Bicyclists can review proposed new bike lanes for L.A [Updated]

[Updated at 9:20 a.m. Thursday: L.A. city planning officials said today that there is no deadline for reviewing the bike lane plans. They have not yet set a date for when the review period will end.]

Cyclists across L.A. have until June 12 to review and offer suggestions to city planning officials on proposed new bike lanes that would traverse the city.

City planning officials released the proposed maps last week, showing where the new bike lanes and pathways would be built on neighborhood streets in the Valley, the Westside, South L.A. and downtown.

Currently, there are 134 miles of bike paths and 321 miles of bike lanes in the city. Bike paths normally are located along flood channels and bike lanes along city streets.

Members of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition expressed disappointment today that more lanes were not proposed along major streets, which would allow cyclists to connect from one major point of interest to another, said spokeswoman Aurisha Smolarski.

City planning officials say putting bike lanes on major streets would mean removing auto lanes or parking spaces to make room for cyclists.

“While local connector networks could be improved by the proposed changes, major connectivity issues within the city remain unaddressed,” Smolarski said in a statement. “We are disappointed with the process and the current draft, but we see this as an opportunity to educate and influence the city to create positive movement toward meeting the needs of cyclists.”

-- Ruben Vives

Photo: Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Pablo]

Wow! The City is looking to lay off potentially thousands of workers, but somehow there's money to create new bike lanes ...

[DA in LA]

Well, that's discouraging. If the powers that be consider Vine to be an established bike route, we're in trouble. More "bike routes" like Vine and all of us riders should be dead within a couple of years

[Frankenbike]

As a cycling commuter, I'm most disappointed in the lack of Westside north/south bicycle lanes being seriously proposed. Centinella, for example, is the most seriously dangerous road I've ridden on, and I do it several times a week. The worst of the worst on that street is the area between Braddock and Jefferson Blvd that bracket the 90 freeway.

It's not that bike lanes are a panacea. When I used to commute from north Mar Vista to the Fairfax area along Venice Blvd., the bike lanes were often blocked by delivery vehicles, buses and trash cans on trash day. Cars would often block the bike lanes while waiting to turn right instead of pulling all the way into the designated right turn lane.

Unless some serious enforcement comes with occluding the lanes, they might as well not be there. The bike lanes have to be exclusively for bicycle riding use, and any other use must be cited for them to have their designed utility. And bus drivers need to be trained not to block the lanes as well, and to make sure the lane is clear of bicycles before they turn into traffic.

[B. Guzman]

Regarding: "...connect from one major point of interest to another."

The real thing the city and community of Los Angeles needs to realize is the streets auto drivers use to get to work and home are the same streets I bicycle between my home and my job. It's not so much major points of interest for recreation, it is daily life in Los Angeles.

[jackie]

This plan is, unfortunately, totally inadequate. There aren't really any new bike lanes! We need to remove street parking and/or traffic lanes to make room for more bike lanes. What are a few parking spots compared to an integrated network of bike lanes throughout the city?

[TrueDis]

The quality of these maps is abysmal. It's hard to even tell what street it is without comparing to Google maps.

[Cathy]

I got excited when I saw the lines on the map going to the Metro stations, until I looked at the legend and black dotted
lines mean "suggested, but not feasable at this time."
There are no bike lanes near Sunset and Fairfax. Has anyone of those LA city planning officials ever biked along the "bike
routes?" I used to commute to work on Fountain Ave. east to
Sunset, then down Sunset to Cesar Chavez to Mission, 9 miles
each way. It was not physically very difficult, but it was
nerve-racking with the traffic and after numerous near-death
experiences, I had to give it up. Traffic is worse now (and
with these new condo projects coming along, it will be even
worse later).
I will pay $100 to the first city official who bikes down Fountain from end to end in rush hour traffic and lives!
Fountain is a narrow street which goes from 2 lanes to 4 and
back again often. Traffic is heavy and there is speeding
anywhere there is a open section of road. The side streets are almost all blind intersections where cars come out into the
intersection before stopping in order to be able to see cross
traffic. Cyclists don't have a chance!
Fairfax is listed as a "bike route," too. Fairfax is a speedway in the areas where there are up to 6 lines, especially in the lanes nearest to the curb. In the section from 3rd Street to Wilshire, Fairfax is very narrow, especially on the Northbound side. I see more cyclists on Fairfax now and there is not enough room to safely pass them in the right lane. When I am driving, I slow down and wait for a chance to get over to
the left lane. This usually results in an SUV behind me up my
tailpipe and honking and the poor cyclist has beat a hasty
retreat to the sidewalk where he can mow down a few pedestrians.
There is a bike lane on Santa Monica Blvd. between (I think)
Doheny and maybe Flores drive (a half-mile maybe). You could be riding east on Santa Monica Blvd in the bike lane and if you didn't know any better, suddenly you would lose the lane and be in a very narrow right lane and be fighting cars and buses for space.

[the dude abides]

Pablo said: "Wow! The City is looking to lay off potentially thousands of workers, but somehow there's money to create new bike lanes ..."

Or has money to waist on car infrastructure and parking. More bike and bus less cars. Get with it.

[ubrayj02]

Pablo,

The cost to build a bicycle transportation infrastructure is incredibly small, and the benefits of more Angelenos using more actives transportation to get around town are immense - less risk of death and injury on the road; lower incidence of long-term health troubles like heart disease and diabetes; and, slower cars speed and a revitalized pedestrian friendly street is good for small local business districts.

This isn't a "bonus" like extended hours at the public pool - we need bike facilities to move more people in a dense urban area while lowering the overhead for transportation and our high quality of life.

The plan cost $500,000, and the full build-out of our old plan would total $60 million. It is going to cost more than $1 billion to widen the 405 (a project which will do the opposite of what an on-street bike network would do).

[Lois Arkin]

Re: "City planning officials say putting bike lanes on major streets would mean removing auto lanes or parking spaces to make room for cyclists." OMG! That's exactly what's supposed to happen. I'd like to know who those city planning officials are, because there are a whole bunch of "with it" officials in City Planning that understand perfectly the importance of getting rid of auto amenities to make way for bikes. And for those who don't, Gail Goldberg needs to be on their tail mercilessly till they get with the program or get out of the way! Gail knows, and the other "with it" planners know that the road to reducing congestion, improving air quality, improving health, slowing our frenetic living patterns, improving the quality of life in LA, getting to know our neighbors, localizing and growing the economy, and lots more good stuff is--HOLD YOUR BREATH--taking more road space and parking spaces OUT! OUT! OUT! AWAY! DISAPPEARED! So forward march with bicycle planning that transforms more parking lanes to bicycle lanes, that closes down streets like Fountain to cars all together, making it a cross town bicycle street, that proceeds with the bike veloway to Pasadena, yes, that plans for many steps into the future: complete streets on all of our major avenues and boulevards(meaning dedicated lanes for non motorized transportation, along with pedestrians and public transit-- cars getting no more privilege than these other forms of transportation) and ultimately: dedicated bike lanes on all the freeways.

[rhode b lock]

"Wow! The City is looking to lay off potentially thousands of workers, but somehow there's money to create new bike lanes"

yup better get used to it. the more people get laid off the more people will be riding bikes.

[Rob Meyers]

Thought this was an interesting take on the posting ....

http://servelikesampras.blogspot.com/2009/06/los-angeles-bike-lanes.html

[Thomas]

The new bike plan for LA is embarrassing. There isn't even a connection from the city to the valley through Cahuenga pass??!!?! It's deemed "unfeasible"? Are you kidding me?!? When will the city understand that if you increase our ability to bike places that it will reduce traffic overall and make this a much more livable city. This is easy stuff people!!!
I wrote several people at LA city and got no response.