Dispatch from Down Under – Brisbane Bikeways

While on Walkabout Down Under, we were tickled to see that the Brisbane City Council has announced plans for the controversial $1.6 million CityCycle bike hire scheme. Locations have been announced for the first 80 bike parking stations and the project will roll out in the middle of 2010.

CityCycle will allow people to pick up and drop off bikes at stations located across West End, Kangaroo Point, the City Business District (CBD), Fortitude Valley, New Farm and New Stead. The network, designed to reduce inner-city traffic congestion and parking demand, will then be expanded to take in St. Lucia, Toowong, Milton and South Brisbane with a final complement of 2000 bicycles across 150 stations.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, LADOT Bikeways staff proudly announced plans to add bike lanes to a small section of Reseda Blvd. that they claim is almost 1.5 miles in length. Transportation Engineers indicate that the bikes lanes would feature a painted line indicating the edge of the bike lane as well as a stencil of a cyclist and the phrase "Bike Lane" placed at regular intervals.

Reseda Blvd. already has 2 miles of bike lanes to the south, approximately 4.5 miles from the beginning of the proposed bike lanes, which will run to the north. This "slight" gap in connectivity in no way impedes a cyclist from enjoying a bike ride on Reseda Blvd. and will, in fact, get a cyclist within 1.5 miles of Cal State Northridge!

Both projects have received criticism, with CityCycle critics claiming that the $300 AU deposit per bicycle for casual rentals and the $150 AU deposit for subscription cyclists was prohibitive and would discourage use. However, Bicycle Queensland Manager Ben Wilson said it was a "fantastic" scheme and rejected criticism. "Anyone who gets their head into first gear can use it very cheaply with the annual subscription," he said.

The LADOT came under criticism for committing to such a small section of Reseda and for projecting that it would take a full year to finish the engineering for the project with the bike lanes finally installed in late 2010. LADOT officials were quick to point out that the painted line on the street needs to be straight when the road is straight and it needs to curve when the road curves.

When pressed to account for the length of time it takes to get bike lanes painted on the streets of Los Angeles, LADOT officials rejected the questions as "trashtalk" and reminded the audience that the bike lanes would be supported with little signs that said "Bike Lane" and that is when the project starts to get very complicated.

Brisbane is a city of 2 million people and cyclists have access to approximately 396 miles of bike trails and bike lanes.

Los Angeles is a city of 4 million people and cyclists have access to approximately 193 miles of bike trails and bike lanes.

Brisbane features the King George Square Cycle Centre, Australia's first major end-of-trip facility for cyclists and pedestrians using active transport to the Brisbane CBD.

The Cycle Centre is available on a membership basis and has a number of features including 420 individual bike racks, male and female change rooms with a total of 35 showers, lockers, ironing/laundry service, excellent security and cycle access direct to the door via Turbot Street or Roma/Herschel Streets from the Bicentennial Bikeway or through Roma Street Parklands from the north.

Los Angeles features curbside bike parking in a quantity sufficient to ensure one rack for every 2 miles of street, which means if you ever see two bike racks together, it will be 4 miles until you see another!

As for the Bike Boxes, Colored Bike Lanes, Lockers, Showers, Bike Stations and other amenities that Brisbane cyclists enjoy, Angelenos will just have to travel more if they'd like to experience them. Sad but true!

If there is ever any doubt that City of Los Angeles lacks vision, one need only take a look at the LADOT Bikeways Department and those doubts will be dispelled.

See you on the streets!

LA Bike Plan's "Proposed Bicycle Network" Aims Low and Still Falls Short

Last Thursday was Groundhogs Day for LA's long overdue Bike Plan and the Draft Bike Map peeked its head out of the city's Byzantine den of multi-departmental oversight and looked around for its shadow.

The release was quiet with only neighborhood council members notified of the availability of the Draft Bike Map at local libraries as well as online at http://www.labikeplan.org/bikeway_maps.

There may have been others notified but as somebody who signed in at four workshops, I find it strange that I didn't receive notification. Apparently the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee, The LA County Bicycle Coalition, the Caltrans Bicycle Advisory Committee, the Bike Writers Collective and the many local cycling organizations were also left off the distribution list.

Nevertheless, word of the release spread quickly and the public has had the weekend to review the three Draft Bike Maps.

Heres my take on the City of LA's Bicycle Plan Draft Bike Map:

1) Outreach: FAIL! Seriously, what is it going to take to get the LADOT (and Planning) to engage the public and to treat the community with a little respect. The LADOT Coordinator had previously claimed that the budget for outreach was 20% of the $450K budget for the Bicycle Plan. Surely that would cover the cost of emailing those who are established in the cycling community or those who have attended prior meetings and signed up for notifications. City's Transportation Committee, as far back as Jan 10, 2007, has taken the time to specifically instruct the LADOT to include the public in the process. And yet, the current distribution for the Draft Bike Map left out the cycling community.

2) Format: FAIL! Surely we could find somebody at Starbucks with an iPhone who could throw this map through iMap and perhaps generate something close to useable. Others more knowledgeable than I have commented:

"This map is embarrasing. If I was forced to release a map like this by a client I would hang my head in shame." Marcotico

I find the maps to be cumbersome and close to useless with a dose of frustrating thrown in. I looked at my neighborhood, was unable to compare the new map with the old, was unable to filter the noise, was unable to do anything other than to exclaim "More of the same from the LADOT!"

3) Vision: FAIL! This document sets out to aim low and then still falls short. Who gets to call improvements "infeasible" and decide that cyclists belong on side streets? Who gets to position a diluted "bike friendly" designation as our hope for improving the city of Los Angeles for cyclists? Why not include real data such as vehicle counts or speed limits or hipster coffeehouses or any of the many factors that make a streets favorable for cyclists? Why not set the bar really, really high and then let the community come together to make it happen?

How about a tally sheet. Be so bold as to give us the actual mileage of proposed Bike Paths, Bike Lanes, Bike Routes and Bike Boulevards. LADOT Assistant General Manager John Fisher went on record with some commitments. Are they reflected on this map?Tell us what's really on the table.

4) Usefulness: FAIL! I simply have to look at Hollywood and ask the simple question "Will this improve conditions as I ride from home to USC, Downtown, Griffith Park, Glendale, Burbank, the Valley, the Westside, NE LA, South LA, Harbor, ANYWHERE?" Seriously, the answer is no! Even the existing popular routes that I ride now remain unimproved by anything so simple as signage or sharrows or any encouragement while at the same time "bike friendly" streets are identified that appear to encourage me to "get out of the way" of motorists on their popular routes. This is not a useful document nor does it reflect a useful strategy or vision.

Why gray out neighboring communities? We still ride through them and any evaluation of efficacy of routes will include connecting with neighboring communities. Why can't LA play nice with the neighbors? Do we really need 88 municipal maps as well as the County map?

5) Clarity: FAIL! The cloud of "unfeasible" routes simply creates visual noise that obscures the brutal reality. There is no Bikeways vision in place, there is no clearly articulated strategy or commitment to standards or improvements. Optional, subject to further evaluation and "may include" are the foggy terms that allow this document to deteriorate in an expensive suggestion.

Graphic artists have reacted at first glance with shock that a cumbersome mapping document such as this was released to the public with a straight face.

"tried to pull it into adobe illustrator to separate out the wishful thinking parts but it's lo res flattened artwork... no dice, thus wishing for them to put this into google maps and allow for turning off and on proposed routes versus infeasable routes etc... pdf fucking sucks and since it's a lo res image they could have just as well made it a jpeg..." RB

"Ahh, why can't someone make a better online mapping interface that doesn't suck... PDFs are so 1990..." jerich1ne

6) Standards: FAIL! There are Bike Routes, there are Bike Lanes and there are "Shared Roadways." Then there are Bike Boulevards. Well, there would be if the LADOT wasn't so afraid of them. The LADOT needs to settle down and set standards and then work from that position. Others have begun the process. There are Bike Routes, there are Bike Lanes and there are "Shared Roadways." Seriously, we know what Bike Paths and Bike Lanes are and where they are but EVERY street is a "Shared Roadway" and even with bike paths and bike lanes, cyclists can ride all the streets. The challenge is to support cyclists who ride the streets of Los Angeles. How is this new "Shared Roadways" designation going to do this?

7) Vocabulary: FAIL! Repeating the phrase "where bicyclists have full legal access under the California Vehicle Code" is completely unnecessary and a waste of space. It goes without saying (kind of like "the laws of gravity will apply to all users of this street") but if necessary, say it once on the map and get it over with. Better yet, use the legal standard which is that cyclists have the right ride on roads and highways unless expressly prohibited. That means the streets of LA and it also means 1000 miles of highway in the State of California. Why does LA keep sprinkling this little bit of "permission" on the small streets?

In addition, using soft words and phrases such as "might be implemented" and "subject to further evaluation" and "applications of various treatments" leaves enough vagueness as to be meaningless and useless.

8) Subterfuge: SUCCESS! The LADOT wrote the scope of work for this project and secured the funding and handled the call and made the presentations to the City Council. All through the process, it was clearly driven by the LADOT. The Bike Plan consultant kicked off the Bike Plan process by referring specifically to the LADOT Coordinator by name as the authority that framed the specs of the process and the direction of the vision. Along the way, the Bicycle Plan, which is part of LA's Transportation Plan which is in turn part of the City of LA's General Plan, was shuffled so that a member of Planning was listed as the project manager but rest assured, this is an LADOT project and the vision comes from LADOT's mandate to move motor vehicles.

Make no mistake, no matter how hard the LADOT works to put the Bike Plan on Planning, this is an LADOT project and that is a good thing for motorists. This is funded with Bikeways funding, this should benefit cyclists but it is driven by a commitment for moving cyclists out of the way of motorists.

9) Funded activity with no real impact: SUCCESS! This map is an indication of things to come. It lacks commitment, uses soft language and includes enough "gray" markings to create the illusion that there is some real Bikeways activity taking place. It has colorful dotted lines that indicate things to come (or not) it has lots of routes that will get you where you need to go (or not) and it will have kept a lot of people gainfully employed during its long gestation period. It's a funding exercise!

10) Creative use of the word "UNFEASIBLE" in a vision document: SUCCESS! Is this an engineering standard? Is this a planning document? When did political will dictate the creation of a master planning document? Why is the LADOT's philosophy the driving force in this process? What happened to public input?

Overall, I'm calling the LA Bike Plan Update Draft Bike Map a complete success from the LADOT's perspective for subterfuge, funding and the bold use of the word "UNFEASIBLE" but a complete failure from the perspective of the cyclists who have hope that they'll get some support as the ride the streets of LA.

From my perspective, I'm calling this process flawed from the beginning and I'm putting my hopes for better cycling on the streets of Los Angeles in the hands of the DIY crew!

"See you on the Streets!"

LADOT Bikeways vs. the Volcano

LA's budget crisis seemed so bad the Department of Transportation actually carried the Bikeways division to the edge of the volcano, apparently fully prepared to toss it over the edge, willing to sacrifice it all in an effort to save the city from financial collapse.

At the last minute, it was revealed that the threat was hollow, that the Bikeways Division is Prop C funded meaning that if the staff were canned, the city would then simply return the "Congestion Relief" funding, resulting in no financial benefit to the City's General Fund.

Nevertheless, it was all part of an exciting week as department after department, constituent group after constituent group, union after union and, eventually, department head after department head, all paraded before the city council and begged a second bowl of porridge.

Why, one would think we're in the middle of a financial crisis.

Truth be told, we're actually doing all right. Since San Antonio has stepped up as LA's 11% solution, the city's annual revenue has grown from $5.4 Billion in to $7.1 Billion. LA's crisis is not one of shrinking revenue but of escalating costs that are rapidly exceeding the 31% increase in revenue. All of which brought the city to a moment of truth when somebody pointed out that the days of lean are on their way.

Call for moderation drew challenges of "You first!" and the city went to the wire, wrestling all the way.

When the dust had settled, money had magically appeared, the budget was balanced and everybody agreed to "Share the Sacrifice" meaning 10% cuts throughout the city and furloughs, layoffs and other austerity measures positioned for implementation.

As for the LADOT's Bikeways Division, they survived intact. Phew!

Now the cyclists of Los Angeles can get back to NOT getting the '08 Bike Plan ($450K) and NOT getting the '08 Bike Map ($400K) and NOT getting the Orange Line maintained (5.27.09 Transpo Committee) and NOT getting any Bikeways support in the Hummer vs. Cyclists incident (1:50)

Of course, LADOT's Bikeways Department hasn't been idle.

Bikeways was on the job last year when the Department of DIY pitched in to help with the public works backlog, painting a bike lane on the Fletcher Bridge. The paint was barely dry when the Bikeways staff moved with uncharacteristic speed, painting out the bike lane and removing the supporting signage. Bikeways staff reported at the August Bicycle Advisory Committee and in the press that the DIY bike lane was dangerous, resulted in "lost goodwill" and put cyclists in danger. Phew!

photo by Sean Bonner

Bikeways was also on the job last year when Westside cyclists needed a little extra excitement on their Culver Blvd. Bike Path.

This Bike Path is on former Red Car land that belongs to the Metro but there is a cooperative agreement in place that allows the city to operate a bike path. Definitely safer than the Fletcher Bridge!

But most of all, Bikeways was on the job last year, developing the Sunset Boulevard Bike Path, a Class I mixed use path between Alvarado and Coronado, right in the heart of Silver Lake. What a bold move!


The Sunset Boulevard Bike Path! Definitely safer than the Fletcher Bridge!

It's moves such as this that leave one wondering "Is the volcano still warm?"

CityWatchLA - Bike Path to Blight Path … and No One to Blame

CityWatch, Apr 28, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 34

The Orange Line Bike Path is 14 miles of bureaucratic "no-man's land"  and a jurisdictional "hot-potato" that has departments and agencies  scrambling for cover as the City's Transportation Committee asks "Hey! How did the Bike Path turn into a homeless encampment?"

Critics long ago warned that building a bike path with a fence on one   side, a wall on the other and surrounding it with bushes and trees   that grow up and out would result in an environment that is unsafe   for pedestrians and cyclists but hospitable to those who favor seclusion and a place to hide.

Those warnings were ignored and the predictions came true. The Orange Line Bike Path is now so overgrown that in some areas such as Van  Nuys, it is populated with homeless encampments. Making things worse is the close proximity of a recycling center and two liquor stores.  All very convenient for the campers but at the expense of the pedestrians, the cyclists and the local residents.

Two months ago, the Van Nuys Neighborhood Council convened a meeting   to address the situation, a meeting so well attended by agency and department reps that it seemed certain that the Bike Path was to be  cleaned up and reclaimed. Such was not the case.

This past week, the Transportation Committee jumped into the fray and convened a meeting to determine what went wrong and who is going to   fix it. The LADOT took the hot seat and explained the difficulty in supervising maintenance contracts and of working with the Metro and Rec & Parks and how the abundant overgrown landscaping wasn't their fault.

The LAPD was represented, Councilman Cardenas was represented and the Neighborhood Prosecutor, Tamar Galatzan also  appeared but nobody could explain who was in charge, who had authority and who had a plan.

Councilman Alarcon cut to the chase at one point in the "Who's  responsible?" debate and said simply "If it's LA's Bike Path then we  should take care of it!"

That should have been the point at which everybody stepped up but  instead we were treated to another round of "Yes, We Can't!"

Unfortunately, the Groupthink that prevents agencies and departments   from being "negative" and just calling it as they see it is still in   play and the LADOT, the Metro, the LAPD, the LASD, the Neighborhood   Prosecutor, the BOSS, LAHSA, the Councilmembers and anyone else with   a piece of the Bike Path are still having polite meetings where they dance about and explain why they're not responsible.

The Orange Line Bike Path has been around for a little over three  years. It was designed and built by the Metro and the LADOT Bikeways Department was there through the entire process. In fact the LADOT is so proud of the Orange Line that they have a presentation they take  to conferences taking credit for its success. Somewhere along the way, the responsibility for the Orange Line was formally transferred  to the LADOT which, based on results, dropped the ball.

Perhaps it's time to call in the DWP and have them cut down the  forest, relandscape with drought tolerant plants and create a 14 mile long demonstration garden on water conservation. Maybe we could plow it all under and plant a 14 mile long Victory  
Garden and use the wide stretches for a Farmer's Market.

Whatever we do, it is imperative that the LADOT stop paying its contractors until they execute their contracts.

It is also imperative that the LAPD clarify with dispatch and the  patrol officers that the Orange Line Bike Path is not the  responsibility of the Sheriff but is the responsibility of the LAPD.

If the Van Nuys area is to be cleaned up, it would also be wise to have the Neighborhood Prosecutor work with the ABC to address the two  liquor stores that cater to the "campers" and who are a blight on the  community.

As long as blight is on the radar, the recycling center has had a negative impact on the area and yet it continues to operate. It's time for us to work together to make our abatement programs work for  the neighborhood.

Most of all, we've got to get over our fear of raising the standards and offending other departments. We've got to evaluate performance  based on results, not on bureaucratic endurance. We've got to stop   settling for mediocrity and we've got to reach for greatness.

The Orange Line Bike Path is either a monument to our mediocrity or   it’s an opportunity to demonstrate our greatness. Either way, it's our   call. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net)

Glossary:

LADOT - The Los Angeles Department of Transportation. Within the  LADOT is the Bikeways Division, responsible for the Orange Line and  other bikeways facilities.   http://www.ladot.lacity.org

Metro - The Countywide Metropolitan Transit Authority. They are the  major operator of bus and rail service in Los Angeles County. http://www.metro.net/index.asp 

LAPD - The Los Angeles Police Department . They are responsible for the Bike Path. When calling 911 from a cell phone remember that it goes to the CHP. Program 213-928-8206 or 213-928-8208 into your cell phone so that you can get to LAPD dispatch quickly.http://www.lapdonline.org

LASD - The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. They are a County Agency under contract to provide services to the Metro. They patrol the Metro Stations, they are responsible for the busway and they respond if there is an incident on a bus. They are not responsible for the Bike Path. http://www.lasd.org

BOSS - LA's Bureau of Street Services. They are responsible for the 6500 miles of streets within Los Angeles. They pick up the abandoned furniture and they factor into this scenario on the Orange Line because of the homeless encampments and the amount of furniture that must sometimes be removed. You can reach them by calling 311. http://www.lacity.org/BOSS 

LAHSA - The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority is a joint powers authority representing both the City of LA and the County of LA. You can access social services by calling 211. http://www.lahsa.org

Rec & Parks - The Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks is sometimes mentioned when discussing bike paths because bike paths are often considered recreational facilities. In fact the LADOT fought all the way to the State Supreme Court to have bike paths declared recreational facilities so that the City would not be liable for injuries resulting from design or maintenance negligence. (Prokop vs. City of Los Angeles) LA prevailed and bike paths are now funded with transportation funding but then declared recreationa facilities. Meanwhile, Rec & Parks has little to do with bikeway facilities except when Bikeways was looking for someone to handle the Orange Line maintenance. http://www.laparks.org

ABC - The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control issues and regulates liquor licenses. If the two liquor stores along the Orange Line Bike Path in Van Nuys are contributing to the problems, it must be documented and the ABC will consider this when evaluating the licenses. If the LAPD and the Neighborhood Prosecutor aren't documenting the incidents and their relation to the liquor stores, the ABC can't do its job. The local ABC agent must be involved in the Orange Line Task Force. http://www.abc.ca.gov

VNNC - The Van Nuys Neighborhood Council meets every month and on May 13, the full Board will convene to address the issues of the  community. Expect to see reps from the offices of Padilla and Cardenas and Villaraigosa as well as Bikeways, the LAPD, the Metro, the City Attorney's office and anyone else with a piece of the Orange Line Bike Path. http://vnnc.org

Orange Line Camp Grounds

LA City Council's Transportation Committee meets today to review the Orange Line Bike Path, also known as the Orange Line Campgrounds.

The Bike Path has long been a popular homeless encampment, especially in the Van Nuys area where the overgrown bushes, the liquor stores at each end and the recycling center all work together to create the perfect environment.

Things came to a head a couple of months ago and everybody who had a piece of the jurisdictional Gordian Knot visited the Van Nuys Neighborhood Council to assure the community that they were "All over it!"

It turns out that the LADOT had a contractor who was responsible for maintenance on the Bike Path but that the contractor had been remiss. The contractor got busy, put an edge line on some of the bushes leaving behind a well trimmed and trash free homeless encampment that was soon occupied by happy campers.

Since then...

We rode the Orange Line this past Saturday and this is what we found:

1) a car missed the turn (wb just west of Sepulveda) and drove onto the bike path, taking out the signs which are still on the ground. The shopping cart survived the incident.

2) the path has a dirt edge line that creeps well into the path indicating that it has not been cleaned in ages.

3) the large bushes that provide the homeless shelter have NEVER been cut back. The Orange Line Campground is occupied. The recent maintenance work resulted in a neatly trimmed Campground with an edge line along the bike path, completely missing the point. The bushes, the liquor stores and the recycling center make this a very popular Campground.

4) the lights don't come on until 8pm

5) the broken sprinkler control with the open cage and leaking water doesn't speak well for any supervision.

6) the body on the bike path (passed out) and the difficulty in calling in the incident on the Orange Line Bike Path indicates a need to clarify AGAIN the jurisdictional issues for the Bike Path. LAPD dispatch can't take the call quickly without an address, dispatch wants to give the call to the Sheriff, the LAPD Sgt. that I flagged down said the LAPD doesn't have jurisdiction until 50' from the Orange Line. Capt Jordan of the LASD says that the Bike Path is City, the Busway is Metro.

CityWatchLA - The Orange Line Bike Path Buck Stops…Where?

CityWatch, Feb 13, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 13

The mystery of the blighted Orange Line Bikeway was solved when Paul Meshkin of the LADOT's Bikeways Division revealed that the contractor responsible for maintenance had "overlooked" the section from Hazeltine to Sepulveda and that the person responsible for supervising the contractor had "overlooked" the failure to perform but that all parties somehow remembered to cash their checks. All's well that ends well!

The contractor, Sunscape Landscaping, was paid $160,000 for a six month contract which required them to sweep the path twice a week and trim the brush. The contract expired this past Saturday.

Sunscape has been busy executing their landscaping contract with the Metro in the same area but on the busway portion of the Orange Line. Somehow in all of the confusion over which bush belongs to whom, the contractor simply forgot to maintain the bikeway which is the LADOT's area of responsibility.

The rapid deterioration of the bikeway drew the attention of the CityWatch, Daily News and LAist all of which motivated the Metro, the LAPD, the Sheriff's Department, the Council office and the Van Nuys Neighborhood Council to action and that's when the LADOT was discovered to be asleep at the handlebars.

The response from all parties was swift and a multi-disciplinary committee is in place to address the larger issue of environmental design, security, homelessness, crime, graffiti and the basic maintenance and supervision of the bikeway and busway facility.

Sunscape was gracious enough to move through the area, clearing trash, trimming bushes and putting an edgeline on the Van Nuys jungle. This one shot fulfillment of the six-month contract seems to have taken them off the hook to the city and they now stand in line to pick up an extension of the contract, this time for 3-5 years. Apparently, no failure-to-perform goes unrewarded!

By midweek the bikeway had been cleared of trash, the bushes had been trimmed back and the richly landscaped and overgrown bikeway now has a lovely edgeline, all of which must make the bikeway residents feel much prouder of their accommodations.

It's fair to say that the bikeway is now a well maintained campground, free of trash but still an attractive refuge for those who seek shelter or a place to hide. It still has the bush "caves" and a trail through the brush that parallels the bikeway.

LADOT staff turned up at the Van Nuys Neighborhood Council in response to concerns over the deterioration of the bikeway and the resulting negative impact on the community.

A concerned board member gave a list of problems that included burned out landscaping, plywood shelters, concertina wire, bottles, trash, and loitering men dropped off by the housing authority. When she pointed out that that very day she had been accosted by a drunk as she made her way down the bike path, the LADOT Coordinator graciously responded with a discussion on the difference between a bikeway and a sidewalk.

Perhaps if the LADOT spent less time debating the limits on their responsibilities and more time on multi-departmental solutions, valuable facilities such as the Orange Line Bikeway wouldn't deteriorate as if in a bureaucratic no-man's land.

Perhaps if the LADOT spent more time biking or walking the bikeways of Los Angeles, they would be able to spend less time in the Neighborhood Councils explaining the many limitations on their ability to supervise their areas of responsibility.

Perhaps if the LADOT dropped the "Yes, We Can't" approach to problem solving we could spend less time on discussions of the difference between a sound wall and the side of a building and more time on the lack of supervision that makes the Orange Line such a great place for graffiti, trash, crime, and all of the other symptoms of an unsupervised, overgrown, isolatated, ill-landscaped and poorly maintained environment, book-ended by two liquor stores which provide the tenants of the bikeway with fuel for the decline.

LA deserves better. There are too any departments involved for something as significant as a 14 mile long bikeway to simply fall between the cracks.

The cyclists who ride this path knew what was going on, the pedestrians and joggers who use the path were aware, the commuters who frequent the area knew of the problems, the local residents knew of the problems, and yet …

The LAPD, the Sheriff’s Department, the Metro, the City Attorney, the Council Office, Street Services and the LADOT all stand by with a look of jurisdictional confusion on their collective faces and watch as the Bikeway deteriorates to the point of absurdity while the contractor stands in line at the bank.

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist activist and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net)

Billboard Company Sponsors Bike Path

Culver Blvd. billboard sends a clear message to cyclists: Get off the bike path and ride on the streets!

The City of Los Angeles, in its infinite benevolence, has long fought to maintain immunity from liability for the Class I "Bike Path" facilities such as the one pictured above, holding that they are trails used for recreational activity and, as such, the user is responsible for any risk or injury.

At a glance, it is evident that this Bike Path is actually a well designed multi-use slalom course, popular with the daredevil baby carriage pushing crowd and probably popular with extreme dogwalkers and cyclists who who like to live on the edge.

Somehow this Billboard was built on this land. It either had a permit or it didn't. If it has a permit, the person who issued this permit should be held accountable for their actions. If it doesn't have a permit, the billboard should be removed, posthaste!

As for the Bike Path, why is it even here? Who in the LADOT approved these plans? Why is it called a Bike Path? It's a multi-use path closed to motor vehicles. It offers little if any support at the many crossings between Corinth and McConnell.

The City Council is meeting today in a special session to consider a moratorium of sorts on Billboards. Why does it take such an uprising from the community to get our City leadership to take a look at foolishness such as that pictured above?

LADOT Reality Check

The LADOT Bikeways staff reported to the City's Transpo Committee that their three most significant bikeways "successes" are:

1) The LA River Bike Path. Apparently by success, the LADOT was referring to:

a) Successful litigation! The City of Los Angeles is flush with victory after fighting all the way to the State Supreme Court to avoid taking responsibility for the design and maintenance of the LA River Bike Path. The City of LA rejected the claims of an injured cyclist who was injured on the gate/chain link fence at the Victory end of the bike path. The City of LA fought the claim arguing that the City of LA is immune from any liability for the bike paths, that anyone who rides on a bike path does so at their own risk and that they are recreational facilities and not transportation facilities.

(No attempt was made to reconcile the fact that the LADOT apparently calls the LA Bike Path a transportation facility when seeking funding and then a recreational facility when looking for immunity.)

The bottom line is this; cyclists riding the LA River Bike Path do so at their own risk, (there's a sign just N of the Los Feliz bridge informing cyclists of this limitation) and the LADOT has argued successfully that riding a bike is a recreational endeavor inherent with the risks that come with such dangerous pursuits. Hunting bear? Jumping out of a plane? Swimming with sharks? Wrestling Gators? Riding a bike on the LA Bike Path? You are a daredevil and you are on your own!

b) Successful communication! Cyclists on the LA River Bike Path often find themselves at odds with other user groups and mistakenly take the term "Bike Lane" to mean "Bike Lane." That's not the case. The LA River Bike Path is actually the LA River "Mixed Use" Path and is fair game for dog-walkers, roller-bladers, joggers, pogo-stickers, ballroom dancers, hop-scotching, jump-roping, shopping cart pushing, picnic basket carrying, non-motorized vehicular travelers of all flavors and speeds! Of course, that's a mouthful to put on a sign so the LADOT continues to post "Bike Path" signs because it's simpler that way.

c) Successful eradication of light pollution! Apparently the wildlife in the LA River were kept awake at night by the pesky Bike Path illumination. No Worries. Freelance wildlife fans liberated all of the copper from the bike path electical system (twice!) leaving the Bike Path in the dark and the wildlife free to do whatever they do when it's dark.

2) The Orange Line Bike Path. Apparently by success, the LADOT is referring to:

a) The Metro's successful Orange Line Bike Path. In a classic demonstration of "Success has many parents, failure is an orphan." the LADOT is more than willing to glom onto the success of the Metro's OL Bike Path when discussing success but when it comes to taking responsibility for the maintenance of the Bike Path, the LADOT fought for two years to avoid signing the paperwork, insisting that the Metro hasn't completed the project.

b) The Chandler extension which consists of bike lanes (yea for magic paint and the BSS who actually did the work!) and the Chandler Bike Path which was in the news recently as the location of the collision between a roller blader and two League of American Bicyclist licensed instructors, resulting in broken bones for both cyclists and yet another confusing debate over the use of the term "Bike Path" vs. the use of the more appropriate term "Anybody-but-that-motorist-Path." The LA section of the Chandler Bike Path is distinguishable from the Burbank City section in that the LA side features drought resistant (dirt) landscaping while the Burbank section uses reclaimed water and is actually landscaped and green and feels like a parkway.

3) The Expo Line Bike Lanes/Path. Apparently by success, the LADOT is referring to:

a) The future? Is the list of accomplishments so short that by #3 the LADOT has to start pulling out the list of hopes, dreams and good intentions? The report started off with "We've been doing a number of things..." and then shifted into the future of the Expo line, a facility that is a Metro project. Telling other agencies how to do their business seems to be the major "success" of the LADOT Bikeways Department.

b) The opportunity? Perhaps this time around, the cycling community will have the opportunity to forge a relationship with the Metro, developing and refining on the bikeways design standards and establishing safe and effective accessibility to the Expo line for cyclists. As for the role of the LADOT in the development of the Expo Line, one need only look to the streets surrounding the Orange Line and Van Nuys Blvd. for a demonstration on the LADOT's commitment (or lack of commitment) to connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians. (Busted curb lanes, missing crosswalk, parking for 18 wheelers? Is this an industrial zone and traffic sewer or a transit hub?)

At the end of the day, it is excruciatingly apparent that the LADOT operates with little if any accountability or obligation to lay down real goals, actual accomplishments and any sense of accountability. This meeting, just like all the others, included an LADOT call for more staffing in order to continue with the Transportation malpractice that is inflicted on the people of Los Angeles.

All totaled, there are 11 people currently working on the secret projects that purportedly are the future of LA's Network of Bikeways. As our City leadership is scrambling to find opportunities to cut the City budget, the Bikeways department brazenly steps up to the mic and acknowledges that they can't think of three things they have done that would justify their existence. Bold, cavalier and utterly contemptible!

This would be a great time for the LADOT Bikeways Department to start preparing the "stuff-we-did-this-year" report for the upcoming Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting on Tuesday, December 2, 2008. As usual, we'll be "Storming the Bastille" and asking for accountability in measurable terms.

"See you on the Streets!"