What a Difference a Few Years Make: A Journey to Relevance

LA’s Bike Plan has already caused traffic congestion, clogging the steps of City Hall as the Mayor, the City Controller, and a full peloton of Councilmembers stood before the press on Wednesday to declare “Los Angeles is on the path to becoming a world-class city for bicycling.”

What a difference a few years make! It has been ages since I innocently visited City Planning Publications to purchase a copy of the General Plan’s Transportation Element ($15) in an effort to locate the current Bike Plan. As I flipped the pages, I found a placeholder that indicated where the Bike Plan would be if it were worth printing. (It wasn’t) Thus began the journey to relevance.

Three years ago, the LADOT hired a consultant from Portland to guide the City of LA in the process of developing a new Bike Plan. At the first meeting, before a standing-room-only crowd, the consultant opened by stating, “We’re gonna have to move fast, we have a lot of ground to cover and we don’t have much time.”

It was at this point that Alex Thompson, President of Bikeside, jumped to his feet and interrupted the consultant with the simple challenge “Why not?”

That became the battle cry of the community as LA’s Department of “No!” led the Bike Plan development process.

“Why not?”

Along the way, the LADOT spent $400,000 on the consultant’s Bike Plan, one that was eventually scrapped.

Meanwhile, the community banded together under the banner of the LA Bike Working Group and developed a crowd-sourced vision for connectivity, one that transitioned into a City Planning process that involved people from all walks, er ...rides.

LA’s current Bike Plan is a victory because of its content, most significantly the Backbone Bikeway Network that will bring together greater synchronicity of basic city services on the big streets that already move people of all modes.

The Bike Plan is also a victory because it is the result of a community driven process, one where people of all modes and perspectives had a voice in the process. In fact, the City Hall peloton also included folks from the Bikesiders, the LACBCers, Midnight Ridazz, the city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee, C.I.C.L.E., the Valley Bikery, the Bicycle Kitchen, and Pacoima Beautiful demonstrating the power of a common ground approach to planning.

Most important, the Bike Plan is a victory because it offers the City of LA an opportunity to pursue funding that will make our streets work for everybody, whether they walk, ride a bike, take mass transit or use a personal vehicle.

After all, streets that are good for cyclists are good for everybody.

Cyclists favor well-maintained streets free of potholes and debris. They prefer streets with moderate vehicle volumes and speeds, an environment that is likewise safer and more hospitable for both motorists and pedestrians.

Surveys in San Francisco found that local businesses benefited from "traffic calming" through their districts, which included accommodations for cyclists.

Finally, an increase in the number of cyclists in a neighborhood -- which means more eyes on the street -- has a direct relationship to a reduction in crime.

In other words, what's good for cyclists is good for your community and LA’s Bike Plan has the capacity to do something that no other plan has ever done, connect the plans.

LA has a General Plan, it has Community Plans, it has Specific Plans, it has Master Plans, it has Vision Plans, it has a River Plan...it is a City of Plans! They compete, they contradict, they confuse and now is the time to connect them!

Imagine if the Bike Plan were to be used as a model for engaging the community in the process, for bringing some connectivity to the many plans, for preserving the character and personality of our neighborhoods and for providing a toolbox of transportation solutions that blend with our local land-use priorities so that neighborhoods are empowered, not overpowered.

The long and arduous journey to the finish line for LA’s Bike Plan has clearly demonstrated that a group of outsiders can move City Hall. News of this success story has resonated throughout the country, but what’s most important is what happens on the streets of LA.

Now is the time to work with neighborhood councils, community groups, homeowners associations and Angelenos of all modes so that the spirit of connectivity can resonate through Los Angeles.

While the City Hall peloton stands at the finish line press conference, our greatest opportunity is to establish this as the beginning, not the end, of a significant journey that will continue to connect Los Angeles.

(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net. Disclosure: Box is also a candidate for 4th District Councilman.)

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.

LA's Sharrows Program prompts formation of National Sharrow Task Force

"This Sharrow on the approach to Vermont 
positions cyclists to the right of two right-turn lanes, 

setting up a right-hook collision"

The debate over LA's inaugural Sharrows program went to Chicago where transportation experts from the private, public, and advocacy sectors took one look at a picture of the meandering 4th Street Sharrows and let out a collective groan of disapproval. The LADOT Bikeways Department's unique Sharrows standards stirred a new debate among the members of the National Committee of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD), one that sees the Bicycle Technical Committee (BTC) reconsidering its years-long development of Sharrows guidelines and the recently adopted recommendations.

Over the last several years, Sharrows proponents fell into two groups; those who wanted ambitious and strong guidelines that would ensure proper Sharrows implementation and those who argued that soft language would facilitate Sharrows approval from the full NCUTCD. The "aim low to get approval" proponents prevailed long ago and the LADOT Bikeways Department is in the process of demonstrating the folly of the "aim low" strategy, much to the dismay of the Sharrows proponents who have worked for years to gain approval.

This past week, Enci and I attended the NCUTCD conference in Chicago where we joined the members of the BTC as they briefly discussed the details of LA's Sharrows program, including the meandering path that results from measuring from the curb instead of from the adjacent travel lane, and the question was raised "Will the LADOT have to populate the streets with "Bikes Merge" signs?" Additional discussion was given to LA's variable positioning of Sharrows before and after intersections, areas that should be consistent and based on destination, as opposed to LA's standard which is simply based on the presence of curbside parking. It was at this point that the Chair moved the dialogue from the specifics of LA's fumbled implementation, offering his opinion that "the unintended consequences of an ill-advised and poorly executed Sharrows campaign are costly and dangerous."

From the discussion that ensued, the following points were made:

• Lanes that are less than 14' wide are non-sharable (side-by-side) and "Bicycles May Use Full Lane" is the appropriate signage support.
• The "Share the Road" sign is "a completely ineffective traffic control device." The presence of a cyclist does not constitute danger nor does it warrant a warning sign.
• Sharrows that are part of a study are painted and Sharrows that are permanent are installed using Thermoplastic. The removal of Thermoplastic is costly and damages the surface of the street.
• Sharrows should be positioned in relation to the left travel lane or street center, not from the curb lane. The recommendation to go no lower that 11’ from the right-curb does not infer measure from the right.
• Sharrows should be positioned so that cyclists follow a straight line that follows the direction of travel, not a meandering path.
• Sharrows can be supported by "Bikes Merge" signs where appropriate.
• The Bicycle Technical Committee dumbed down the language to get the Sharrows approved. "It feels like we shot ourselves in the foot. It will be used for a number of years but without the guidance that we proposed.

The Sharrow controversy is just one of the many issues that the BTC is working through the process and the others include use of the "Except Bicycles" signage, Bike Lane treatments at intersections, Barrier-Separated bike lanes, Bike Merge signage, Colored Bike Lanes, and Door Zone Markings. Given that the NCUTCD meets only twice a year, the opportunity to present findings and recommendations to the full body is limited. The Chair of the BTC moved the Sharrows debate into the formation of a Sharrows Task Force that will return with recommendations that will be presented at the January 2011 NCUTCD conference in Arlington, Virginia.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, it is incumbent on the LADOT and its many partners to heed the advice of the experts, to review LA's implementation of the inaugural Sharrows program, and to consider the full spectrum of guidance including proper lane positioning and clear communication to road users.

It is also incumbent on the cycling community to consider the regrets that are being expressed by transportation professionals at the NCUTCD as they review the folly of soft language and conclude by declaring "We need to fight a better fight in the future so we’re more more effective."

The Sharrow in the foreground is 10' from the center of the street. The next Sharrow is 15' from the center, followed by a Sharrow 10' from the center. This is engineered conflict and a collision between a motorist and a cyclist would be the responsibility of the cyclist because the Sharrow positions the cyclist as merging traffic, not as through traffic. Through traffic has the right of way. These Sharrows are dangerous and provide a false sense of security.

The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is sponsored by organizations such as League of American Bicyclists, International Association of Chiefs of Police, Institute of Transportation of Engineers, Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, American Society of Civil Engineers, National Safety Council, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, American Automobile Association, American Highway Users Alliance, American Public Works Association, American Public Transportation Association, American Railway Engineering & Maintenance of Way Association, American Road and Transportation Builders Association, American Traffic Safety Services Association, Association of American Railroads, Governors Highway Safety Association, Human Factors Resources, International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association, International Municipal Signal Association and National Association of County Engineers.

LA City Council - "Failure to Deliver"

Los Angeles is a City that loves to order departmental surveys, concept reports, project studies, recommendations and proposals. What Los Angeles doesn't do well is deliver.

It's been two and a half years since the LA City council, over the objections of the LADOT, acted decisively and made it illegal to park in a Bike Lane in Los Angeles. Unfortunately the LADOT and the LAPD are still ill-equipped to enforce the ban and the ordinance remains irrelevant.

It's been a little over three years since the City Council approved the contract with Illium and Associates for Bike Maps which we argued would be redundant since the Metro does county-wide maps that are of better detail and quality than the city maps. The City Council moved forward and approved the $400,000 contract but that was the last movement to be made. Three years later, is Ilium developing those maps? Is Alta Planning also developing Bike Maps as part of the Bike Plan process?

Last year CM's Huizar and Perry said "I FURTHER MOVE that the Department of Transportation, in partnership with the City's Bicycle Advisory Committee and the General Services Department, be requested to develop a mass parking policy and designate an efficient place and manner to lock up large number of bicycles for individuals who come to City Hall as a part of a group." Maybe it was just a joke and we fell for it. Ha, ha! Seriously, how hard is it to lock up bikes at City Hall? Too tough for the LADOT to figure out. They study, we wait.

It's been over 18 months since CM's Garcetti and Reyes got all interested in Sharrows and said "I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council direct the Department of Transportation to develop a "Shared Lane Pavement Markings," also known as "sharrows," pilot program. So far, nothing except that the plan to engage in a study is almost underway. Meanwhile, Long Beach has put in colored Sharrows and the Department of DIY has put in homemade Sharrows.

It's been 18 months since CM's Greuel and Garcetti were inspired by the bike-share programs of the Great Cities they visited, returning to LA and commanding "I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council instruct the Department of Transportation to examine the feasibility of creating a bike sharing program in the City of Los Angeles and submit recommendations to the Transportation Committee within 45 days." Tough talk! New Transportation committee Chair Rosendahl liked it so much, he gave the same instructions to the LADOT last week.

Meanwhile, on February 24, Claremont and Covina will be cutting the ribbon on "Bikestation Claremont and Bikestation Covina, the first bicycle and alternative transportation center “network” in the United States."

It would be great to have the City Council's Transportation Committee visit Claremont and Covina for the Bikestation ribbon cuttings but the 24th is an important day in LA, everybody will be on the 10th floor as LAPD Chief Charlie Beck visits the Transpo Committee. Will he have the Hummer vs. Cyclist report from last year?

It's been almost a year since a group of cyclists encountered a motorist behind the wheel of a Hummer, sans license plate, and ended up in a Wilco Tango Foxtrot encounter. Three times the Transportation Committee has directed the LAPD to appear to report on the incident and the subsequent investigation but in all three appearances the LAPD neglected to bring the actual LAPD report, resulting in a lot of "I don't know. I'll have to check." responses. Will Beck produce the report? Will Rosendahl follow up on the failure of the LAPD to respond to his instructions?

It's been over a year since the City Council embraced the Cyclists' Bill of Rights and boldly directed "the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Planning Department, Department
of Public Works, and Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee, in consultation with the City Attorney and the Los Angeles Police Department, to report with recommendations on how to
incorporate the principles enshrined in the "Cyclists' Bill of Rights" into the City of Los Angeles Bicycle Master Plan and other relevant documents and practices." That went nowhere fast.

The City Council has demonstrated clearly that it is incapable of following up on the many instructions it puts in play. Hence the need for community oversight. Now, more than ever, it is imperative that LA's Budget, the delivery of services, and the civic process itself be open and transparent. The public must be at the table.

CityWatchLA - 2009: The Year of the Bike!

CityWatch, Dec 23, 2009Vol 7 Issue 104

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. We won some battles, we lost some friends. We grew as a community, we matured as a movement. We celebrated the fun, we embraced the utility, we established common ground. We made friends, we made enemies, but most of all we made progress. We rode with fear, we rode with joy, we rode with the conviction that the streets of Los Angeles belong to the people and we discovered allies of other modes who agree that it's time to take back the streets. It was 2009 and it was "The Year of the Bike!"

Los Angeles Magazine got it started in January when they asked the question "Can Bike Culture Change LA?" They sent an editor to ride the streets of LA and late on a weekend night he witnessed the LAPD pull cyclists over on a deserted street in downtown LA and cite them for not having bike licenses. This incident served as the catalyst for a group ride to the LAPD in which every single bike license was purchased, leaving the LAPD unable to fulfill its bike licensing mandate. Thus galvanized, the cyclists continued to the Transportation Committee and to the Police Commission, arguing that the enforcement of the bike licensing law was punitive and that it demonstrated bias-based policing. It took a while but the cycling community prevailed, a moratorium was declared and the LAPD was directed by Chief Bratton to stop citing cyclists for not having bike licenses. A small victory over a small ordinance but a large leap in cohesive bike activism for the community.

The Metro attempted to limit cyclists on the Metro Rail to two bikes per rail car, quietly navigating the public process and almost making it to the Metro Board before the cycling community engaged, arguing that cyclists with bikes are gap connectors and transportation solutions while the other unregulated "stuff" such as luggage, shopping carts, Christmas trees and baby strollers were allowed with no limitations. Again, the cyclists prevailed and a movement was underway.

The Transportation Committee, first under Wendy Greuel and then under Bill Rosendahl, began holding "themed" Transportation Committee meetings to engage the cycling community and to deal with the many issues that come with a shift in the consciousness of transportation professionals as multi-modal solutions become the norm instead of the exception.

Along the way, the Cyclists' Bill of Rights picked up more endorsement from neighborhood councils, stirring conversations and debates that resulted in robust discussions of mobility, access, public space, safe streets and multi-modal transportation. Assemblyman Paul Krekorian's Safe Streets bill challenged the logic behind the routine increase in speed limits and the "Good for Bikes, Good for Business" campaign picked up steam.

Tragedy struck quickly this year, it struck often and it stirred feelings of vulnerability and rage and fear and resolve.

If getting hit by a car and left in the streets by hit-and-run motorists was a disease, the CDC (Center for Disease Control) would be all over Los Angeles, declaring an epidemic and fighting to find a vaccine. But it's not a disease, it's simply the collateral damage that results from the clash of cultures as pedestrians and cyclists challenge the primacy of the motor vehicle.

Cyclists responded to tragedy by installing ghost bikes at the locations were cyclists were killed by motorists. Painted white, they memorialized the cyclist's name and date of death. As often as not, it was all that we knew about the dead cyclists but we mourned them as family and from that grieving came a resolve and a commitment to stay together.

A father and son on the LA Wheelmen's Grand Tour were hit from behind by a hit-and-run motorist who left the father dead and the son broken and bleeding. A repeat offender in Santa Clarita crossed the line and drove head on into a group of cyclists, leaving one dead and several injured before he left the scene.

300 cyclists lay down on Glendale Blvd. with their bikes for a silent "Die-In" to commemorate the death of Jesus Castillo, hit by a drunk driver and left for dead on Glendale Blvd.

Another motorist on Glendale Blvd. hit a cyclist from behind, leaving him lying in the street. The LAPD didn't find the motorist. It was the cyclist who tracked him down and then presented the evidence to the LAPD. It was the cyclist who pushed the Prosecutor to file charges. It was the cyclist who discovered the hard way, that in LA, justice is a DIY endeavor.

That sense of "We're on our own!" resulted in the establishment of bikehitandrun@gmail.com as a tool for collecting anonymous hit and run tips, BikeX.com for mapping incidents with motorists and StolenBikeLA for reporting stolen bikes and enlisting help in their recovery. Add to that Bikely, the bike route mapping service and BikeMetro and it's evident that the real progress in the cycling community is the result of DIY work.

The cycling community's DIY spirit originated in LA's co-op bike shops which now total four with the Bike Kitchen in East Hollywood leading the way for the Bike Oven in Highland Park, the Bikerowave in West LA and the Bikery in the Valley. Along the way, the DIY movement moved past the mechanical, the legal, the educational, and the political actions and took to the streets.

Bicycling Magazine documented LA's unique brand of DIY activism, celebrating the Fletcher Bridge Bike Lanes that appeared in the middle of the night courtesy of LA's Department of DIY. The lanes didn't last long but they accomplished a couple of important things. They prompted the LADOT to respond with lightning speed to remove the guerrilla lanes, demonstrating that when the LADOT really wants to do something, it can act quickly and decisively and effectively. It also resulted in the LADOT's spokesperson going on record and revealing their attitude to cyclists in Los Angeles. "There's no more room!"

Unfunded but unfazed, the Department of DIY continued the good work, embracing Park[ing] Day LA as the occasion to unveil the Alprentice "Bunchy" Carter Community Park at the corner of Wilshire and Vermont, an event that was heralded by the Load(ing)Zone bike ride, resulting in the dispersal of seed bombs that must surely be enjoying the most recent rainfall.

The Department of DIY's most recent "volunteer" improvements to the streets of Los Angeles resulted in the installation of 16 Sharrows (shared lane markings) in the Highland Park area, an overnight action that did what the LADOT has been unable to accomplish in spite of a City Council ordinance, funding from the East Hollywood Council and the clamoring of the community. The LADOT's representative has offered many excuses, including the fact that the paint might be slippery. That must explain why the crosswalks keep disappearing throughout LA. "The paint is slippery!"

Through it all, the City of LA did their part to bring the cycling community together by presenting a Draft Bike Plan so lacking in substance that the cyclists of LA moved past complaining and simply organized the LA Bike Working Group and set out to draft LA's Best Bike Plan. The City's feeble and over-funded effort was the proverbial last straw and it was here that cyclists discovered that it is about more than the Bike Plan, it is about civic enragement turning to civic engagement. This led to the establishment of common ground and the cyclists of LA found allies in neighborhood councils who embraced the Cyclists' Bill of Rights and joined in calling for a Bike Plan that will connect our communities, not just serve as more consultant fodder to litter the planning landscape.

For all of the thrill of the DIY movement, the real cause for celebration in LA came when the system worked, when the courts and the police and the community all worked together to deliver justice, embracing the simple fact that cyclists are people and when a motorist uses a car as a weapon, they have committed a crime.

Dr. Christopher Thompson, the emergency room doctor who used his car as a weapon against two cyclists in order "to teach them a lesson," went on trial and ended up guilty of six felonies and one misdemeanor, held without bail for sentencing and demonstrating once and for all that the system sometimes works. While Dr. Thompson still faces sentencing, the verdict alone was cause for celebration around the world and it gave hope to the cycling community that no longer would "They had it coming!" be accepted as a defense against charges of mayhem on the streets.

Through it all, we learned that riding a bike in LA is not about riding a bike, it's about creating community, it's about opening streets to people, it's about celebrating public space and it's about changing the world. To think, it all started with a simple bike ride!

The year 2009 closed with LA's Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa using the word bicycle in a sentence. He said, in an interview with KPCC's Patt Morrison, "In the area of bicycling I've gotta do a better job and the city's gotta do a better job." Finally, something we can agree on!

As we look forward to 2010, the Mayor's words are soft and hardly the substance of a battle cry, but they work. They work for all of us and they work in all endeavors.

"In 2010, we've gotta do a better job!"

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

CityWatchLA - If Only the Mayor Rode a Bike...

CityWatch, Oct 30, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 89

If Mayor Villaraigosa rode a bike, the current process for updating the LA's Bike Plan would be a lot different. For starters, it would have the Mayor's attention and that alone would be a significant shift, but most importantly, it would be incorporated into the Mayor's campaign for turning LA into a Great City.

1) The Mayor has committed to making LA one of the safest big cities and if he rode a bike, he'd realize that the place to start is on the streets of LA. They're one of the most dangerous places in the city.

People die on a daily basis. It's no longer news. The public as a whole is desensitized to the fact that our streets are a battleground and that nobody is free from the conflict. LA is a city under siege.

If the Mayor were to jump on a bike and attempt to pedal from City Hall to the far reaches of his kingdom, he'd quickly realize that the real opportunity to make Los Angeles a safer city for everybody would be to start with the streets of LA and that would result in a Bike Plan with real vision, with real imperative language and with a real commitment to moving people safely. That would be good for the Bike Plan and it would be good for LA.

2) The Mayor has committed to making LA the greenest big city and if he rode a bike, he'd realize that the place to start is with our air. Breathing LA's air is one of the most significant threats to our health.

Long time residents take it in stride, repeating the "It used to be worse!" mantra that has become the battle cry for mediocrity.

If the Mayor were to look at the city from a bike, he'd realize that supporting alternative transportation is key to greening our city and it that would result in a Bike Plan with a real commitment to the environment and to supporting positive transportation choices.

3) The Mayor has committed to supporting the well funded and long term expansion of LA's mass transit system and if he rode a bike, he's realize that one of the simplest and most inexpensive ways to complement the effectiveness of mass transit is to close service gaps and to offer people more choices.

Cycling is a gap connecting option that allows mass transit passengers to travel more efficiently and it requires little effort to support. If the

Mayor were to use a bike to get from his home to the Metro, he'd realize that simple innovations to accommodate rather that to alienate cyclists would go a long way toward improving the efficiency of the transit system as a whole. This would result in a Bike Plan that strongly positions cycling as a transit solution and would establish strong standards rather than weak suggestions.

4) The Mayor has committed to making the creation of jobs his number one priority and if he were to show up for one of the Bike Plan workshops, he'd realize that the simplest place to start would be to have the City of LA actually hire locals.

The Bike Plan is being developed by consultants from Portland, San Francisco, and Colorado and the city staff who are guiding the process come from Inglewood, Santa Clarita, Fullerton and Long Beach.

If the Mayor were to ride a bike on the streets of LA, he'd realize quickly that there is no "high-altitude" approach to creating a great Bike Plan. It requires rubber on the road experience and it requires local knowledge of not just the streets and the community but of the political landscape.

The people who are in LA after the office is closed are the people who are in the best position to create a robust and powerful vision for LA's Bike Plan. Hiring local would result in a great Bike Plan and it would put Angelenos to work.

Safer streets, a greener city, more efficient mass transit and the creation of jobs!

If only the Mayor rode a bike.

For more information on LA's Bike Plan, visit http://LABikePlan.com

(Stephen Box is an LA cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net) ◘

CityWatchLA - Without a Car in the World

CityWatch, Oct 23, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 87

Artist Diane Meyer challenges the primacy of LA's auto-centric transportation system and puts the spotlight on the "alternative" element with her 18th Street exhibit "Without A Car in the World" (100 Car-less Angelinos Tell Stories of Living in Los Angeles). Pairing beautiful lifestyle portraits with poignant and pithy interviews, Meyer brings to life the wide variety of subjects, ranging from the idealists who eschew the automobile as part of a lifestyle commitment to those who live car-free lives because of economic, legal, and health limitations.

The timing of "Without a Car in the World" is especially relevant, coming on the heels of Mayor Villaraigosa's legacy battle for a regional transportation plan that has communities throughout the county fighting over projects and funding, and engaging in parochial high-altitude bombing, all claiming to represent the "common man" but demonstrating at every turn a commitment to representing those who already have the freedom of choice.

Meyer's show features the invisible constituency, the 30% of LA's population who have no choice, who will never show up at a High Speed Rail press conference and who will never travel to One Gateway Plaza to address the Metro Board with 60 seconds of public comment. Instead, their stories are told on the gallery walls of a Westside gallery, 18th Street Arts Center, one with a great reputation for stirring the public discourse and featuring art that engages the community.

My wife Enci and I were honored to be selected as subjects and we rode our bikes to the opening of the show, pedaling over with a couple of friends who were also featured.

For a while, it seemed like a family reunion, there were so many friends from so many walks of life and from all over Los Angeles. But slowly the "glow" wore off and our focus moved to the subjects that we didn't recognize, the "invisible" Angelenos who travel quietly and patiently, simply attempting to get home safely to their families each night.

Just to the left of our portrait, right in the center of the gallery, hung a picture of three men, day-laborers, who tell of getting picked up for work, transported to a strange neighborhood where they toil for long hours, getting paid in cash and then having to figure out their way home, late at night, strangers in a strange land!

A blind man tells of sitting on the bus bench, listening to the pitch of the oncoming engines, rising to meet every bus, never knowing which one is his and always wondering about the ones that don't stop.

A man in a wheelchair boasts of his intimate knowledge of sidewalks and curbcuts and his ability to get around, never in a direct line but navigating the obstacles that the average person simply steps over and ignores.

Balancing it out are stories of a skateboarder who tears up shoes but loves to skate everywhere, cyclists who celebrate the freedom of riding the mean streets of Los Angeles and social creatures who thrive on the camaraderie found on mass transit.

Urban planners and social scientists smile as they take the high road, positioning their small footsteps as the beginnings of the impending transportation revolution. Some spoke of their transportation choices as simple economic decisions based on priorities that favored tuition and family over autos while others used mass transit and bragged of the work they were able to complete while commuting.

But the story that established the baseline against which the success of LA's transportation system must be judged was told by a gentlemen who simply explained "I'm on the bus six, seven hours a day. MTA doesn't see what we see, they need to come from behind the desk, take a two or three day trip, get on all the buses, see how they aren't on schedule, they're always crowded ..."

When we arrived at the opening of the show, we were honored, but by the end of the evening, we were humbled.

Enci and I ride bikes in LA because we choose to ride, we "Storm the Bastille" and we celebrate our freedom and we lay claim to the streets, reveling in the growing numbers of cyclists who often share the "See you on the Streets!" greeting that has become our battle cry.

But after meeting so many people who walk, roll, pedal and use mass transit simply because they have no other choice, I realize that we also ride for those who can't attend the Pedestrian Advisory Committee or the Bike Plan Workshop or the Metro Board hearings.

We ride for the significant number of Angelenos who have no choice, who have no voice and who represent the failure of LA's Transportation System.

LA's weakest and most vulnerable community members live in fear, sometimes unable to simply cross the street. If LA is to become a Great City, it will start with a commitment to mobility as a civil right, a basic guarantee of effective transportation choices that extends to everybody.

Until then, Los Angeles is simply a city under siege.

Note:

Without A Car in the World
continues through December 11.
18th Street Arts Center
1639 18th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90404

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

CityWatchLA - Dude—There’s a Park in My Loading Zone!

CityWatch, Aug 14, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 65

LA’s Greensters are going mobile with LOAD[ing] ZONE, a pedal powered bicycle convoy that transports temporary parks through the streets of LA as part of the Sept 18 Park[ing] Day LA celebration that will be turning park[ing] spaces into parks, just for the day.

The Greensters are an all bicycle transportation team that was formed as part of the Rebel Without A Car Productions commitment to sustainable film production. They provided all transpo support for the entire "At What Price" film shoot, including moving all grip & electric, camera & audio, catering supplies & food, production supplies and even a couple of camera operators. They had so much fun, they’re still riding as a team. Load[ing] Zone starts early in the morning on the west side and the Greensters will load up supplies for their curbside temporary parks and begin riding, stopping as opportunity presents itself, and building a temporary park, engaging the public in a dialogue of open space and of how we approach the movement of goods and people.

The parks they build will be traditional in the sense that they offer people a place to meet, hang out, seek entertainment, refreshment and enlightenment.

Ron Durgin and Jeremy Grant will be leading Load[ing] Zone on a route that meanders through South LA, up through the Wilshire District, across East Hollywood, through Silver Lake and up to Highland Park, stopping to pay homage to the home of the Fly[ing] Pigeon and the home of the Bakfiet.

Load[ing] Zone features a cupcake bike (not made out of cupcakes but loaded with cupcakes!) a music trailer and an ice cream bike.

CaterGreen will be pulling a ZeroWaste compost trailer as part of the “leave no trace” commitment and will engage the community in a dialogue on opportunities to improve our relationship with our environment by putting our trash to work.

Load[ing] Zone’s participation in Park[ing] Day LA 2009 is part of a citywide celebration engaging artists, activists, neighborhood councils, urban planners and community groups in an effort to (re)claim public space and to remind the public that “Streets are for People!”

The parks built on Park[ing] Day are temporary parks, typically build in metered parking spaces and lasting only as long as the meter is fed, but Load[ing] Zone will also have a Guerrilla Garden[ing] Trailer. Park visitors will find native and drought resistant seeds, soil and castings so that they can make seed bombs to take away, and toss them on the barren and forlorn empty lots in the area. The next rain will awaken them, causing a small Pocket Park to blossom.

Load[ing] Zone is an open ride and cyclists, park lovers and fans of cupcakes are invited to join the Greensters as they take the parks to the people.

The day of riding and parking and cupcaking and pollinating will conclude in Echo Park with an outdoor Ride-In Movie featuring highlights from the Bicycle Film Festival.

“See you on the Streets!”

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

CityWatchLA - When Rights and Privileges Get Mixed Up the People Lose

CityWatch, Aug 11, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 64

LA’s newly seated City Attorney, Carmen “Nuch” Trutanich, is hosting a City Attorney Neighborhood Forum at City Hall on Thursday and in an effort to demonstrate his unique approach to access, he has divided the public into two groups, those who get “free guest parking” and those who don’t.

It always comes down to the haves and the have-nots.

I won’t be there, of course. I didn’t qualify as one of LA’s “core-elite” and in a city that ranks your influence based on where you park your car, I can only imagine the inferior seating set aside for those who arrive by bicycle, or even worse, on foot or by mass transit. Of course, Nuch could have looked at Enrique Peñalosa’s work in Bogata, Columbia for inspiration on positioning equality in mobility as the foundation for a municipal government, a position that results in a reduction in crime, an increase in efficiency and a positive impact on the local economy, all while contributing to the overall health of the voters who put him in office.

Instead, Nuch continued down the congested road that positions motor vehicle parking space as the commodity that makes the wheels of this city move, the element of privilege that confirms position and power, the gift of public property that doesn’t show up on the audit trail and the City Hall welcome mat that keeps the insiders in and the outsiders out.

This may sound harsh, after all, we live in a city where “Officer, it was the strangest thing, I looked outside and there was a guy walking on my sidewalk!” is a legitimate “Broken Windows” call to the LAPD and ranks right up there with “All units! There are cyclists riding on the street!” as confirmation that there is something seriously wrong with the way LA moves people. At every turn, we reward bad transportation choices and then discourage good behavior, all the while complaining about our transportation system and traffic congestion.

Nuch is not unique in his commitment to the status quo and that’s the point. If he really wanted to come in and shake up City Hall and to communicate that there was a better way to engage the people, he could have simply started with public access based on equality of mobility. Instead he selected “free guest parking” as the battle cry.

How great would it have been if Nuch opened his reign with a commitment to the people of LA that City business would only take place in facilities that are open to those who walk, to those who use mass transit and to those who ride bikes. After all, this commitment is already made to those who arrive in motor vehicles, why not include the rest of the public?

Nuch is not alone in missing this opportunity.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the Patron Saint of Mass Transit, was recently scheduled to meet with the membership of GreenLA, an advocacy group made up of 100 of LA’s most active environmental organizations. The meeting was billed as “GreenLA Membership and the Mayor of LA” in a dialogue on LA’s green issues platform. Apparently transportation wasn’t one of the topics.

In a demonstration of disconnect, the meeting was scheduled to take place on the Westside, in an industrial area south of LAX. The venue is in an area so transit-proof that GreenLA first asked those with cars to offer carpools to other guests, then simply switched the location to a downtown facility, accessible to pedestrians, cyclists and those who use mass transit. Why, it even had accommodations for those who carpooled!

How is it that those who arrive by car are given special consideration on event notices, invitations and flyers, complete with information pointing out parking availability, detailing the location of the parking, noting any special reimbursement or validation details, and reinforcing the old and tired LA mantra, “You are what you drive” while those who employ alternative transportation are expected to figure it on their own.

Councilman Tom LaBonge recently invited Art Leahy, the new CEO of the Metro, to an evening town hall meeting to discuss LA’s Transportation System with the community. LaBonge chose Travel Town in Griffith Park as the venue, apparently unaware that the 96 is the closest bus and it stops running at 6pm. The Metro’s website indicates that there is no bus service from City Hall to Travel Town, it’s simply Metro inaccessible. Is the leadership of LA new to the city or just new to the idea of moving people in modes other than the automobile? The meeting was moved to another location, this time one with no bike racks. Small steps!

The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE) is currently gearing up for the October Neighborhood Council Congress and in an effort to fan the flames of interest, a “save the date” flyer was sent out promising “Great People, Great Food and Free Parking!” No word on alternative transportation, no encouragement to walk, no info on mass transit, no directions to the bike racks. Nothing in that flyer communicates a commitment to equality as the standard for public access.

Our freedom to move is one of our most basic freedoms. In the political arena, access is one of the most basic elements of equality. To get harsh on the status quo of parking may seem...well...harsh.

But consider this, there are seven parking spaces in LA County for every car. The host of a public meeting that doesn’t accommodate those who arrive in single occupant vehicles faces severe criticism.

Council District 2 candidate Chris Essel demonstrated her commitment to the locals in CD2 by sending out an invitation to the “common folks” urging them to drop by her office on Ventura Blvd. The invitation indicates that the location is supported by “ample free parking on Ventura Blvd. in addition to valet parking on site.” No mention is made of buses such as the 150 or the 750, no mention is made of the available bike parking, no encouragement to do anything other than maintain the status quo, all the while complaining about traffic congestion!

Bravo to the CD2 Candidate who seizes this opportunity and fills the leadership vacuum, showing up at the next Candidate Forum on foot or who takes the Metro or who rides their bicycle or who shows up on a horse. Having a candidate show up in anything other that a single occupant motor vehicle would be a refreshing demonstration of a commitment to shaking up the way we move people and would certainly separate the doers from the talkers.

Of course, this may be a difficult leap for many but the least we can ask is that all candidates reinforce their commitment to access equality by noting on all campaign materials the information for peds, transit passengers and cyclists on a “favored nation” status with all motor vehicle parking and valet information for motorists. (By the way, if you’re going to reimburse or validate for parking, give out Metro tokens also!)

LA’s City Clerk has taken the lead on this standard and has established “mass transit accessible” as one of the criteria used for selecting locations for the upcoming Neighborhood Council elections.

Ultimately, if Los Angeles is going to become a Great City, it will be because mobility is positioned and supported as a basic human right. It will be because we work together to create a standard where public access includes the public as a whole, not simply those who arrive in a car. It will be because we define and respect our streets as public space.

“See you on the Streets!”

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

CityWatchLA - MTA Communication Off the Tracks

CityWatch, July 24, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 59

This past Sunday, a man leading a group of cyclists north on the Metro Gold Line (Highland Park to South Pasadena) encountered a Rail Operator who yelled at the group "Two bikes per car only!" and threatened to kick the cyclists off the train until cooler heads prevailed and the reality of an empty train on a Sunday morning allowed common sense to take over.

The cyclists continued on their journey and the Rail Operator went back to being confused about the anticipated implementation of the controversial "Bikes-on-Rail" policy which would limit cyclists to two per rail car.

The proposed policy went to the Metro's Operations Committee last week but Supervisor Mike Antonovich was prepared with a counter- proposal that directed the Metro staff to consider the legal implications of bikes, strollers, and luggage and directed them to prepare a report that should result in a "Stuff-on-Rails" policy.

In spite of the fact that the proposed "Bikes-on-Rail" policy didn't clear the Metro Operations Committee, it appears that the Metro staff were excited enough about the opportunity to limit access to cyclists that they began free-lance implementation, complete with the obligatory yelling that comes with a commitment to safety.

With this new commitment, one can only wonder if Rail Conductors will also be yelling at women with strollers, travelers with luggage, and recyclers with shopping carts or if it's just cyclists who will be targeted as the source of congestion on the Metro Rail.

In spite of the failure of the proposed "Bikes-on-Rail" policy to pass GO, the marketing element appears to already be implemented … including signage indicating that bicycles, strollers and luggage are to share a specific area in the corner of each rail car is already appearing. Apparently, positive thinking runs freely in the Rail Division of the Metro, making up for the fact that common sense has run dry.

This process seems to indicate that decisions were made, actions were taken, messages were communicated and the Metro team was ready to go, all in advance of Metro Board approval and all completely unencumbered by that pesky public participation element … the one that simply asks the Metro to actually consider the humans who depend on a robust Transportation System in order to conduct their business and get home to their families at night.

It would seem that one of the simplest partnerships would be between the Metro and those passengers who want the Metro to be safe and effective. One would think that in a county of 10 million people, the Metro might be able to find one or two passengers who might have some useful insight into safety and efficiency and who might be willing to participate in the development of programs and policies that move the Metro toward becoming a robust Transportation System that supports all modes of travel.

Even more specific to this situation, one would think that the Metro would have involved the cycling community in the development of a "Bikes-on-Rail" policy but such was not the case.

All of which should change as a result of Operations Committee Chair Rita Robinson's direction to Metro staff that the cycling community be involved in the future development of the "Stuff-on-Rail" policy.

Apparently there are cyclists who have actually traveled to other cities and even other countries and it didn't take long for the cycling community to advance solutions from around the world, including the popular "Bike-Car" that has the seats removed and allows those with bikes to efficiently travel without compromising capacity.

With so many enviable Transportation Systems around the world, perhaps the best way to prevent the Metro Rail staff from taking their proposed step backwards would be to send them on a vacation, require them to travel, to visit other cities and to experience transit solutions that will allow them to return to LA full of commitment to a robust Transportation System that sets a world-class standard for safety and efficiency and equality.

They might also want to checkout some communications systems. Might help get all of Metro on the same page.

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

CityWatchLA - Metro’s Identity Crisis

CityWatch, July 14, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 56

The Metro is proposing to take LA's cycling community for a ride, one step forward and two steps backward, all in a misguided effort to revise the Metro's bikes-on-rail policy.

Current Metro policy prohibits cyclists from bringing their bikes on rail during peak hours (6:30 am - 8:30 am and 4:30 pm - 6:30 pm) a policy that is rarely enforced or even acknowledged based on the anecdotal presence of bikes on most Metro light rail during these hours.

The Metro is proposing to remove the restriction, a simple action that should be hailed by the cycling community with cheers of "They like us! Right now, they really like us!"

But a quick survey of the eight-page handout for the proposed policy revision revealed the small print, the details, the motivation for the out-of-character "What have we done for the cycling community lately?" posture of the Metro. Under the "enhance safety" bullet point, the Metro addressed safety by slipping in a universal limit on cyclists with a two bikes per rail car limit. This means that the last Red Line train from NoHo in the middle of the night, one that typically has two cars, would be limited to 4 cyclists.

The late night trains are typically light on passengers but heavy on bikes. It also means that during busy times, cyclists would be racing back and forth on the platform with their bikes, counting cyclists and looking for the "light" rail car. Hardly a safety improvement on the platform!

There are a couple of significant issues here, bigger than the simple specifics of where the bikes go and how many fit.

1) Bikes are a form of transportation. Cyclists are able to get around the city and fill Metro service gaps because of their bikes. Metro passengers are able to get farther and to fill service gaps because of their bikes. We should be supporting the potential synergy here, not limiting its efficacy by excluding cyclists with limitations that apply to no other user group.

Mike Cannell, the General Manager for Metro Rail Operations, explained that with the increase in ridership on the Metro Rail, space has become increasingly scarce. Good point. He pointed out that with the success of the Flyaway from the airport, more and more passengers are taking luggage on the Train. Good point. He pointed out that when you add strollers, carts and ... gasp ... one time he saw a guy with a Christmas tree, we're really now all competing for limited and finite space. Good points!

BUT...bicycles are a transportation solution. When the guy can ride his Christmas tree from the train station to his home, it should be in the same category as the bicycle, but until that day, bikes support and enhance the Metro Rail service as a form of complementary, not just alternative, transportation. All else is "stuff" and to limit bicycles to two per car while not limiting strollers, wagons, luggage, and other personal property demonstrates a clear attitude of "What are we gonna do with all of these cyclists?"

Cannell continued by pointing out that the presence of "all of these bikes" was a violation of the fire and penal codes because of the blocked doorways. He was asked if It was the "blocked doorways" that was the violation or if it was "the bikes blocking the doorways" that was the violation. He responded that it was the bikes. When pressed, he repeated that the prohibition was against bikes, not people or luggage or strollers or Christmas Trees, but against bikes.

Cannell's team pointed out that the space on a rail car is finite and a bike takes up space, thereby reducing Rail Car capacity. Cyclists countered, "By riding a bike, cyclists complement the Metro and close service gaps in the system, thereby increasing Transportation System capacity!"

Crickets chirped when the Metro staff was asked if anybody had actually counted cyclists on buses, on rail, and on the streets and if there was any information or data to support this discussion and the proposed policy recommendations.

The Metro doesn't count cyclists because, apparently, cyclists don't count.

2) The Metro has an identity crisis. Anyone who visits the Metro with any regularity is reminded of the old tale of the Elephant surrounded by the blind men. Essentially, six blind men were asked to determine what an elephant looked like by feeling different parts of the elephant's body.

The blind man who feels a leg says "It's like a pillar!" The one who feels the tail says "It's like a rope!" The one who feels the trunk says "It's like a tree branch!" The one who feels the ear says "It's like a hand fan!" The one who feels the belly says "It's like a wall! The one who feels the tusk says "It's like a solid pipe!"

The Metro is the proverbial "elephant." The Train folks exclaim "The Metro is a Rail System supported by bus connectivity."

The Bus Operations folks exclaim "The Metro is a Bus System that saturates the region with connectivity but competes with Rail for operating funds!"

The Training folks exclaim "It's a conflicted environment with everybody in our way!" The Real Estate folks exclaim "It's a development opportunity supported by transit!"

The Parking Lot folks exclaim "Seriously, look around. It's a parking lot supported by transit!" The Outreach folks exclaim "It's an opportunity to engage and to create community!" The Pedestrian folks exclaim "Hey, where's the elephant?"

The Bicycle folks exclaim "Don't anger the elephant!" Through it all, the local municipalities and agencies look at the elephant and see an ATM that's gonna dispense $40 Billion of Measure R money over the next 30 years, all to projects based on the Metro's priorities and oversight.

The Metro, by design, is our Regional Transportation Authority. It's an "elephant" and all of "the blind men" are correct. It's many things, but first and foremost, it is responsible for creating and funding a Transportation System that services all modes, using all methods and moving all people.

Federal funds along with Measure R funds put the Metro in a significant position of power and the character of our regional Transportation System is due to the priorities that are established at the top. The Metro funds everything from freeways to bike lanes to educational materials to the trees that make it more pleasant to walk to the bus stop.

Based on results it is evident that the Metro has meandered in its commitment to creating a Transportation System with a "multi-modal" commitment to moving people.

There is hope that this is going to change. The Metro has a new CEO, Art Leahy, and a new Chairman of the Board, Ara Najarian, both of whom have a reputation for innovation and a commitment to civil service.

Leahy and Najarian now have the opportunity to work together to integrate the many opinions of "the blind men" into a cohesive vision and mission for "the elephant." It's on them to create a real regional Transportation System that is committed to moving all people using all modes and that is committed to improving the quality of life for our communities.

Their first challenge is on the horizon and will come up this Thursday in the Operations Committee when the limit of the number of cyclists comes up for a vote. As Cannell puts it, "This system wasn't built with cyclists in mind."

The Metro now has the opportunity to address that oversight and to integrate cyclists as transportation solutions into a real Transportation System. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net) ◘

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.