Bike lanes: Protecting cyclists should be a priority
There are a couple of videos circulating online that make a powerful case not just for bike lanes but also for cyclists to actually have the ability to use them, and safely.
The first is from filmmaker Casey Neistat (via BBC), who got a $50 ticket in May for riding in traffic when the bike lane was blocked. "I'm doing the world a favor riding my bike," he tells the officer in a cellphone video. "Look at this guy double parked right here, in a bus lane, and you're not giving him a ticket." The second part of the short video proves just how difficult it is for a cyclist to remain in a bike lane when motorists and city workers aren't heeding the law. My only wish is that Neistat were wearing a helmet to better make his point about safety.
In another video, visual artist RonConCocaCola (via A Cup of Jo) presents a busy intersection to show the collision course that emerges when people go rogue. Certainly, this proves that cyclists are sometimes at fault, but the above video helps show why cyclists can't always stick to the bike lane.
3-Way Street from ronconcocacola on Vimeo.
True, both videos are from New York City, but Los Angeles has its share of similar problems, including both disregard and contempt for cyclists, who're perceived by some motorists as a nuisance. While the approval of L.A.'s bicycle plan to quadruple the mileage of official bikeways is a boon for cyclists, it's only half the battle. We also have to change our mind-set and really welcome bikes on our roads, which is an area where Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa can lead the way. Here’s an editorial from March that explains:
[I]f the planned bike lanes and neighborhood traffic-calming measures are actually built, it would go a long way toward making L.A. a more livable city and mark one of the most lasting achievements of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's tenure. Bikes don't pollute, they don't contribute to freeway traffic, and they improve the health of riders. They're also fun, at least if you're not being sideswiped by a speeding truck or cut off by a taxi; when the latter happened to Villaraigosa last summer on Venice Boulevard, he fell off his bicycle and broke his elbow, an accident that turned the mayor into a bike-safety advocate.
RELATED:
--Alexandra Le Tellier
Yes, there should be bike lanes but also a lot more tickets for the bicyclists. I see them break the rules all the time. I can count on one hand how many times I saw a bicyclist actually stop at a stop sign or even a red light versus hundreds that didn't. They go all over the road with no regard for anyone else and they should be getting a lot more citations. Maybe that money will even pay for the bike lanes.
Posted by: LiberalReason | June 10, 2011 at 04:19 PM
they're jerks - they're like a rash wherever present
Posted by: 2cents | June 10, 2011 at 04:22 PM
@LiberalReason Yeah, you're absolutely right. We need to create an environment where motorists and cyclists can co-exist, and where both parties are held accountable for breaking the law.
Posted by: Alexandra Le Tellier | June 10, 2011 at 04:43 PM
Agreed w/ liberalreason. It's true...lots of motorists carelessly cut off cyclists, or get dangerously close to them, and for that reason, we need more dedicated bike lanes. But I almost NEVER see a cyclist obeying traffic laws (you think you can ride in the left turn lane with cars? Then you can stop at the same stop signs that cars stop at.). What's worse, so many of these cyclists, upon a real or perceived "conflict" with a motor vehicle often behave violently by hitting, kicking, or spitting on cars.
More lanes, sure. But that means you need to hold up your end of the bargain and be good citizens as well.
Posted by: disbelief | June 10, 2011 at 04:44 PM
Bicycle helmets do not improve safety.
Posted by: rezkiy | June 10, 2011 at 05:16 PM
"Sometimes cyclists find themselves unable to stay in the bike lane?..." if you watch carefully you'll notice that some cyclists, especially the younger generation of cyclists find it fun to ignore red lights, dodge through traffic, ignore stop signs and are careless overall. They even go so far as to blame motorists for their mistakes through violence. You can't rush into the middle of an intersection and expect cars to stop for you and NO that does not give you the right to kick the car that got in your way because you decided to ignore the red light. If we are to reach a mutual understanding then cyclists as much as motorists should obey the rules of the road. I am a cyclist and I have had my share of close calls. But I, like many others who are trying to make a difference try to set a good example and follow the rules.
Posted by: Cyclist&Motorist | June 10, 2011 at 05:26 PM
As a cyclist who recently moved from Portland, LA is not a culture that accepts calm streets and cyclists. Sure there are riders that go through stop signs when no one is present. But telling cyclists they need to come to a complete stop is like telling an auto driver to not exceed the speed limit. It will not happen. Well at least not in LA...
Posted by: tobystar | June 10, 2011 at 05:51 PM
Sure both sides need to practice patience and understanding, but I have to agree with many here that cyclists blow through stop signs at an alarming pace. Neighborhood streets are a minefield for even cautious drivers. Try driving down Mountain in Monrovia on a Saturday or Sunday morning and seeing a flood of cyclists blow through a stop sign and from a side street regardless of whether cars are present or not. Whatever issue you can have with a single cyclist is magnified when in a pack.
Posted by: kofi | June 10, 2011 at 05:57 PM
Oh and by the way, real mass transit should be a priority not bicycle lanes. LA is far behind any major US or International city for mass transit. Why does it take 7 to 10 years to extend rail lines? This city certainly has more pressing issues than bike lanes.
Posted by: kofi | June 10, 2011 at 06:01 PM
And then there's bicyclists that just have to go in pairs ignoring the bike lane borders... And then there's the bicyclists who talk on cell phones and listen to music/radio on ear buds... And then there's the bicyclists that insist on going on streets like Pico with no bike lane, when there's lanes on Ocean Park and on Santa Monica... It's their bodies -- why should cars have to yield to bad bicycle behavior when the privilege is given to bicyclists to remain in their bike lanes and abide by the law? Wouldn't you think logic says to them to protect themselves by riding within the guidelines?
Posted by: Susan | June 10, 2011 at 11:03 PM
This has really brought out some great, and original, comments! What's that you say? A red light running cyclist with no helmet? I've never heard that anecdote before! Thanks for sharing.
Really, let's focus on "safety" by focusing on the real danger on our streets: bike riders! These people are a hazard to ... what exactly?
There can be no "let's be nice" on our streets until the dangers of our cars are fully acknowledged in our street designs and planning decisions. These are massive machines, piloted by barely competent drivers, hurtling around our city (you know, that place where everyone lives and works?). Safety starts and begins with taming the automobile.
Posted by: Tu Madre | June 11, 2011 at 12:58 AM
There needs to be better infrastructure for bikes. More bike infrastructure and the education on how to use it would help cut down on some of the headbutting that goes on between cyclists, car drivers & pedestrians, and increase use of bikes and decrease pollution. There also needs to be education about the CA Vehicle Code as it applies to bikes (for both drivers and cyclists).
Many people love to attribute behavior to an entire class of people "car drivers do xxxxx" "bikers are all xxxx". The fact is that a jerk is a jerk no matter what form of transport they take. Focus on the behavior, not the class of vehicle. Enforce the laws but enforce them justly.
The roads would be safer for everyone if things that are considered penny ante tickets (vehicle not signaling, driver opening car door without looking, jaywalking, adult riding a bike on the sidewalk where not allowed, etc) were given out again. Then maybe the people (operating whatever kind of vehicle or just walking) who don't pay attention to the law now will finally start behaving. That would make for a safer community for everyone.
Posted by: Recumbent Cycliste | June 11, 2011 at 01:13 AM
Rid the streets of bicycle riders.
Posted by: Joseph L Cooke | June 11, 2011 at 05:44 AM
I'm a frequent cyclist and do my best to avoid rogue motorists. But I wince when I see cyclists who have no regard for the traffic laws governing bicycles. Examples: Cyclists riding on sidewalks. Two or more cyclists blocking traffic by riding abreast instead of in single file. Cyclists riding, not walking, in pedestrian crosswalks. Cyclists riding on the left side of the street, instead of with the flow of traffic. Cyclists "jayriding" across streets between intersections. Cyclists riding at night without proper lights. Cyclists riding without helmets. Cyclists failing to signal their turns. Cyclists failing to observe traffic signals and stop signs. I could go on. It's a wonder police do not issue more citations.
Posted by: Don | June 11, 2011 at 06:44 AM
Our society would be a much healthier and clean air one if more people rode bikes instead of cars.
The main reason many don't including me is because of the lack of safe bike lanes. I hope more people can understand this.
Posted by: Light2000 | June 11, 2011 at 07:22 AM
I cringed when I saw the video; I've never seen such stupid people in my life. EVERYONE on that video was making mistakes. Motorist,bikers, and pedestrians. I'm glad I don't like in LA.
Posted by: Stum | June 11, 2011 at 08:13 PM
"My only wish is that Neistat were wearing a helmet to better make his point about safety."
The science that shows the benefit to cyclists from wearing helmets is equivocal. That is there is no overwhelming evidence for benefit. Some studies say there is, some say there isn't. Helmets can make accidents more likely and make certain injuries worse.
The day they make a helmet that can deflect cars, I'll start wearing one.
Almost needless to say, helmets have no real protective effect against motor-vehicle impact.
http://www.cyclehelmets.org
Posted by: Amoeba | June 12, 2011 at 02:07 AM
City laws indicate that riders should ride as far to the right as possible. However, should the right side be obstructed (parked cars, debris, etc) or unsafe (gutters, grates, glass, uneven pavement) to do so, riders have the right to take up full use of the lane. Now how many people are aware of this???
One component of riding is that the environment around you constantly changes. You can never rely on the driver next to you to know it's your right of way to take up the full lane when there's trash cans left out in the roadway. In a test of comparison between a reinforced styrofoam helmet versus a 3/4 ton moving block of steel, glass, and fossil fueled torque, the vehicle will always win. Perhaps it was your right of way. Perhaps it wasn't. Does it matter? Because every ride you take, as a bicyclist, is a fight for your right to live and a fight for survival. If everyone understood this difference, I think the overall mindset of roadsharing would be different.
And @Susan, who complains riders use non-bike laned roads purposefully over other roads. Well, why do drivers drive Venice blvd or Washington Blvd to go east/west when there's a perfectly good freeway that goes east west? It could be that the destination that they're riding to aren't located on streets with bike lanes. It could be that they don't know bike lanes are available on those streets. Or that the road congestion of Santa Monica, or the hilly terrain and on ramps of Ocean Park Blvd make Pico a much safer bet.
Posted by: AnthonyS | June 12, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Come on people, be realistic. How many people can ride their bike to work, based upon their health, distance to work, etc? Very few. What, maybe .01%? Why would we spend any money on that? Better to spend the money to expand the freeways, so that our tax dollars are used in the most effective way. Not on some stupid pipe dream of having people ride their bikes to work. Give me a break.
Posted by: Todd Andrews | June 12, 2011 at 02:34 PM
The only cars that every cause me problems when I'm on my bike are the biggest of the SUVs, and the occasional Metro Rapid. Normal car cars are generally very nice, mindful that I'm in the street, and regular buses are very polite.
Bicyclists, pedestrians and drivers ALL need to follow the rules of the road and what accidents that do happen will truly be accidents. Most so-called accidents are entirely preventable.
Posted by: Carol | June 12, 2011 at 08:36 PM
Yes, bicyclists should obey traffic laws. But the "California stop" was not coined because of bicyclists running stop signs.
Also, while some cyclists do blow through stop signs and red lights, most do not. Many more may roll through stops, but rolling through stop signs has a lot less to do with disregard for the law and more to do with conserving energy. Yielding for stops allows bicyclists to maintain a higher average speed and requires considerably less energy than starting and stopping. Bicyclists also have better visibility than drivers at intersections, so yielding instead of a full stop is pretty safe.
I agree with Tu Madre below: road safety necessarily requires all users to follow the law, but which causes more collisions, injuries, and deaths, bicyclists or drivers? So sure let's educate bicyclists and hold them accountable for following the rules of the road, but let's focus on doing the same for drivers, since cars are a lot more dangerous.
Posted by: effelarr | June 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM
"LiberalReason" could not be wronger, and "effelarr" could not be righter.
You car drivers are not qualified to comment on this unless you've attempted to ride a bicycle on a public road lately (and riding one when you were a kid does not count).
Some cyclists ride the way we do because we have to do what WORKS, not what car drivers want us to do (and admit it- most of them just want us to disappear). If car drivers don't do what works, they get a fender-bender and/or a ticket. If cyclists don't do what works, we get hospitalized or killed.
Cyclists don't fully stop at stop signs? Well, neither do drivers, especially once they know no one else is at the intersection. And if they rode a bike, they wouldn't fully stop, either. See "effelarr's" comments above. Once your bike stops, you are a target that can't easily move- we don't have the luxury of a gas pedal we can just stomp on, remember? If you keep rolling, you at least have some maneuverability.
Cyclists use the sidewalk? Try riding a bike on the street right next to parked cars with doors that might suddenly open, and with your back to drivers behind you that might be drunk, on cell phones or otherwise distracted and drifting into you. When you're in a car and a distracted teenager runs into your rear bumper, you get a big insurance and body-shop hassle. When you're on a bike and the same thing happens, you die.
So that's why you sometimes see cyclists on the sidewalk - we have this survival compulsion that makes us choose the safest path. And, as long as we respect and yield to pedestrians (something all responsible cyclists support and practice), the law is on our side: LAMC 56.15.
Bottom Line: Every bicycle you see is one less car clogging and wearing out the roads, one less tank of gas being consumed and one less parking space being occupied. The rest of the world gets this. If you don't want to join in, so be it, but your comments on how cyclists should ride lack any credibility since they aren't backed with any actual experience.
Posted by: PERRYinLA | June 13, 2011 at 02:35 PM
Of course cyclists need to pay attention and not ride like lunatics. But for the most part, traffic lights are not necessary for cyclists so long as they pay attention. If it's safe to go, go. Cyclists know all too well that a lane on a road or a light on a sign doesn't mean it's safe, cyclists always need to pay attention and this is why most ignore traffic lights. I have never heard of a cyclist who killed a pedestrian and I would imagine cyclists injuring pedestrians is quite rare. In any case, a traffic light or a lane on the road is merely a suggestion and lunatics will ignore it and continue to be lunatics. Cyclists stopped and waiting mindlessly for no logical reason at red lights while it's safe to go, will not make the road safer. It's been proven over and over that traffic calming intersections are the safest intersections and there have no traffic lights at all. Pedestrians and cyclists want these types of intersections because they're safer, more beautiful and cheaper, but those who drive cars and love to see their speedometer hit high speeds through an intersections don't like them.
Posted by: Simon Hartigan | June 13, 2011 at 08:57 PM
My sarcastic solutions
1. Fix the traffic light so that it will change for bicycles.
2. No parking in bicycle lane.
3. Since many driver feel cocky because they are driving behind a weapon. Cyclist should be required to carry guns.
4. Cyclist should randormly shoot cars front tires out of passing cars, Just returning the favorite.
5. Have bicycle tax to pay for bicycle road.
6. Make protected bike lane from cars. So Kids can ride to and from school. ( this may be too crazy).
7. Make the gas price so high that people are forced to bicycle around. SPECIALLY the Elderly and the children. Then run them over because they are not in the bicycle lane.
Posted by: TGIF | June 20, 2011 at 07:05 PM