattle examines the age-old conflict over where — and if — bikes belong. Bike culture comes to D.C. A cycling Fox News reporter in Milwaukee documents his encounters with dangerous drivers. Introducing the cycling art of schluffing — something I’ve done since I was about 6 years old. Brayj points out the failure of bike planning at UCLA, as well as calling our attention to tomorrow’s county Department of Public Works meeting to explain why they won’t be building the long-promised extension to the Arroyo Seco Bike Path.

Today’s post, in which I consider my attitude

Let’s talk about negativity. Mine, in particular.

You see, during the panel I was on at last week’s Bike Summit, I mentioned that one of the many reasons I’d started this blog was that I was concerned — okay, pissed off — about the state of cycling in Los Angeles. And said that this is, with the possible exception of 1980’s era Louisiana, the worst city in which I’ve ridden.

Then someone asked if I thought that cycling had gotten better or worse in my 30 years of riding — and here in L.A. over my near two-decades of residence, in particular.

My response was, worse. Much, much worse, in fact.

And it’s true.

Once I learned to avoid busy streets unsuitable for cycling — and to never, ever ride after an LSU home game, when the risk of being intentionally run off the road by drunken frat boys increased exponentially — Louisiana really wasn’t that bad. There were lots of quiet side streets perfect for cycling, and the River Road along the levee was wide, flat and virtually car free. And cyclists were enough of an anomaly in those days that drivers usually gave us a wide berth.

Every other city I’ve passed through or called home, for whatever reason or length of time, had a system of cycling infrastructure far superior to present day L.A. Even San Diego, circa mid-‘80s, had a better system of Class 1 and Class 2 bikeways (off-road paths and on-road lanes) than L.A. does today.

And in many ways, L.A.’s bikeways are in worse shape than they were 10 years ago, as crumbling asphalt, increased traffic and lax enforcement of bikeway restrictions take their toll.

Another thing that’s changed over the last 10 years is the willingness of local drivers to share the road. And in case you’re unsure where this is going, I’m not suggesting that it’s gotten better.

Maybe it’s the fact that traffic here on the Westside is significantly heavier than it once was. Maybe it’s the added stress everyone is under these days. It could be the distractions to drivers offered by the proliferation of cell phones, iPods and PDAs.

Or it could be the simple fact that L.A.’s understaffed police force, combined with an increasing population and shifting departmental priorities, means there aren’t enough officers on the streets to enforce traffic laws. As a result, local drivers seem to feel free to do whatever strikes their fancy, legal — or safe — or not.

And whether or not there’s a cyclist in their way.

So if that sounds negative, I’m sorry. That’s just my experience, from my perspective.

On the other hand, it’s not all bad.

Things actually seem to have gotten better over the past year. There seems to be less tension on the roads today than there was just a year ago. Maybe the Mandeville Canyon incident has made drivers rethink their attitudes.

Or maybe we’re all just trying a little harder to get along.

Then there’s the fact that even a bad day on the bike is better than just about anything else I might be doing. And for every negative moment on the road, there are a thousand moments that make it all worth while.

Some people at the forum thought that it was wrong to focus on the negatives. They felt that too much negativity might discourage people from riding.

And they have a point.

This sport needs its evangelists. We need people who will encourage beginners, and help them get the skills they need to start on a long, safe and rewarding riding career.

But we also need to talk about the wrongs we see and experience on the road. The things that can, and should, be changed, so that the people who start riding today will experience a better, safer and more bike friendly city than we did yesterday.

Because we owe them that.

 

One of my fellow panelists says it’s time to become a more considerate cyclist. According to Streetsblog, cyclists may finally be getting some respect in Washington. An economics professor at Oregon State University says instead of taxing cyclists, they should pay us to ride. An off-duty police officer in Tucson was killed when his bike was struck from behind in broad daylight; as usual, the driver was not cited. And also as usual, it doesn’t take long for the anti-cyclist rants to start. Another cyclist, also run down by a pickup truck, credits his survival to wearing a helmet; while this site suggest that learning how not to get hit in the first place is an even smarter option. Evidently, I’m not the only rider who complains about iPods on the bike paths. And finally, L.A. Magazine has added a postscript to their description of Los Angeles’ Bike Culture, discussing the role we cyclists may have played in influencing the outcome of last week’s primary election.

 

Here we go again — An open letter to the candidates in California Senate District 26

Even though we just finished one election last week, we have another one coming up in two weeks to fill the state Senate seat recently held by Mark Ridley-Thomas — a district that covers most of Los Angeles and Culver City.

As I’ve said before, we need to become more involved in the political process if we want things to get any better for cyclists in this city or this state. So today I emailed each of the candidates in the March 24 primary election, based on the list provided by the League of Women Voters, to offer them each an opportunity to use this blog to speak directly to the biking community.

Just as I did for the recent 5th Council District election, I will post their statements in the order I receive them, without edits or comments. It will be interesting to see which, if any, of the candidates respond — especially considering that we may have provided David Vahedi’s margin of victory in the council primary.

 

Dear Mr. or (Ms.) …

As you are aware, the election for California Senate District 26 is less than two weeks away, Yet many voters have only recently become aware of this election — let alone the candidates or their positions.

That gives you a unique opportunity to reach countless uncommitted voters; however, the concerns of one highly motivated voting group have largely been ignored up to this point.

Thousands, of not tens of thousands, of registered voters in this district also ride bikes. Some, such as myself, ride for recreation and fitness. Others ride for social or environmental reasons, while for still others, cycling is their primary means of transportation.

Whatever their reason, virtually all are concerned with such vital issues as safe streets and improved infrastructure, clean air and fair, unbiased enforcement of traffic laws, along with meaningful reform of state laws to encourage greater participation in cycling and ensure our safety.

I am offering you, as well as the other candidates in the race, an opportunity to address a highly motivated, yet largely ignored, voter group — at no cost to your campaign.

As an active voter in this district, I also operate a popular blog about bicycling in Los Angeles. I will turn this forum over to your campaign for one day, in order to speak directly to the cycling community.

You are free to discuss anything you want, from the role bicycles can play in reducing traffic congestion, to seemingly unrelated issues such as crime rates or responsiveness to your future constituents. If you are an active cyclist, tell us. Or if you want to confront cyclists in some way, feel free. I will publish whatever you send — unedited and without comment — in the order that it’s received.

All I ask is that you send your statement to me in the body of your email or as a Word attachment, with a maximum of 1,000 words (although less is usually better online). You may also submit a small photo or campaign logo to appear along with your comments.

Of course, you’re under no obligation to participate; however, if some of the other campaigns submit a statement and you don’t, it could speak volumes to the biking community.

Besides, it’s free. So what do you have to lose?

PS — I recently made the same offer to the candidates in March 3rd primary for Los Angeles 5th City Council district; four of the six candidates, and two of the top three finishers, participated, including David Vahedi, who won by a margin of just 60 votes.

 

Gary points out that cycling is neither a Democratic or Republican issue; try telling that to Rush Limbaugh, who appears to have a different take on the matter. And even people who support cycling may not support cycling everywhere. Now Nevada is taking up a bicycle safety bill. Will points out that when bikeways are closed for construction, we should take the promised re-opening date with a grain — or possibly, a bag — of salt. Thanks to Streetsblog’s Ben Fried for tipping us to a great cartoon addressing the issue of cars stopping in the bikelane, while Damien asks if we’ll really see the city’s Bike Master Plan next month. And finally, Anonymous Cyclist offers a great explanation of what to do if you’re in a cycling accident.

Selling bike safety, culture and infrastructure to a suspicious public

The single most powerful political manifesto I’ve ever read was written by Dale Carnegie.

I don’t think he intended to write a revolutionary treatise. But over the years, I’ve found the suggestions contained in his 70-year old book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, are more effective in creating political and societal change than any sit-in, march or demonstration.

One in particular has been proven over and over to be a brilliant political tool: “Always talk in terms of the other man’s interest.” That is, look at it from their perspective, and think about they’re interested in, rather than what’s in it for you.

I been thinking about that since I attended a session on advanced bike traffic planning tools, hosted by Ryan Snyder of Ryan Snyder Associates, at the L.A. Bike Summit on Saturday. He talked about a number of innovative bike traffic solutions, from sharrows and bike boxes, to painted bike lanes and improved signage.

But what really caught my attention were two things:

First was the concept of Road Diets. Simply put, it’s the idea that traffic flow and neighborhoods can both be improved by reducing the number of lanes.

For instance, a typical four-lane street that carries 20,000 vehicles or less a day can often be reconfigured into two through lanes, with a center left turn lane so that turning cars don’t block traffic, while leaving room for bike lanes on either side. This reduction can actually improve vehicle flow, while calming traffic speeds and permitting a dramatic increase in bike usage — and improve safety for both drivers and riders, while revitalizing the surrounding neighborhood.

The other one was the idea of Bike Boulevards — something a number of local riders have advocated lately.

At its most basic, a bike boulevard is a street, often parallel to a major thoroughfare, that has been optimized to encourage bike traffic. At the same time, it employs various barriers, roundabouts and signal changes to discourage vehicle through traffic.

You don’t have to sell cyclists on the concept of a bike boulevard. Build it, and we will come.

But as Ryan pointed out, the problem for both of these ideas — especially bike boulevards — comes when it’s time to sell local residents and business owners on the idea. With today’s over-congested traffic, very few people are open to the idea of actually reducing traffic lanes.

And no one wants to live on a bike boulevard.

People who live there tend to envision a thundering horde of two-wheeled thugs invading their street, reducing their property values and making them second-class citizens in their own neighborhoods.

Yet the reality is just the opposite. By eliminating through traffic, a bike boulevard will dramatically reduce vehicle traffic, making their street quieter, more peaceful and significantly safer, while local traffic is still able move in and out with ease.

Streets become more walkable, as well as bike-able, encouraging residents to get out and meet their neighbors. And the enhanced landscaping and beautification projects that often are part of a bike boulevard project — in part to get buy-in from the locals — results in a more attractive streetscape.

All that adds up to a better, more livable neighborhood. And means that property values could actually go up, not down.

The same holds true for a business district. Reduced traffic flow means less through traffic, resulting in quieter streets less congestion and easier access for drivers who do want to stop and shop. Parking can be improved and streets beautified, creating a neighborhood ideal for strolling or sidewalk cafes, while the extra bike traffic could actually bring more customers to the area.

Everyone wins.

So we have to do a much better job of marketing — whatever we’re selling. Because the key to getting bike boulevards and the other biking infrastructure, safety improvements, better educated, less biased and more effective police, and acceptance of bike culture, is not to demand our rights, but to look at it from their perspective.

We have to show local authorities, as well as home and business owners, exactly how and why it works to their benefit.

And let them demand it, instead.

***

Streetsblog offers some great biking links this morning, as well as a good overview of the keynote speakers at the Bike Summit. Gary, Brayj and Drew also offer reviews, though in the latter case, I fear I have once again failed to make a good impression. Will offers links to photos, as well as photos and video of his close encounter with Lance following the Summit. Los Angeles Rides quotes from a New York Times article about riding in the city, and how we make ourselves look bad — and not just by wearing spandex. Bicycle Fixation demonstrates that once again, cycling offers better stress relief than any prescription drug. The Biking Lawyer relates the history of the Stop As Yield Law. And Los Angeles Cyclist offers parts 3, 4 & 5 in his five part story of the Ridiculous Pink Fixie.

See you at the Bike Summit

I’ll be honest. I didn’t think I’d be attending this weekend’s Bike Summit.

Not that I didn’t want to, you understand. But my weekends are reserved for spending time with my lovely wife (who I just happened to meet exactly 16 years ago today). Which is why you don’t see me on weekend rides, however much I might want to be there.

But then Damien asked me to be part of this panel.

Suddenly, I had a perfect excus…uh, valid reason to attend — one that even a non-riding spouse couldn’t find fault with. Besides, I’ll make it up to her. Honest.

But frankly, this is important.

This city has long had a large number of cyclists, myself included for the last few decades. And a large number of cycling groups and organizations, from La Grange and the Wheelmen (I’ve really got to get around to adding them to my links over there) to the LACBC and C.I.C.L.E. Not to mention the Ridazz and Socal Bike Forums.

Just to name a few.

But it’s only over the last year or so that these disparate voices have started to coalesce into a political movement. And that riders — or ridazz, if you prefer — have come to realize that if we want things to get better for SoCal cyclists, we’re going to have to do something about it.

And we can do a lot more by working together than we can just bitching about it on our bikes. Or on our blogs.

So I’m really looking forward to it. And plan on doing a lot more listening than talking, because there’s a lot to learn.

I’m also looking forward to meeting some of the people attached to all those links over there. Along with some of the people who visit this site on a semi-regular basis, for reasons I will never understand. But for which I am eternally grateful.

Which brings up a question.

What would you like me to discuss during my part of the presentation? Is there anything that you been dying to know about biking or blogging, L.A. politics — or surviving beachfront bee and massive hematomas, for that matter.

Because I’d much rather discuss something you find fascinating than just blather on in my own inimitable manner.

 

Nate covers yesterday’s Pre-Bike Summit meeting. An Iowa cyclist takes other riders to task for opposing the state’s Bike Safety Bill. Isn’t it time we got one of those, too? Cyclists in Toronto deliver nearly 6,000 signatures to city hall demanding a new cross-town bikeway. Our own Rearview Rider echoes that in calling for a 4th St. Bikeway right here in L.A. Arizona bucks the trend towards common-sense revisions of bike safety laws by refusing to allow rolling stops in their state. Looks like almost everyone is getting into the bike sharing, even if our own city can’t figure out how to do it. Finally, Gary barely dodges after-dark joggers in the bike lane.