Metro - System Capacity Improvements

One of the most efficient, effective and immediate things the Metro can do to improve capacity is to address Human Infrastructure, the attitudes and behavior of the Metro staff and passengers. For your consideration I offer these four opportunities.

1) Communication - If the public asks enough Metro employees, the variety of answers will be sure to include a yes, a no, a maybe, and a go away. But it will often result in the run-around. This wastes time and speaks to a systemic flaw that should trigger an examination of the larger issue and the opportunity for clarification.

Example: Recent discussions of the 761 which frequently heads over the hill well under capacity but with a full bike rack has generated complaints as cyclists wait multiple rounds in order to ride over the hill. Metro staff, from Jody Litvak to Lynne Goldsmith to the Bus Operators, are unable to agree on the Metro's policy for bikes on-board policy, offering up "No" and "Only on the last run" and "At the Operator's discretion" and "Only with Operator liability" and "It's not my department." Somehow an opportunity to address systemic confusion was missed and the question lingers. Why does the 761 head over the hill, under capacity but without allowing the cyclists who are left behind the opportunity to put their bikes inside at the back? Also, why does the 761 pass up folding bikes when its rack are full? Best of all, why hasn't this series of questions to staff and complaints to customer service triggered an examination of the triple rack opportunity to increase capacity by 50% for cyclists? They work in Long Beach. Any objections have been dismissed by the Long Beach experience and data. Is anyone paying attention to this opportunity to improve capacity?

2) Training - The public can hardly be expected to understand the Metro policies and then behave accordingly if they are so confusing and exist with so many interpretations. The Metro staff implement and enforce different versions of old and new policies with such creative enthusiasm that it simply drives contempt for the system and an "everyone for themselves" behavioral pattern among the passengers.

The Transit Court will be addressing "Bikes on Escalators," a prohibition that defies comprehension in light of the baby carriage and luggage accommodation, yet it seems to be getting revived. Bike on Trains are prohibited during certain hours but Metro staff explain "That prohibition isn't enforced, it's just there in case we need it." Bus Operators tie off their bike racks and call them "broken" so they can ride bike-free on the freeway. Bus Operators enforce prohibitions against bikes-on-board unless the passenger is able to speak clearly and articulate "Metro policy is to allow bikes-on-board at the Operator's discretion and this empty bus has room in the back for my bike so there is no reason to exclude me from this bus." Rail Operators produce old bike policy pamphlets from the early Red Line days, Bus Operators produce new bike policy pamphlets and find restrictions that don't exist, through it all the thing that is most unclear is "What are we going to do with all of these cyclists?"

3) Logic - Bus Operators frequently inform the public that bikes on-board are allowed at a Bus Operator's discretion but that the Bus Operator is responsible for any damages so they will not allow it. This type of information is simply an insult to the public's intelligence. Kerr's Catering Service v. Department of Industrial Relations (1962) established that an employee can not be held liable for damages that are part of the cost of doing business. Wear and tear, broken dishes in the cafeteria, etc. are not the responsibility of the employee and the Metro should be clear on California Labor Law. Most importantly, the Metro should nip this "liability mythology" because it simply frames the passenger as a liability, not as an integral element of a Comprehensive Transportation System.

A well designed environment will yield good behavior. People sit on the stairs because there is no place to sit. This interferes with the movement of passengers and cyclists are less likely to use the stairs but now the escalators are off limits? People congregate in the middle section of the platform because the Purple Line trains them to count on that section, but this behavior means the head and tail are less populated. Every exiting passenger heads to the center of the platform to exit. Design and communicate to spread passengers out. I always wait for the front car because I have a bike and it is the least populated car, but at Union Station, at NoHo and on the Purple Line, it's not clear where to wait for the front of the train.

Benches that draw passengers to the ends of the platform, clear messaging so passengers can behave accordingly, traffic flow so that boarding is more efficient, simple communication and guidance such as "stand to the right, walk to the left" would all go a long way to increasing capacity and enhancing the passenger experience.

4) Oversight - Equipment malfunctions and breakdowns are to be expected but the most recent Union Station escalator incident bears witness to the systemic lack of oversight. When the escalator closest to HQ went out of service last week, the failure of an out-of-service sign with directions to the elevator in the parking lot to appear should be an indicator that Metro staff who use the escalator take a great deal for granted. The fact that the repairs took days to commence, all for a burned out wire, should have generated a sign indicating that repairs were on the way. This simple incident, so close to Metro HQ, should serve as a trigger that would cause Operations to examine the Metro's response to "out-of-service" incidents and generate a policy for communicating, or responding and for analyzing the data. It is my experience that the escalators at some stations are frequently out-of-service but the staff tell me that no data is collected nor reported. How does the Metro improve?

Complaints from the public are often about staff but the larger opportunity is to look for issues that indicate an opportunity to address communication, training, logic, and the larger Metro environment that allows ongoing conflict between passenger expectation and reality. The 761 issues with under capacity buses that could transport cyclists with their bikes on board is an example of complaints that should have generated an examination of the specific line and the more general policy.

5) Collaboration - I have participated in Cyclist/Metro brainstorm sessions, task forces, and roundtables over the last several years and each time I am hopeful that I am investing my time and energy in a process that will yield a meaningful progress in establishing cyclists as an integral element in LA County's Comprehensive Transportation System. In each case, I spend too much time listening to how hard is is for Metro employees to do their job. I've listened to Metro Bus Operators who need me to know how hard it is to control an articulated bus, Metro Trainers who need me to know how many people they are responsible for training and how difficult it is, HQ staff who need me to understand how difficult it is to work in a political environment, Communications staff who need me to understand how difficult it is to simply get color schemes approved, Operations staff who need me to listen to an explanation of their budget constraints, and enough internal drama to turn even the hardiest bicycle advocate away and yet I persist. Metro morale issues are not the cycling communities responsibility and they must be dealt with before we can move forward and collaborate. We understand the realities of the world we live in, no need to impress us with complexities and budgets, we get it.

Let's collaborate. Let's focus on active solutions to real opportunities that will enhance Metro capacity and the passenger's experience.

Real opportunities for real active solutions:

761 - this line often runs under capacity on a vital route for cyclists yet full racks and a "no-bikes-on-board" policy from the operators prevents cyclists from getting home. Communicate the "Bus Operator's discretion" policy, dispel the liability mythology and let's enhance capacity. Bikes on Board! (Locals have racks for two bikes. Larger buses have higher capacity but still only hold two bikes. Double capacity buses should hold four bikes. Why does the arbitrary limit of two cyclists keep coming up?)

Triple Racks - Long Beach uses them, examine the liability data, dispel the mythology and increase capacity for cyclists on buses by 50% in one swift move.

Bikes on Escalators - Remove the restriction or restrict all carriages, carts, luggage and "stuff" but be consistent and communicate clearly. To allow this to slide into Transit Court oversight is absolutely unacceptable.

Bikes on Rail - Remove the time-of-day restrictions from Metro materials and communicate clearly the policy. With 100 languages spoken in our community, many people simply follow the crowd. Communicate clearly and the crowd will move in the right direction.

Bikes on Buses - Communicate clearly, starting with Metro staff, and demonstrate that cyclists are gap connectors, transportation solutions, not simply a burden and a liability.

Collect the Data - Efforts to restrict cyclists (two per rail car, two per bus...) defy the reality of our world. The Red Line on a Saturday morning is full of workforce cyclists headed to their jobs in the Valley. The Orange Line at night is full of workforce cyclists headed home from their jobs in the West Valley. Metro staff must base their decisions on real data and real need, not on "Monday to Friday, 9 to 5" observations.

Integrate Cyclists as Partners - Cyclists are gap connectors and enhance systemic capacity. To simply look at the space a cyclist and a bike take up is a disservice to the impact that cyclists have on the capacity of the system. Many of my Metro trips would not work if I was unable to combine transit with the bike. Cyclists are Transportation Solutions and must be integrated as vital partners, not as an afterthought.

CityWatchLA - Metro Goes Into Company Mode! Above the Law?

CityWatch, Mar 19, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 22

A Metro bus operator on Sunset Blvd. pulls out from a bus stop and "asserts" himself into traffic, forcing the cyclist riding downhill in the bike lane to give up the bike lane. The cyclist is alongside the bus as they both merge left, the bus operator by choice, the cyclist with no choice. The cyclist bangs on the side of the bus and continues riding east on Sunset Blvd. Between Micheltorena and Silver Lake Blvd, the Metro's bus operator drives behind the cyclist, honking and waving his hand. The theatrics come to an end at Silver Lake Boulevard when the bus operator rear-ends the cyclist and yells, "You vandalized my bus!" With the bike stuck under the front bumper of the bus, the cyclist calls 911 while the bus operator pulls the bike out, explaining, "If it's not on the rack, it doesn't belong on the bus." He then throws the bike to the curb.

The Los Angeles Police Department asks the cyclist if there are any injuries and if any emergency medical services are needed. Upon learning that there are no injuries, the LAPD simply instructs the cyclist to exchange information with the bus operator and file a report.

Meanwhile a Metro Supervisor shows up along with a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy on a motorcycle. They take control of the situation, the bus operator no longer talks to the cyclist, and the Metro Supervisor, the Deputy and the Bus Operator all get on the empty bus. (Another bus had arrived and taken the passengers, leaving the empty bus and the bus operator behind) The Cyclist attempted to board the bus with the Deputy, the Supervisor and the Bus Operator but was denied access. He asked for the bus operator's information but was again denied.

The Sheriff's Department works for the Metro and is responsible for the security of Metro property. The streets of Los Angeles are not the Metro's property. The Metro's Supervisor and the LASD are both there to protect the Metro, the Metro's property and the Metro's employee. Who is representing the cyclist?

The question here is simple, "Is the Metro above the Law?" Is a Metro bus operator required to exchange information with the cyclist according to the California Vehicle Code or is a Metro bus operator allowed to disappear into the Metro's system, leaving the cyclist on the street with a 3" by 5" card in his hand and some Metro identification numbers along with instructions on how to file a Metro property claim?

Is the Sheriff's Department authorized to overrule California Vehicle Code and interfere with the exchange of information between two parties involved in a traffic collision?

The Metro has approximately 9200 employees, making it one of the region's largest employers. Of those who are engaged in providing the LA County area with a robust and comprehensive Transportation System, approximately 1540 take advantage of the Metro pass that is offered to employees but only 155 actually use the free pass to ride the Metro to work.

Four hundred and eight employees participate in a vanpool and another 422 use carpools. As for the Metro employees who ride a bike, only 39 out of 9200 employees pedal to work. These figures come from the Metro's AQMD compliance survey, taken at Metro workplaces in 2009. (Air Quality Management District is the air pollution control agency for all of Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, the smoggiest region of the U.S.)

Apparently, Metro employees ride the Metro less than the general public (Metro estimates that 7% of LA County uses public transportation but less than 2% of Metro employees share that ride) and they also ride bikes less than the general public. (Metro estimates that 2% of the general population rides a bike to work but at the Metro, it drops to 0.4% mode share) What happens when people go to work for the Metro? What is it about working for a regional Transportation Authority that motivates employees to get in a single occupant motor vehicle? Do they know something we don't?

The cyclist involved in the Sunset Boulevard incident has a suggestion for the Metro: the Metro's bus operators should ride a bike on the same streets for a week. Then perhaps they'd develop some empathy for those who are smaller and more vulnerable.

Who knows, they might like it and the Metro's AQMD compliance results might improve!

(Stephen Box is transportation and cycling advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net)

CityWatchLA - Aussies: Same Challenges, Different Solutions

CityWatch, Aug 25, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 68

Two weeks into my Australian Walkabout, I'm wandering the wilds of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane, following the storylines of my family and connecting with the history of my country. I am, after all, an Australian by birth and an Angelino by choice.

It's apparent I've arrived just in the nick of time. This continent is populated by a stubborn bunch, all clinging to silly traditions and I've got my work cut out if I'm going to impart the wisdom of Los Angeles to my Rellies Down Under.

For example, here are five areas where Melbourne is simply upside down on its approach to some common opportunities:

1) In Melbourne, a city of 4 million people, they're completely unschooled in the fine art of moving motor vehicles. Boasting the world's most extensive Tram Network, supported by a significant Train System, complemented by an efficient Bus System, Melbourne has the audacity to throw cyclists and pedestrians into the mix, positioning motor vehicles at the bottom of the food chain. The fact that their scheme works brilliantly, efficiently, safely, and effectively is completely irrelevant as is the bustling street life and thriving economic environment.

The simple fact that the people of Melbourne would dare to challenge the primacy of the single occupant motor vehicle with such impunity and, of course, success, clearly demonstrates that Melbourne is no match for Los Angeles when it comes to mobility.

2) Melbourne simply fails to get in touch with its hugeness. Los Angeles and Melbourne are so similar in population and in size that they could be fraternal twins! The difference is this, Los Angeles is more mature and has grown comfortable with the fact that it's "built-out."

LA's leadership resists innovation, claiming that the city is simply too big and too cumbersome to manage, let alone change. Rarely does a departmental meeting take place without the twin paradigms of mediocrity (LA is a battleship that can't be turned quickly and true progress occurs slowly and in small increments) being advanced as excuses for inactivity and mediocrity.

Melbourne, on the other hand, has streets and buildings older than Australia, yet it embraces change and innovation as if there were no limits to progress. Dangerous stuff, this Heritage Preservation coupled with Urban Re-Purposing, topped off with parks and bike lanes and traffic circles and shared streets and traffic calming and all sorts of impossibilities!

If Melbourne continues to fix streets, sweep sidewalks, treat residents with respect and act with the municipal dexterity of a small village, it can only serve to destroy LA's excuse for stagnation. "We're just too big!"

3) Melbourne completely misses out on political opportunities by focusing on practical solutions. In addition to the many significant environmental challenges any large city faces, Melbourne finds itself in the 13th year of a severe drought. Water is in such short supply, crop irrigation has actually been threatened and bush fires have ravaged communities with tremendous loss of life and property.

Rather than pursue LA style "big-picture" political solutions that advance careers and enrich city coffers, Melbourne thinks little.

Everybody is Melbourne is an environmental steward and the resulting "swarm" of solutions includes smokers not butting in the gutter (to avoid rainwater runoff contamination) to residential rainwater collection. (my Rural Uncle brags that his tanks have sustained him for the last six months)

Water "polling" has become a point of pride and my Urban Aunt shared her water records with us, competing against her history and her goals to reduce her water usage. Toilets have half-flush features, water reclamation is routine, peer pressure drives conservation and the public good is evidently of greater value than personal excess.

Through it all, Melbourne maintains parks with drought resistant native plants, uses creative and natural ground cover and plants trees at a speed that seems designed to be the metric equivalent of San Antonio's Million Tree Campaign. (I'm betting they're planting at a rate 2.2 times that of LA!)

At the end of a hard day of environmental stewardship, Melbourne residents return home to power outlets that are turned off when not in use, to rooms that are not heated or cooled unless occupied and to lighting that is low energy and heavy-metal free.

This practical approach flies in the face of the LA Municipal model which relies on consumption in order to fund the city machine. Melbourne has so much to learn from LA, including the simple fact that there's money to be made by encouraging bad behavior!

Imagine if Melbourne invested in muni parking lots, sold more gas, used more power, consumed more water, polluted more air, produced more trash! Why, it would be a filthy rich city with a balanced budget, just like Los Angeles!'

4) Melbourne claims English as the native tongue but conversations are sprinkled with colloquialisms that require a bit of translation. For example, "living wage" means a basic wage that is suitable for...well...living on. "Affordable housing" refers to housing that is accessible and affordable to those earning a "living wage." Servers in restaurants blush when tipped, after all, they've "already been paid quite nicely, thank you!"

This honesty in communication, while refreshing, deprives the City leadership of the wiggle-room that the Los Angeles style of double-speak provides. Left unchecked, this Melbourne style of “Strine" could result in an expectation that "public servants" actually serve the public! Where's the political future in that?

5) Aussies love their sports. But they take it a little too far! They love to play, they love to watch and they love to gamble. They are so competitive, they turn everything into a challenge and they always know the score.

"The Eureka is the tallest residential building in the Southern Hemisphere, the Southern Star is the largest observation wheel in the Southern Hemisphere, the Melbourne Cricket Ground has the largest retractable roof in the Southern Hemisphere."

This competitive spirit starts to get old, especially when everybody turns into a scorekeeper. The Transit authority posts their goals and performance numbers at the stations. The local authorities post their budgets and follow up with an accounting of the funds. Public Works leaves the price tag on their projects for all to see.

Melbourne would do well to relax a little, to learn from the leadership of Los Angeles who embrace a "softer" style of accountability based on intentions and motivations and efforts.

The Aussie approach translates into a style of governance that is so much more performance based with acute sensitivity to evaluation based on the numbers.

From Town Hall to the Train Station to public works, those involved in serving the public can tell you how they're doing based on the numbers. Where's the future in that?

In conclusion, I acknowledge that my Walkabout is not quite traditional, after all, it would typically take place in the outback, not in City Centre Boutique Hotels. Sustenance would most likely be bush tucker, not family reunion feasts. But who am I to get hung up on ritual when the real opportunity is to immerse myself in the journey of discovery and to explore the elements of Greatness that abound literally everywhere I walk.

As I wander, I recognize much that connects me with my past and I realize much more that will shape my future in Los Angeles. The Aussies are experiencing many of the same challenges and opportunities but their actions are a little different and this is the inspiration and connection that gives my Walkabout meaning.

In deference to my loved ones in Melbourne and in keeping with the spirit of a true blue Walkabout, I pass up opportunities for validation in favor of inspiration and I focus on my journey Down Under.

So it is that I find myself reconnecting to my people, my history and to the spirit of greatness that accepts no excuses and knows no limits.

(Stephen Box’ birthplace is Australia. He and his wife Enci have made Los Angeles their home. Box is a transportation advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net) Photo credits: StreetsBlog.com. ◘

Metro vs. Cyclists

This past Monday, Enci and I were riding south on Vermont, a couple of hundred yards north of Prospect.

We were riding southbound on Vermont in lane #2 alongside parked cars at approximately 3:25 pm in light traffic. I was in the lead, Enci was in second position and the bus was in third. I heard Enci scream, I looked back and saw a bus behind me but not Enci. I pulled over and the bus passed me, pulling to the curb just yards further on. Then I saw my wife riding down Vermont.

Bus Operator #25119 had just "asserted" himself into the #2 lane at the expense of my wife's position and in doing so, forced my wife to choose between the side of the bus, the parked cars or simply braking to avoid getting hit by the bus as it came from behind alongside her and then simply merged right toward her.

Tough choices!

This incident drew a Metro Supervisor, two Sheriff's Deputies, an LASD Supervisor, LAPD officers from both Hollywood (4) and NorthEast (2) and an LAPD Supervisor. Quite a significant show of force!

The Bus Operator was long gone when the first LAPD officers responded to my call. As we stood on Hollywood Blvd. talking to the officers, Operator #25119 came back on his return route, graciously slowing down and waving, apparently enjoying the spectacle. Imagine his shock when Officer Lee WALKED off in pursuit and pulled the bus over.

Through it all, we experienced a cloud of jurisdictional confusion over who takes the report and law enforcement confusion over whether or not it's a crime to run a cyclist off the road.

I went to the Metro Board on Thursday to address 1) this incident 2) the issue of training and oversight of bus operators on safe interaction with cyclists on the road 3) the jurisdictional confusion 4) feedback opportunities for the metro on weekends and holidays.

It was a crazy session, public comment was scheduled for the end of the meeting and then moved to the beginning. It was a full house with overflow in the cafeteria. They moved public comment from the end of the meeting to the beginning and all of a sudden I heard them call my name. I was prepared for a two minute speech but they cut us down to 60 seconds and so I gave it my best.

I went over my time and kept going, committed to hitting the 4 points and I thought County Supervisor Knabe was trying to cut me off, then I realized he was calling over Jack Gabig, the Division Manager, who motioned for me to follow him out a side door. For a moment I flashed on that scene from Casino and imagined a bunch of Metro Operators waiting "backstage" but with RoadBlock and Courage flanking me, I figured I was in a good position.

Mr. Gabig spent half an hour taking my complaint and I'd like to think we're on our way to starting a relationship between cyclists and bus operators, one that puts our safety before their schedule or convenience.

Attached is an email I sent as a recap of that meeting.

Mr. Gabig,

Thanks for taking the time to talk with me at the Metro Board Meeting and for discussing the details of my complaint.

I wanted to recap the specific elements so that you can address them or direct me to the appropriate person.

1) Metro vs. Cyclist incident from this past Monday. My wife was riding her bike south on Vermont, in contol of the #2 lane, when she was run off the road by Operator #25119.

From our first encounter with a Metro supervisor to those we speak with along the journey, it is made clear that this is a personnel issue and that we have no right of access to the Metro file or process.

I contend that Metro passengers and those on the streets and sidewalks also have rights and that the Metro can surely balance the personnel limitations with appropriate resolution and communication of this complaint.

Further to the potential claim that this is a personnel issue, I would contend that this is, first and foremost, a criminal complaint.

2) Metro Training and Oversight: This incident, along with similar incidents, indicates a need to address the training and oversight of the Metro's Operators. From honking unnecessarily to passing unsafely, CVC violations must not be tolerated, especially when they endanger the lives of cyclists.

The Metro's manual calls for 3 to 4 and a half feet of passing room for cyclists but some operators still "assert" themselves and squeeze cyclists.

The Metro's manual refers to "cyclists and other road hazards" indicating a culture of primacy that results in unsafe and illegal behavior.

3) Jurisdictional confusion must be resolved: Once again, we experienced jurisdictional confusion as my call to LAPD resulted in 1 Metro Supervisor, 2 Sheriffs, 1 LASD Supervisor, 2 NE LAPD Officers, 1 NE LAPD Supervisor, 4 Hollywood LAPD Officers.

One shouldn't have to watch law enforcement officers debate jurisdiction in order to report a crime. One shouldn't have to know the system in order to get the full support of the system.

If there is a memorandum of understanding between the LASD and the LAPD with regards to jurisdiction on the streets, the rail lines, the busway and the bike paths, please consider this a formal request for that MOU.

4) Metro Customer Service is cumbersome and ill-equipped to handle simple complaints, as evidenced by the deluge of tweets, messages, emails, texts and verbal stories I received over the last 3 days that conclude with "I tried to contact the Metro but I gave up!"

One would think that from a simple loss prevention position, the Metro would want a customer service system that yields good accurate data on safety and performance.

And yet...the current system doesn't allow someone to call in during the evening, on weekends and holidays. There's not even an answering machine in place!

Most important is the need for significant improvement in acknowledging complaints and reinforcing the process by communicating resolution, even if in general terms. But there must be some confirmation that the process works.

I thank you for your help in addressing this specific situation and the larger opportunity of the relationship between the Metro and cyclists.

As I mentioned today, cyclists and bus operators move at the same speed across town and share the curb lane so it's imperative that we develop a relationship based on equality and respect.

I look forward to working with you.

CityWatchLA - Cyclists and Other Road Hazards

CityWatch, Apr 3, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 27

This past Sunday, the operator of a large, articulating Metro Local bus pulled up behind a cyclist riding in the Sunset Boulevard bike lane, honked his horn twice, and then accelerated, veering to the right into the approaching bus stop, and forcing the cyclist to the curb. The cyclist was infuriated and confronted the bus operator who responded by explaining to the cyclist and then again to his passengers that the solid line indicates a bike lane but that the dashed line on the approach to the corner indicates a “bus zone” and that cyclists must stop and give way to buses.

Based on this incident, it appears that there is a disconnect between the California Vehicle Code (CVC) that governs all other road users and the Metro’s policies and practices for using the same roads.

CVC 27001(a) specifies "The driver of a motor vehicle, when reasonably necessary to insure safe operation, shall give audible warning with his horn." The Metro, on the other hand, instructs its operators to sound the horn for “cyclists and other road hazards.”

Passing a cyclist is no cause to honk, in fact it distracts the cyclist at the worst possible moment, in this case as the operator is about to illegally and unsafely force the cyclist from the road.

Further, characterizing cyclists as “road hazards” only serves to reinforce the “might is right” bias that is so dangerous on our streets.

CVC 21750 specifies that “the driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle or a bicycle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left at a safe distance without interfering with the safe operation of the overtaken vehicle or bicycle…”

When a motorist pulls in front of a cyclist, especially in a long articulating bus that comes to rest at an angle with the back end still in the bike lane, the cyclist is forced to suddenly stop and choose the curb, the back of the bus or the traffic lane and none of them are good choices. Getting cut off by a right-turning vehicle is one of the most dangerous of scenarios for a cyclist and is often referred to as the “right-hook.”

As for this incident, a complaint was logged and an email was sent to Metro Customer Service, Metro Management and the Metro Board’s Chair, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

To date, there has been no response.

A similar incident occurred a couple of weeks ago when Will Campbell, an intrepid bike commuter and technophile, was riding in the bike lane on Venice Boulevard, only to end up curbed by the operator of a bus on the 333 line. Campbell always travels with two cameras, one of them mounted on his handlebars, and he posted a video of the incident on his blog.

What a difference a video makes.

In Campbell’s case, an email was sent from customerrelations@metro.netThis email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it indicating that “This matter will be thoroughly investigated and the appropriate corrective measures taken.”

Of course, if it’s the Metro’s policies and training that are at odds with safe cycling, there’s nothing to investigate and there are no corrective measures to take.

At the end of the day, cyclists and bus operators should be able to share the road effectively and safely. Both average the same cross-town speeds (14.5 mph) both spend most of their travel time in the curb lane and it’s no challenge to simply avoid each other, rather than squeezing and jockeying for position.

Cyclists who complement their ride with the Metro can navigate the city with speed that is competitive to other modes. Whether it’s jumping on the Orange Line to get across the Valley or riding the Red Line to short-cut the Cahuenga Pass, sometimes the Metro can make all the difference.

Likewise, Metro passengers with bikes are able to travel farther and quicker, closing service gaps and riding to routes with shorter headways.

These are challenging times at the Metro. A new CEO, Art Leahy, is taking the helm and the Board Chairman, Antonio Villaraigosa, has just named LA City Councilman Jose Huizar and Department of Transportation GM Rita Robinson as Board Directors.

While all eyes are focused on the Metro’s billion dollar funding issues and on long term planning, it’s important to remember that our streets are filled with pedestrians, cyclists, mass transit passengers and motorists, and that they are humans and that they are vulnerable and that they need to get home safely.

Our streets are the new “public space” and our ability to share that space is one of our greatest opportunities for revitalizing and redefining our communities. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and a contributor to CityWatch.)

Equality and Respect. Nothing less!

This morning, my wife was riding west on Ventura Boulevard in light traffic. She was in the right half of the #2 lane. She looked over her left shoulder at the approaching traffic and saw an 18 Wheeler in the #1 lane and a Metro Rapid Bus (750) in the #2 lane. They were side-by-side and traveling at the same speed.

Enci had parked cars to her right and no room to spare. She held her line, with only inches between her and the parked cars. There were only a few parked cars remaining before the Boulevard opened up and the #2 lane widened.

The Bus Operator did not slow down and had no room to move to the left. He passed Enci with inches to spare. Enci had no wiggle room at all.

She did not see the Operator but she was able to get the 4-digit number off the Bus. She was shaken, she was pissed and, in an expression of frustration, she yelled at the bus as it drove off down Ventura Boulevard, still side-by-side with the 18-Wheeler.

She continued on her journey, westbound on Ventura Boulevard, still in the #2 lane when a motorist passed her and then made a hard right turn (the “right hook”) across her line and into the corner gas station.

Enci was able to avoid the vehicle, braking and turning hard left and then right, but ended up losing control of the bike and she hit the ground, hard.

As she lay in the street, she was unable to get up off the ground because her left arm and left leg wouldn’t take her weight. No motorists traveling the same direction stopped to help and none of the motorists waiting at the light offered assistance. A pedestrian stepped out to help her get to the curb and to collect her bike.

As Enci stood on the curb she looked around the gas station for the motorist who nearly took her out. Moments ago, the motorist was in such a hurry to get to the gas station but after cutting Enci off and leaving her in the street, he had apparently given up on his errand and had left.

Enci rested at the gas station, made a few adjustments to her bike and collected her wits.

She continued her journey, arriving late to her Theatre Company’s first read of Peter Cottontail, Jr. and then she went home. That was when she lost it.

Safely at home it sunk in. She relaxed and the experience caught up with her. The emotion of being terrorized by a Metro Bus Operator and then right-hooked by a motorist and left in the street overwhelmed her and she cried tears of fear, anger, frustration and righteous indignation and utter disappointment in people, people who can threaten someone’s life and then just drive away.

As this happened I was in Sylmar, having ridden busted up Lankershim to the debris littered San Fernando Road all the way to the edge of Los Angeles for a breakfast meeting that went long. I called Enci when my meeting ended only to hear her sobbing on the phone.

It was a long ride home for me and I felt very helpless. When I walked in the door, Enci was there, no longer crying but now very angry. Before I could address her incident and ask how she was doing, she burst out.

“You won’t believe what just happened. Eric just got squeezed by a Bus on Sunset Boulevard.”

Enci was already in activist mode, ready to change the world. It needs changing and there’s no better place to start than right here.

We made a few calls. They may or may not have some impact on the Metro. It remains to be seen. The Metro is a large organization with institutionalized behavior and a culture that is stubborn, resistant to change and supported by a strong union.

But we won’t give up.

LA is a great place to ride and it’s up to us to demand equal access to our streets and it’s up to us to demand respect. Without equality and respect, nothing else matters. Without equality and respect, we will continue to be treated like 2nd class citizens and we will continue to be marginalized. But only if we accept it.

As I watched Enci get back on her bike and ride off to her Westside appointment, I stood more committed to fighting for equality and respect for the cyclists of Los Angeles. I hope you’ll join me.

“See you on the Streets!”