Making L.A. better for bicyclists: what should the city do?

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday is expected to approve an ambitious bicycle master plan that would add bike lanes to major arteries and call for 200 miles of new bicycle routes every five years.

The plan, reported in The Times by Kate Linthicum, lays out a long-term goal of 1,680 miles of interconnected bikeways. Figueroa Street, Wilshire Boulevard and Santa Monica Boulevard would all get bike lanes in the near future.

The plan won the support of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who became an advocate for the city's bicycling community after a turning taxicab jolted him off his bike. He convened a bicycle summit, launched a safety campaign and supported the city's first CicLAvia, which closed 7.5 miles of city streets to traffic for most of the day.

What do you think of the city's bike plan? Should the council approve it? Do you have any recommendations to make Los Angeles more bike-friendly? Tell us your thoughts below.

DOCUMENT: City of Los Angeles, "2010 Bicycle Plan"

Photo: With a backdrop of City Hall, cyclists cruise along Spring Street during the car-free CicLAvia. Credit: Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[lwps]

Make a bold move, such as ban cars from certain streets completely. Do this right away. It doesn't have to be a big major street, but just enough so that people could see how cool it is.

[Alan]

ridgerunner has the right answer. Well done.

Use of secondary streets a block off the main artery is the way to go.

[Joe]

Yeah the bike lanes sound like a great idea until it rains, or its too cold or too hot or the wind is too strong or you have to stop at the grocery store on the way home. Bike commuting will NEVER work in a city where most people commute at least 20 miles one way.

[UrbanReason]

Wow, I'm glad to see so many positive comments about this here. I can't wait until this moves forward. With our good weather and unusually wide city streets, there's nothing preventing LA from outdoing the rest of the country except for selfish, stubborn, impatient, backward thinking individuals with poor understanding of the potential benefits bike infrastructure would present to pedestrians, cyclists and motorists alike.

@ridgerunner - I think a lot of cyclists have actually been the ones pushing for lanes on main arteries. That's primarily what the backbone network that garnered so much support (and made its way into the plan) was. I agree that it can be more scary to ride on main arteries with poorly designed bike lanes, but it's much better for day-to-day commuting and errands as well as for local businesses when bike lanes run on main streets.

@Joe. I know it's easy to say things like that when you don't see the value in cycling for yourself. One could bike that distance, though, as fast as most people could drive it in LA. During a normal day it can easily take an hour to cover 15 miles in LA, a distance easily bikable in that time. But even if you'd personally never commute 20 miles by bike, just imagine if cycling were a safe and viable alternative for those of us who DON'T commute 20 miles a day, or when we run errands or make short trips. We might make your drive a lot more pleasant by easing congestion. Of course you'd have to be patient, it would take several years for enough commuters to feel comfortable enough biking to make the change and begin easing congestion, but that is the goal. In the end everyone wins from this situation. And come on, don't be silly about the rain. Tens of thousands of people chose to commute by bike in Copenhagen and many other cites across the world during snow and ice - I think most of us would learn to use a cheap raincoat. We have it pretty good by comparison.

[UrbanReason]

Also, not to target @Joe specifically, but when people make comments like:

"Yeah the bike lanes sound like a great idea until it rains, or its too cold or too hot or the wind is too strong or you have to stop at the grocery store on the way home"

It seems like you think the city just came up with what they think is some brilliant idea or way to waste money. But dude, thousands of cycling or would-be-cycling commuters and ordinary citizens across the city have been volunteering their time, going to meetings to contribute to this plan, pushing for this, advocating for this, telling their friends and family about it, doing whatever they can to make it happen. This isn't some wild hair some city official came up with, citizens have been fighting for this. Do you really think the people fighting for this, who probably already ride every day - rain or shine, are really going to wimp out when it rains? And SO WHAT if they do? I don't get what the problem is? So a few regular cycling commuters drive or take transit the 50 days of the year the weather isn't to their liking - but the other 300 we'll be out of traffic, out of your hair, reducing pollution, thinking forward, and helping to improve the quality of life for all Angelinos. I just don't understand the point of comments like these.

[Mcgibby]

Where was this idea before it was too late? This city always does things half-*ssed and after there is a problem...too late.

[Scott Zwartz]

I wish people would realize that the Bike Plan is not a Bike Plan -- It protects motorists from bikes as much as it protects bikers from us drivers.

Bike lanes serve a purpose first identified in the 1915 LA Traffic Study -- different modes of transportation should be separated. The need to separate fixed rail transit (trolleys) from automobile traffic is the real reason the Red Car is gone. People prefer to believe in conspiracy theories about GM rather than read the actual history. I digress.

Bikes and cars are immiscible like oil and water. When bikes have their own lanes, they won't be zipping upon on me silently when I open the driver's door nor will they "magically" appear in the parking lane when I want to turn right. When those damn nuisances have their own lane, then I will know where they are and I can protect my car from them.

OK, I am old and ft and can't ride a bike any more. Still, I think separating bikes from cars was a good principle in 1915 when the city established the Separation Principle, and I think it is still good about 100 years later when we may actually separate the bikes from the cars. Both drivers and cyclists should thank Stephen Box for his work on bringing about this first step,

(There is no truth to the rumor that Mr. Box paid the cabbie to run Mayor Tony off the road. I know it isn't true as I just made it up now)

[Dwight Jones]

Build bike lanes ten feet in the air, one above the other, directionally opposite. Use aluminum frames and hang them over and along sidewalks, on less travelled roads, through verdant areas.

Cheap to build, safe, and much less interfacing with cars.

[WasDaMadderYou]

So there's like 10 cyclists who want this? Morons, what we need is more roads for more cars!

[J in Pasadena]

The first thing the city can do to support bicycling is to reinstate the Acura L.A. Bike Tour, the massive bike ride that starts the morning of the L.A. Marathon. Despite being one of the largest bike rides in the country, drawing thousands of local cyclists and promoting an entirely wholesome spirit, the city canceled the ride without a second thought for the past two years. If Los Angeles were truly concerned about cyclists, events like this that support the sport would not be canceled casually and needlessly.

If you wonder why Crank Mob and Midnight Ridazz organize their own rides, this is why. Los Angeles has been a city at war with cyclists, from the police harassment of peaceful riders by arrogant, misguided (and out of control) cops to drivers who routinely cut off and treat riders like the enemy to the lack of any cogent civic support for cycling related activities. It's really a shame in this land of faux environmentalism and rampant emissions that an activity that promises so much to make our environment better is so disregarded.

This is a token gesture, and one I feel where the city will not live up to its promises. L.A., you'd better plan on some more massive, unpermitted rides -- inconvenient as they may be -- until you get your head screwed on straight.

[Alann]

LA could become vastly more bike friendly if bicyclists (and I am one) were less arrogant, learned the rules of the road, and just opened their eyes and acted as if they had a brain.

I have only been injured or nearly injured by careless and clueless fellow bicyclists.

[Pt1]

Easy: Start enforcing traffic laws (remember those?). Raise fines on motorists for running stop signs or cutting off cyclists to bank-breaking levels. $2000 to start. Seriously.

The consequences of NOT doing these things: Nobody feels safe to ride a bike in the absolute best bike-riding weather in the world!

[Jack Myers]

One difference between Northern California and LA/OC is simply a matter of painted-on street lanes. In LA, where there's a traffic signal and a left turn lane, the far side of the intersection often has a short painted-on merge lane. This is extremely dangerous territory for a straight-ahead bicyclist because the drivers who are turning right on red have their attention focused on merging and there's not enough room in that lane for both a car and a bicycle. I never encountered striping like that in the bicycle-friendly Palo Alto area.

[Tom]

Political correctness run amok.

[Sherilyn]

I think it's a great idea. I'm a little tired of almost being run over on the side walks by bike riders - I think they definitely need their own lanes.

[Mia E. Harney]

Yes, Los Angeles should add many more miles of bicycle lanes, because this is a clean way to exercise. Cyclists should not need to be wary of wreckless drivers, since a driver should not cross the white line into the bike lane.

[Jim]

Motorists hate cyclists mainly because they see that we can afford to travel at a slightly slower rate of speed since we are not beholden to an angry boss at the local car dealership or minimart. They also despise cyclists because they can see our physic is toned and attractive while the motorist's body is basically good material for the next season of "The Biggest Loser." Cyclists enjoy an ebullient lifestyle that does not pollute. In LA we all breath in the same pollution-but cyclists exhale the solution.

-Jim