Vehicularists v. facilitators in new L.A. bike infrastructure planning
theory November 2nd, 2009
From an otherwise quite good article in today’s L.A. Times, the facilitators get short shrift:
The city of Los Angeles is currently updating its own bicycle infrastructure plan. Even as it does so, cycling experts and enthusiasts can’t agree on how to make the roads more bicycle-safe. Some advocate for more dedicated infrastructure, such as bike lanes. Others believe that people riding bicycles belong on the roads just as surely as do cars — and that the key to greater safety is people cycling in a manner that reflects that right.
–Erik Ryberg
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Dichotomy is a powerful and necessary but limited way to frame issues. Think of it as the starting line. But along the way there is always the risk of false dichotomy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy
(as always, apply healthy skepticism of Wikipedia or anything else you read)
The facilitator side of things would seem to have the most difficulty for their approach requires municiple outlays that just aren’t available. And yet, simple and cheap changes could be made that also have the effect of implicitly bringing together the two camps: remove the east-west stop signs from 3rd and Treat.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
It appears to me that the debaters in these
two camps are projecting the adversarial
mind set of cars and bikes to this interest.
I would think there is more to be gained by
examining the fluidity between the many modes
that make up the whole of transportation.
As a cyclist, I can go from traffic to
multi-use path to bus to pedestrian, etc.
The predominant mind set these days, however,
belongs to the insular-most of the modes.
Keep us busy arguing points in this
manner and the result would likely be the
removal of the north-south stop signs
from 3rd and Treat. Big “T” transportation
needs to be seen as being served; not just the
individual modes.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Rip the stop sign out of all traffic circles and roundabouts. Phoenix, Adot, and Scottsdale put a yield sign up it can be done.
You ever see a car or truck riding on a gutter pan?
In Tucson you do, but not to many places. We don’t say 8.5 feet asphalt the rest gutter pan. Substandard bike lanes love them.
http://www.youtube.com/user/bodybait#p/u/6/oLjCbAfy86A
1:08 I get yelled at for not riding in the bike lane.
Vigilante made up justice on her part.
We need better drivers of all. Create some laws a jury can understand. Like for assault’s proposed change, is a great one.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pm
bb-
Do you always ride in the middle
of the lane when there is no bike
lane present?
I’ve always been of the thought that
cyclists are obligated to ride where
the bike lane would be if it is not
painted….unless road conditions
are too bad.
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
This is taken from the Gov. of Arizona highway safety.
http://www.azgohs.gov/transportation-safety/default.asp?ID=16
“You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you.”
Narrow lanes are the most common of it all.
law 28-815. 28-815. Riding on roadways and bicycle paths; prohibition of motor vehicle traffic on bike paths
A. A person riding a bicycle on a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except under any of the following situations:
If overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
If preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
If reasonably necessary to avoid conditions, including fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals or surface hazards.
If the lane in which the person is operating the bicycle is too narrow for. a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
B. Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadway set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
C. A path or lane that is designated as a bicycle path or lane by state or local authorities is for the exclusive use of bicycles even though other uses are permitted pursuant to subsection D or are otherwise permitted by state or local authorities.
D. A person shall not operate, stop, park or leave standing a vehicle in a path or lane designated as a bicycle path or lane by a state or local authority except in the case of emergency or for crossing the path or lane to gain access to a public or private road or driveway.
E. Subsection D does not prohibit the use of the path or lane by the appropriate local authority.