Not signed in (Sign In)

General: The Bike Advocacy Thread.

Bottom of Page

251 to 300 of 971

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 20
  13. >
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009 edited
     
    Velo Cult:
    thats my neighborhood so i'll help defend those lanes on Clairmont Dr. they are absolutely fantastic and excited they are there. as a driver i have not seen any negative so im a little confused on that. do you know what the complaints are?


    Not exactly sure what the complaints are, but I image they probably are about how drivers have to go a little slower and it might take them a little longer to get on and off the freeway. There's probably some more congestion now that there is only one full traffic lane in each direction, and some people might not be happy about that. I'm curious myself to see what the engineers tell us about how it is affecting auto traffic flow. But I'm not sure. That's what makes these meetings so interesting (and worrisome) - you just never know what people are going to say or what might happen.

    Fun fun!

    Kathy
    • CommentAuthorthom
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009
     
    billd:Suddenly I'm nervous about what I say on this topic.


    I don't think il Pirati's comment was meant to be hostile to either viewpoint or to any particular person, but was rather intended to convey the idea that this forum is oriented less toward arguing over particular viewpoints, and more toward advancing conversations in productive ways. Anyone who posts intelligently and respectfully is welcome. We've had very interesting and enlightening conversations about vehicular cycling on this and other threads, but as an issue for bicycle advocacy, the argument between the two "opposing" camps is a non-starter.
    • CommentAuthorProtorio
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009 edited
     
    Its always interesting to hear the complaint that drivers might have to drive slower. Really, what is the civic downside to that? Slower traffic is safer, traffic flows more easily (instead of speeding and braking), allows for safer and expanded dog-walking, cycling, walking with your kids, running, wheel-chairing, etc. The only thing fueling such a critique is selfishness.

    As for the green sharrows lane - I think the riders in the video are kind of proving a point - that its cars that slow traffic down, not cyclists. When stopped and when safe, filter forward as always. Take the lane, as you are legally obliged, with moving traffic.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbëany
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009
     
    I don't think the topic of Road Witching has been brought up here before, but I am 100% in favor of it. Especially in San Diego when one is no more than a few miles away from a major freeway, I think all other streets ought to be preserved for the rest of the road users.

    Some examples:






    •  
      CommentAuthoril Pirati
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009
     
    .

    I, for one, would be very excited for someone as passionate and educated as Serge to join this forum. He's been very helpful in getting my legal issues disseminated far and wide throughout the Bicycle Law Blogging community. What I'm not excited about (and I don't think many of us on here are) is for this site to divulge into just another forum for arguing theoretical utopian ideals, no matter which side is ranting. Activity is welcome! Preaching and lecturing are not, in my opinion. We could open a thread dedicated to bickering, but I don't think that would add a lot of joy to anyone’s life.

    Please do not feel like your point-of-view is not welcome. Please respect others' points-of-view. I see legitimacy to most arguments in the bicycle advocacy debate. And like most, my opinion is unlikely to be changed by long-winded, annoying, unwelcome diatribes.

    Now you all have at least 4 cents from me on this.
    • CommentAuthormatt t
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009
     


    Meanwhile, Kathy Keehan told me something pretty alarming, if I understood her correctly: because of that lawsuit against the San Francisco bike plan that required SF to do an EIR before adopting the plan, all cities in California have to conduct EIRs on plans that would take space away from cars. That will cost $400,000 (I think she said), which the city doesn't have, so the bike plan is essentially dead in the water.



    $400,000 sounds really high to me. It seems that something like this would only require a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), wouldn't it? Most of the issues under CEQA wouldn't apply because there would be no negative impact to things like air quality, noise, visual impacts, biological resources, cultural resources, etc. etc. And filing those things would take minimal effort for most of those disciplines.

    The only major study would probably be traffic...which could be argued to have minimal negative impacts when considering how bicycles help east traffic flow.

    Granted, I'm not a planner and I only really know the parts of CEQA that apply to my work, but I've filed stuff like this before. And it seems that it should cost less than 400K...
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 11th 2009
     
    I love the Road Witching idea!

    Regarding the EIR for the bike plan - I think the number is actually closer to $250,000 to $300,000, which is an extraordinary amount of money. It would take at least a programatic Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). If the plan has any ambition at all, it would require removal of some traffic lanes (like on Clairemont), putting bike paths through parks (biological resources), parking removal, and some road widenings to accommodate bike lanes (noise, visual impacts, etc). Because of the scope of the bike plan, covering the whole city, it's not a small amount of work and thus not a cheap document. I'm not sure where things are going to end up, but if I had to guess I think it will probably end up having a much less detailed programatic document for the plan and then detailed environmental documents for each project as they go along.

    Currently the CEQA process doesn't allow for the improvement of bicycle access to mitigate the other traffic concerns, as far as I can tell. I know there are some serious efforts at the state level looking at revising CEQA to change that, and I'm hopeful that those happen soon. But in the meantime, anything that makes it harder for you to get through an intersection in your car is an 'impact'. :-(

    Kathy
    • CommentAuthorSerge
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2009 edited
     
    Hi everybody!

    Just want to say "interesting thread" and I hope everyone has a nice weekend!

    If you can make it to the SDBC 22nd annual holiday toy ride tomorrow morning, rain or shine, that would be great. The price is right (free) and you get what you pay for (no sag, but there are some snacks at 25 miles at the Salvation Army).

    Meet at UC Cyclery in La Jolla Village Square at 8:30 am Saturday morning. The point of the ride is to take toys (each rider brings an UNWRAPPED toy) for the needy to the Salvation Army at the Joan Croc Center in Rolando (University Ave. and 69th Street). Usually over 100 riders (maybe 200?) go, lead by Santa Claus. If you want to see motorists honking at bicyclists in a friendly manner, this is your ride.

    About 50 miles at an easy "holiday pace" (15 mph on the flats).
    Decorate your bike in the holiday spirit. Prizes will be awarded before the ride begins to the best-decorated adult rider, junior rider, and tandem riders.

    Serge
    •  
      CommentAuthorVelo Cult
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2009
     
    hi Serge, you might get more play in the in the Local Events thread. looks like a great event.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBev
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2009 edited
     
    il Pirati:.
    What I'm not excited about (and I don't think many of us on here are) is for this site to divulge into just another forum for arguing theoretical utopian ideals, no matter which side is ranting. Activity is welcome! Preaching and lecturing are not, in my opinion. We could open a thread dedicated to bickering, but I don't think that would add a lot of joy to anyone’s life.

    Please do not feel like your point-of-view is not welcome. Please respect others' points-of-view. I see legitimacy to most arguments in the bicycle advocacy debate. And like most, my opinion is unlikely to be changed by long-winded, annoying, unwelcome diatribes.


    +1

    I know I'm on the Bike Advocacy Thread and all, but the holier than thou mentality gets old. And while I ride as much as I can, I also drive. I drive my dogs to the vet, I haul my horse to the vet, I drive to see my surgeon way up at UCSD, I drive to meet friends for dinner (yes, I admit it!), I drive. And although I drive, I am not a bad person. Some of these utopic visionaries on here are extremely intollerant, and that does not make for a good, positive community. If I wanted intollerance I'd listen to Rush Limbaugh.

    What initally drew me to this forum was its all welcoming, any bit of cycling is a great start, come join us attitude. It is non-threatening, non-confrontational - because if that's what you want there are other places (already mentioned here) that can accommodate. And that's how you increase rider numbers by including.

    This rant isn't specifically aimed at this thread in particular as I've found this attitude on other threads (and forums & blogs & boards). It was just a good opening for me to spew. I'm done now.
    • CommentAuthorLarry
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2009
     
    Kathy:Hi Larry,
    Careful! I didn't say 'dead in the water' on the bike plan. I said 'they're working on it'. Which sometimes means 'dead in the water' but usually means 'going to take longer than we thought'. Kathy

    Ah, brought down by hyperbole again. Maybe I should have said "becalmed for now."

    -Larry
  12.  
    A new post from Streetfilms. Come on San Diego we have the more livable weather than Portland.

    Portland: Celebrating the Americas Most Livable City
    • CommentAuthormarkphilips
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2009 edited
     
    Roadwitching or PARK(ing) day. Either way I like that idea. It's fun and clever.

    New immigrants to N.A. from different parts of southeast Asia often wonder where are all the people (in the neighborhood)? Neighborhoods are so deserted and very isolated.
    • CommentAuthorSerge
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2009 edited
     
    billd:

    I wish there was a way to educate the public, cyclists and drivers alike, about California Vehicle code 21202:

    California Vehicle Code Section 21202 - The keep right rule for bicycles.

    I find it frustrating how often I get honked at and yelled at when riding in narrow lanes because hardly anyone seems to know what the keep right rule for bicycles actually is. It would also be nice if drivers would respect 21750:

    California Vehicle Code Section 21750 - The safe passing rule.

    Actually, if drivers would just respect 21750, then I wouldn't feel a need to take the lane so often.



    I used to be quite satisfied with 21202 and didn't get too excited about the argument that we need to get rid of 21202 (and 21208). The implication of removing those two statutes would be that due to 21200 bicyclists would be subject to the exact same roadway positioning restrictions as are all drivers of vehicles. That is, in the far right lane or "as far right as practicable" per 21656. One objection to that is that 21656 does not explicitly list all the exceptions that 21202 lists.

    Like I said, I didn't get too excited about all that, until the Woolley case. If you haven't read the transcript from that trial yet, please do. It's simply unbelievable. Here is a page about it with all the necessary link. Please read the blog about it on the Mionske website (and the comments about that blog too):

    People v. Andrew Woolley

    After reading that, please consider... What does 21202 really mean? One thing I learned from reading Mionske's book is that to understand a law you can't just look at the words. Case law determines the meaning of any given law at least as much as the actual words in the law.

    In the case of 21202, who knows what the words even say, much less what they mean, besides a few of us "California bicycling law wonks"? I'd say the police, judges, even most cyclists and lawyers, and certainly motorists are largely oblivious, including those who actually read the statute. In Woolley we see that the words in 21202 don't matter; they might as well say "bikes must be ridden at the curb", period. So what's the point?

    The big problem with 21202 is that it applies only to bicyclists, which leaves it wide open to anti-bike bias. Laws that apply to all drivers must be interpreted without that bias, at least in appeal if not on the road and in traffic court, because the same words apply equally to all drivers, not just bicyclists. This is very important. For example, 21656 does not have an exception for "when preparing for a left turn". Does that mean drivers of slow moving vehicles can't make left turns? Of course not. Everyone already knows that would be an unreasonable interpretation of that law, so there is no need to make the exception explicit. So it would have to be interpreted the same for bicyclists too. No ruling that a bicyclist is in violation while turning left (or doing anything else that is reasonable) would hold up because of the implication to all drivers of slow moving vehicles, which is untenable to anyone regardless of how fierce their anti-bike bias is.

    Any chance the effort to repeal 21202 (and 21208) is something all bicyclists can get behind?

    •  
      CommentAuthorVelo Cult
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2009
     
    so, on the Tweed ride we had a city bus right hook the group of 35 riders on his way to the bus stop. he told the people in the back of the group he was going to the bus stop but i don't think any of us knew he was going to right hook us to get there. now, im from the school of though that drivers (especially bus drivers) need to be told what they are doing wrong. with right hooks drivers rarely realize how fast the bikes are going i tell them with yelling or gestures. i don't cuss but i let them know. i feel that if i don't they won't realize what they did. last night i pounded on the side of the bus. i gotta say this is the first time a bus driver has ever apologized which is cool but if William and myself never made a bid deal of it he'd probably do it again not knowing any better. at the same time i tend to get a lot of grief from other cyclists for telling drivers what they did wrong. i understand their point too of keeping everything peaceful although i don't see how that helps the next time that driver gets near a cyclists. they have 2 ton+ vehicle and we're in lycra or city clothes. sure, some mess with cyclists on purpose but others just don't know any better. how do others deal with this? am i way off base?
    •  
      CommentAuthorBev
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2009
     
    Being a 5' tall female I have a tendency to just carry on, unless they have just nearly endagered my life/grazed me/clipped me with a mirror in which case I have been know to holler at them or whack their car with my hand. But if I were big, broad & bald like William I'd be telling more people off. Best that I'm not. I'd probably get carried away and abuse my power.
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2009 edited
     
    Velo Cult:so, on the Tweed ride we had a city bus right hook the group of 35 riders on his way to the bus stop. how do others deal with this? am i way off base?


    Not off base if people were in danger of getting hit. Another effective option, if you can think of it at the time, is to get the number of the bus, and call the driver in to MTS. They're professional trained drivers and complaints go in their records and are used for deciding raises, etc. If they were asleep during the part of the training for driving near bicyclists, they need to be called on it.

    The trick for this is to get the number of the bus, the route number, the time of day, and where you were. That way they can track down the specific driver. Otherwise they won't do anything since they can't be sure who it was.

    Kathy
    • CommentAuthorLarry
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    Just found this series on bicycling and bike advocacy in the Northwest. It's by Alan Durning, whose mid-90s book, "This Place on Earth," I'm currently reading. He's also with -- founder, I think -- of Northwest Environment Watch, now the Sightline Institute.

    http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score/series/bicycle-neglect

    -Larry
    • CommentAuthorLarry
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    markphilips:A new post from Streetfilms. Come on San Diego we have the more livable weather than Portland.

    Portland: Celebrating the Americas Most Livable City


    Thanks for posting this! I think we could use the type of traffic signal shown at 7:40 in the video at the intersection of the of the Rose Canyon Bike Path with Gilman/La Jolla Colony Drive.

    -Larry
    • CommentAuthorHillbilly
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009 edited
     
    This may be a little off topic (or not) but I didn’t think it warranted its own thread since it may have been discussed previously.
    In any event, I really like the idea of making “accident spoke cards”…or maybe something that fits into your wallet or pouch or wherever. Basically what they consist of is a short checklist of what to do if you are in an accident. Here are some examples of the type of information that would go on them:

    What to do if you've been hit

    Crash Info

    I would personally make some of these up myself but to be honest I still get a bit confused on the procedures and laws here in California. I feel that a short list of bicycle laws would be nice to have on here along with the relevant contact info for some good bicycle lawyers, police officers, or anyone else who could be useful would be a huge help. I’m not sure if this is something the SDCBC would be interested in doing (or maybe have done in the past)? I know and have seen many people (including myself when I was hit) go through a lot of trouble because they didn’t handle things correctly or couldn’t think clearly immediately after an incident and I feel that a cheat sheet like this would be very helpful. I have heard personal stories of similar cards coming in handy when they were handed out in DC while I lived there.

    Anyone have other thoughts or opinions?
    • CommentAuthorHillbilly
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    beany:Ever since the Roaditude campaign was launched, I've been thinking about ways to advocate for bicycling to the masses...

    I have always wanted to do an ad campaign similar to the ideology behind the tweed ride: "Cyclists are Regular People" or "Anyone Can Ride a Bike". It would consist of a single picture of a cyclist/commuter/racer in their riding gear (whether it's work clothes, full kit...whatever) standing with their bike at one of their favorite spots along their commute or rides. Then, under the picture would simply have their occupation.
    I think it would help to convey the fact that cyclists are "fairly" normal people too :)
    • CommentAuthorgregoryz
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    Hi. Some of you have heard by now that Clairemont Drive was radically improved for cyclists two weeks ago. What was a pretty rough four lane road with a busted up shoulder has been turned into a two lane (one each direction) road with an excellent bike lane clearly striped away from all of the pot holes and ruts. It was a pleasant surprise to all of us. I think it was partially engineered due to a couple of fatal automobile high speed fatalities on this stretch (which is basically from Interstate 5 up to Fairfield street at the top.) Now that the road has been improved, there is some push back from the community whom I believe are concerned that it will cause traffic backups. I would like to rally some cyclists for a meeting this Thursday at 6pm during which this will be discussed. This is an email I received after sending positive comments about this change to Donna Frye's office...(We may have not been included had I not sent my thanks!) "Wondering why Clairemont Drive went from two lanes to one? Gary Pence, P.E., Senior Traffic Engineer for the City of San Diego will discuss it at a public meeting with concerned residents of the area on on Thursday, December 17th at 6:00PM at the South Clairemont Recreation Center located at 3605 Clairemont Drive." My agenda in attending the meeting will be communicating the following... We (my wife and I) use our bicycles and our cars daily. The road is now much safer for cyclists, joggers, walkers and motorists. The posted speed limit did not changed. What the city did was implement appropriate traffic calming measures which make speeding (35mph) through that zone feel much more dangerous. Pulling out onto Clairemont Drive from Fairfield used to be a very very stressful experience. It is now a very doable and safe thing to do. I hope you will consider joining us at the meeting and doing the on-line poll which is linked from the website below. Thanks for your time!
    [[_linker_]]
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009 edited
     
    Hillbilly:This may be a little off topic (or not) but I didn’t think it warranted its own thread since it may have been discussed previously.
    In any event, I really like the idea of making “accident spoke cards”…or maybe something that fits into your wallet or pouch or wherever. Basically what they consist of is a short checklist of what to do if you are in an accident.
    Anyone have other thoughts or opinions?


    I threw together a little wallet card. http://www.sdcbc.org/crash.pdf
    If anyone knows how to make it prettier or set up so that it can be printed front and back on a piece of paper you can fold into your wallet, I'd appreciate the advice! I know just enough InDesign to get myself into trouble...

    Kathy
    • CommentAuthorHillbilly
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    Kathy:
    Hillbilly:This may be a little off topic (or not) but I didn’t think it warranted its own thread since it may have been discussed previously.
    In any event, I really like the idea of making “accident spoke cards”…or maybe something that fits into your wallet or pouch or wherever. Basically what they consist of is a short checklist of what to do if you are in an accident.
    Anyone have other thoughts or opinions?


    I threw together a little wallet card. http://www.sdcbc.org/crash.pdf
    If anyone knows how to make it prettier or set up so that it can be printed front and back on a piece of paper you can fold into your wallet, I'd appreciate the advice! I know just enough InDesign to get myself into trouble...

    Kathy

    Awesome...I swear I looked for that forever on the site. I'll see if I can help out with it a little and maybe add some more info.
    • CommentAuthorLarry
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    gregoryz:
    I hope you will consider joining us at the meeting and doing the on-line poll which is linked from the website below. Thanks for your time!



    Thanks for posting the poll, Gregory! If any of you were having trouble following that link, try this one. It was about 50-50, with a few "no opinions" when I filled it out a couple of hours ago.

    I'm hoping to make it to this meeting. I wish I could say I ride this street regularly -- maybe I'll just have to start!

    -Larry
  26.  
    Here's something that every cyclist can do for advocacy. www.baufl.org Official launch is tomorrow.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBev
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2009
     
    Hillbilly: “accident spoke cards”…or maybe something that fits into your wallet or pouch or wherever. Basically what they consist of is a short checklist of what to do if you are in an accident. Here are some examples of the type of information that would go on them:


    For ID purposes, I have a Road ID braclet. It generally lives on my bike, but it's very visible. My info, emergency contact info, my insurance info. But the spoke cards are a good idea. Can customize them easily, if you're a shop you can advertise on it while giving them out.
    •  
      CommentAuthorHans
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2009
     
    I'm riding to the 6:00 Clairemont meeting on Thursday, from Little Italy, if anyone wants to join along the way.

    I'm jealous. The city just repaved Reynard, the main street that goes up to Mission Hills from downtown. Re-striped it with rreeaall wide lanes, but no bike lane! Hmmm... it's residential the whole way up the hill also.
  29.  
    •  
      CommentAuthorray333
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2009
     
    Reynard Way is finally repaved? Unbelievable! I started in on the City to fix it in 1999, the same year I began complaining about unsafe conditions on Kearny Villa Rd. It only took them ten years; that's pretty good for San Diego! Maybe Kearny Villa Rd. is next. Sure hope so, because a week ago last Friday I was buzzed so close by a southbound route 20 bus that the wake almost sucked me into the rear wheels! It missed me by inches! After it passed me, the bus drifted over into the bike lane. Anyone there would have been instantly vaporized. I followed up with SD Transit. My contact there talked with the driver. He said he would have apologized to me if he coud have. Believe me, I tried pretty hard to catch him at the bus stop at Ruffin Rd. and KVR!
    •  
      CommentAuthoril Pirati
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2009 edited
     
    .

    This is the text of a letter I sent Councilmember Todd Gloria today, pertaining to the CVC 21202(a) case. I encourage anyone who cares to do the same (feel free to plagiarize as needed!)

    Councilmember Gloria,

    My name is il Pirati. I live in University Heights. I am very proud of your representation of our district. You had my vote last November, and you have my continued support.
    One issue that I, and all cyclists in San Diego, could use your support on is educating law enforcement and judges about bicyclists' rights. In March I was pulled over by an SDPD Motorcycle officer named David Root and improperly cited for violating CVC 21202. I explained to the officer that his understanding of the vehicle code was not correct, informed him of the correct verbiage and interpretation, and was rewarded with condescension and a citation.
    Once home, I called the SDPD motorcycle division and spoke with a sergeant (his name escapes me now; Martinez or Montoya) who identified himself as Officer Root's supervisor. I explained what had taken place, went over the vehicle code with the sergeant, and asked that he please train Officer Root on the law. The sergeant apologized for the incident, agreed that I should never have been cited, and called me back to inform me that he had indeed conducted training with Officer Root.
    I decided to take my citation to traffic court. I've attached the trial transcript. Officer Root still contended that I was violating the law at the time of the citation even though, by his own testimony, two of the four exceptions to the code were relevant and I was traveling at a speed faster than the normal speed of traffic, negating the entire relevance of the code I was cited for.
    The presiding Judge was Judge Pro Tem Andrew J. Liska. Somehow he was able to completely separate his decision from logic and the written law, and sided with the officer. His statements in the transcript, and referenced in my Appellant's Opening Brief (also attached) show a complete disregard for the written law or for safe bicycle operation.
    The ray of hope in this story is that the City Attorney responded to my opening brief (Respondent's Brief, attached) and agreed that I was not in violation of CVC 21202(a). The City Attorney recommends overturning Judge Pro Tem Liska's erroneous decision. The case is awaiting scheduling before the Appellate Division of the San Diego Superior Court.
    This case is much larger than just my personal efforts to avoid paying a fairly small fine. The real issue is that there are San Diego Police who are pulling over and citing cyclists with little to no understanding of the law and are actually creating dangerous situations by doing so. And there are Judges who could care less what the law says and care only about what they think the law should say. Below is a list of links to various Bicycle Law Blogs in California who have been discussing this case for weeks now. San Diego is becoming a case study in ignorance and judicial prejudice.

    http://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog/index.cfm/2009/12/9/When-The-Law-Doesnt-Say-What-The-Court-Thinks-It-Should-Say

    http://www.cyclelicio.us/2009/12/people-vs-andrew-woolley.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Cyclelicious+(Cyclelicious)

    http://www.bikesd.org/2009/12/cvc-21202a-appeal-opening-brief-by-andrew-woolley/

    http://bikinginla.wordpress.com/

    http://solspot.com/bike-monkey/woolley-wins

    I know that you are proud of San Diego, as am I, and do not want to see this city represented in this negative light. Also, I know that a large number of your constituents ride and use bicycles frequently, probably more so than in any other part of the city.
    I ask that you bring before the City Counsel a measure to ensure that ALL San Diego police and judges are educated by the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition about the proper interpretation and enforcement of CVC 21202(a) and all laws pertaining to bicycle operation. The City Attorney's office agrees that, at least in this case, the law enforcement officer and the judge failed to understand or apply the law in letter or intent.
    Please let me know how you and the City Council plan on addressing this issue.

    Very Respectfully,


    il Pirati


    Hopefully this will help get things rolling in the right direction.

    Wow, that is a long letter when I look at it quoted here. He probably won't even read the whole thing!
    • CommentAuthormatt t
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2009
     
    I did....have faith. If he doesn't read it, someone on his staff will.

    Todd Gloria is my Council Member as well. I think more letters like this, and raising other bike related issues, will start to get the Councilman's attention.
    • CommentAuthorSerge
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2009
     
    Great letter, Andrew! We SD cyclists are very lucky that it was you who was cited.

    Serge
    • CommentAuthormarkphilips
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009 edited
     
    I attended the Clairemont community meeting about the recent lane reduction and addition of a bike lane on Clairemont just east of the I-5. Although, the meeting was still car-centered I learned a lot... I think it is a step in the right direction (by trial and error). I took some notes and listed it below. There were more topics and suggestions not included below.

    1) This particular street issue has been around since the 1980s.
    2) People in the community who were affected in one way or another are angry because of the numerous accidents that occur on this street. There was a hard copy of the accidents.
    a) both north and south bound traffic speeding related accidents affect the neighborhood due to damaged properties (cars, trees, fences, etc)
    b) accidents happen mostly on the curves whether it is uphill or downhill. Drivers speeding loose control of their vehicle or wanders out of the lane and collide with the opposite traffic, parked cars, trees, etc.
    c) 33 fatal accidents in the past 6 yrs. Two children died when their parents lost control of the car and hit a tree.
    d) People who live in near the area find it challenging to make a left, right turn from/into their neighborhood or driveway.
    3) Past improvements did not improve traffic accidents ----hmmmmm?
    4) Concerns about people density increase in the near future will increase traffic (because every person w ill drive a car)
    5) Balancing two ends of the scenario: slowing traffic down (traffic calming) and avoiding the bottleneck effect/congestion for people going to or coming from I-5 (good luck to the traffic engineer on this one.
    6) bicyclists avoid this street because it lacked bike lanes prior to traffic calming. Now there is hope ;-)

    The bicycle lane seems to be an after thought. The addition of the median lane for left turns also acts as a buffer for drivers who wander out of the lane; it prevents a head on collision with the opposite traffic. Kathy (and perhaps the bicycle enthusiasts in the audience) objected to the suggestion of adding bike lanes so that there's enough buffer between parked cars and traffic. Imagine that!......... At the top of the hill the bicycle lane disappears...watch out for the door zone and the cars that may squeeze you near the door zone. The traffic engineer is not familiar with Sharrows but he will investigate more...

    When I step back and look at it from my limited point of view, the problem and the solution is obvious...but since most people are addicted to cars and the present transport infrastructure supports its use (I'm guilty of using a car but I am aware of my other choices)......and we enjoy our freedom to go anywhere and anytime as we please....there are no other options.....BUT then again most people in this forum would agree that there is an alternative choice rather than reaching for the car keys.

    I read this comic about the reporter in a helicopter looking down on rush hour traffic. He was overlooking the massive gridlock beneath him and the caption says
    "FOLKS, IT'S H O P E L E S S ! S T O P D R I V I N G !"

    If I join the comic above with another comic where the caption says the following
    "I hate driving...but I need a car to get to work...but I hate my job, but I gotta make car payments."

    It becomes a vicious cycle....
  35.  
    This is the crap I used to deal with in Santa Clarita - a town that thinks it is bicycle friendly as it hosted the Tour of California. Trust me, it isn't! This is a place where, at a meeting about a bike path, the planning commission was THREATENED about putting in a path along Bouquet Creek. This town isn't even car friendly - eight lane roadways with no shoulders! Or how about 1/4 mile long turn lanes? Triple left turns anyone? Roadside bike paths with multiple driveways? Makes me glad I live here now.
    [[_linker_]]
    Decoro Bike Lanes...
    [[_linker_]]

    [[_linker_]]
    More anti-bike
    [[_linker_]]
    When it was striped...
    • CommentAuthorbilld
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    mike_ballard:http://www.the-signal.com/news/archive/17471/
    Doug SinkThe bike lanes are useless to me - I cannot ride a bike seven miles to work in the morning.
    It's unlikely that he can't. It's more likely that he won't, for whatever reason. I'm not saying that he should have to. I just don't like the word "cannot" here. For most people, it's a decision to drive rather than bike (or take public transportation, or carpool or telecommute etc.). Relatively few people of working age "can't" ride 7 miles each way. When I tell non-cyclists that I ride 9 miles to work, a lot of them act like that's a long way. It really isn't that tough. Most people could do it if they simply chose to.

    I'm 46 years old. I have asthma and arthritis. I ride 9 miles each way to work and back every day. I know I could handle 20 miles each way if I had to (I know this because I managed to ride 300 miles in one week this last summer). Unless he's got some serious medical issue, or needs to drive for work, he can probably manage 7 miles on a bike. If I can do it, then most people can.

    I expect that bike lanes will encourage more riders. His complaint that he hadn't seen bikes there before is based upon a road with no bike lanes, which tends to discourage a lot of potential riders -- especially if the right lane was not particularly wide. Even after the lanes were installed, it takes a while for people to start using them. It could take a while before there are a lot of people using the lanes. Traffic congestion could actually encourage more people to bike.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVelo Cult
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    haha, i used to ride Santa Clarita all the time Mike. lived in Porter Ranch for 24 years. there sure is a lot of nice riding in the outskirts of Santa Clarita but the city itself was bad. i loved all the canyons.
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    Excellent turnout and excellent results in Clairemont last night. The bike lanes are staying!
    It made a difference that so many bicyclists were there. It showed the vocal opponents in Clairemont that people care about the bike lanes and that many people think they are a good thing. Thank you to all the cyclists who showed up!!
    Turns out the bike lanes were installed as traffic calming, because of the high number of crashes on Clairemont. (46 crashes, 33 serious, ~3 deaths) in the last six years. The traffic engineers have been trying various things to try to get people to do slower - enforcement, signage, minor striping changes, but none of those were working, so now they are trying the bike lanes.
    The community folks were mostly aggravated by three things -
    1. the changes went in with no community notice or input. a valid concern!
    2. the changes are causing congestion in morning and evening rush hour. I think this one is oversold, but I don't have the data yet. so far I haven't seen any congestion, but I don't live in that neck of the woods.
    3. the changes are pushing traffic onto the residential streets because people are cutting through the neighborhoods to avoid Clairemont Drive. The city is going to do some studies to determine if this is actually happening - they aren't sure yet.
    I think these concerns are going to be addressed by the city, and I feel confident the bike lanes are going to stay. Especially if people start riding on them!
    Not sure if Mike conveyed the jist of my comments on the bike lanes - the traffic engineer was talking about how the bike lane provides some extra space for a motorist who drops a CD or gets distracted in the car, and the bike lanes give them a couple extra seconds before they hit the parked cars. My hope is that there will be bicyclists in those lanes, so they're not really available for cars to use as a 'idiot recovery area'. :-)
    Anyway, the bike lanes are there to stay for now. Thanks again for everyone's coming out to the meeting - you all made a BIG DIFFERENCE for San Diego last night. Good job!!!
    Kathy
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    P.S. Two things -

    1. County road standards at Planning Commission this morning. Wish me luck!
    2. Got a call from Todd Gloria's office re: setting up a meeting with City Attorney's office, Police Dept, and the Coalition to see about using the City Attorney's opinion on the Woolley case to educate police re: 21202. Good job letter writers!!!
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilliam
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    Hey, if there was a bike lane somewhere, and then it was removed to put parking spots: how can I tell if it was done legally?
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    William, it probably depends on the location. If it's the city of SD, first call would be to the appropriate council office. Other cities it would probably be to the city manager's office.
    Wanna share where it was?
    •  
      CommentAuthorKathy
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    Got my butt kicked at Planning Commission. They still don't understand that bicyclists need to be on EVERY road, not just the ones they think we'll be riding on. *sigh*
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilliam
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009 edited
     
    Kathy, it is the middle of bum f*ck nowhere for most. Best to call it the west bound side of imperial, approx 6368 imperial. For several years there was a lane, then suddenly, 3 hour max parking. Lots of overnight parking, which I complained to the SD Sherrif about ~ who told me that parking is a CHP issue. Who knew?

    Anyone, not a big priority ~ but, the lane was removed and I think it is listed as a bike route on one of the maps.

    The lane starts again around 6296 Imperial.
    •  
      CommentAuthoril Pirati
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009 edited
     
    .

    .Kathy
    2. Got a call from Todd Gloria's office re: setting up a meeting with City Attorney's office, Police Dept, and the Coalition to see about using the City Attorney's opinion on the Woolley case to educate police re: 21202. Good job letter writers!!!


    That's excellent! Please keep us posted. If you need any more info from me, please let me know. I'd be happy to provide whatever I can. Very good result!
    •  
      CommentAuthorbëany
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    .Kathy
    2. Got a call from Todd Gloria's office re: setting up a meeting with City Attorney's office, Police Dept, and the Coalition to see about using the City Attorney's opinion on the Woolley case to educate police re: 21202. Good job letter writers!!!


    That is fabulous news! The cops should also patrol once a week on bicycles in non-uniform. Ticketing all the naughty drivers will bring in tons of revenue for the city.
  46.  
    I've been quite persistent in calling about people violating the no parking before 9am rule on Park Blvd, especially near the Naval Hospital. They have a tendency to park right next to the signs, so, their own stupidity. So far, I've seen quite a few tickets. So, I've been helpful with revenue generation.
    • CommentAuthorbikingbill
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    My email about the 'improvements' to Solana Beach/101 .. dated April 4, 2004

    To: Whoever promoted the rail-trail along 101 in North San Diego County.

    Hey, thanks for getting that "multi-use" path funded and launched. Today I noted that in Solana Beach ... from Loma Santa Fe north to the Cardiff Beach ... the road has been reconstructed (new curbs) to totally remove the extra width that was previously occupied by the bike lane.

    I guess the plan is that cyclists will be asked to ride on the "multi-use" path, sharing the road with alert pedestrians and considerate dog owners. This is on a segment that I routinely ride at 25 mph or better.

    I look forward to the adventure that awaits me. Meanwhile, I'm learning to enjoy and recognize the various tones produced by car and truck horns. I'm almost at the point where I can recognize the actual make and models of vehicles that now find me occupying their 45 mph speed limit lane.


    The lanes did return, but as with La Costa Ave, about 50% of the bike lane width was gone.
  48.  
    I also should add that I am working on getting a decent amount of bicycle parking at the new County Operations Center, where I may have to work in 2011. My goal is to have lockers for regulars and racks for everyone else, but plenty of both.
  49.  
    Kathy:Got my butt kicked at Planning Commission. They still don't understand that bicyclists need to be on EVERY road, not just the ones they think we'll be riding on. *sigh*


    Kathy,
    I posted CAR-SICK in the book thread wherein in it talks about how de-motorisation and transport diversification has improved traffic congestion.
    Check out some of the video clips posted in the Portland, Copenhagen, and video threads. I hope this will be useful in showing to Traffic planning staffs.
    Streetfilms also provides DVDs to show to traffic planning comittees. This is a very useful tool.
    Seeing is believing and believing is seeing.

    Thank you for keeping us posted.
    • CommentAuthorSerge
    • CommentTimeDec 18th 2009
     
    Kathy:P.S. Two things -

    2. Got a call from Todd Gloria's office re: setting up a meeting with City Attorney's office, Police Dept, and the Coalition to see about using the City Attorney's opinion on the Woolley case to educate police re: 21202. Good job letter writers!!!

    Too bad the only issued addressed in the letter is the basic condition underlying 21202 (cyclist needs to be moving slower than other traffic at that time for it to apply). I don't think that's the relevant issue in most cases of alleged 21202 violation. Further, the letter itself suggests such a cyclist might be in violation of the basic speed law, 22350, so arguably the only lesson to be learned from all this for these police is to cite such a cyclist with 22350 rather than 21202.

    But at least it could be used as way to get in the door, and as an opportunity to discuss all the other issues, in particular what all the exceptions to 21202 are, why they are in there, and what that implies about safe, appropriate and lawful traffic cycling.

251 to 300 of 971

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 20
  13. >