<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: L.A.&#8217;s Draft Bike Plan Enters &#8220;Civic Enragement&#8221; Phase</title>
	<atom:link href="http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/</link>
	<description>Covering Los Angeles&#039;s livable streets movement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:06:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ernie Strawn</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-37821</link>
		<dc:creator>Ernie Strawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 05:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-37821</guid>
		<description>Seems to me we are asking people who do not ride bicycles to improve things
for bicyclists. How about not supporting these people even if they claim
to be on our side, but do not ride!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems to me we are asking people who do not ride bicycles to improve things<br />
for bicyclists. How about not supporting these people even if they claim<br />
to be on our side, but do not ride!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: User1</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-35801</link>
		<dc:creator>User1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 06:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-35801</guid>
		<description>I really think this planning commission lacks a vision of what their end product should look like.  I would like to offer them examples of four cities that have an impressive bike plan in place.  Feel free to correct me if I&#039;m wrong in my observation, but I like &lt;a href=&quot;http://bike2015plan.org/execsumm.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Chicago’s bike plan&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cityofseattle.net/transportation/bikemaster.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Seattle&#039;s&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgov.org/site/bac_index.asp?id=11525&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;San Francisco&#039;s&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bike/mp.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;and New York&#039;s&lt;/a&gt;  bike plan.  I would say Chicago&#039;s topography and demographics are about the closest to what LA has.  LA is about twice as large in square miles, and about 25% more in population.  It wouldn&#039;t be out of the realm of expectations to want a plan produced that looks like theirs, would it?

(hope the links work)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really think this planning commission lacks a vision of what their end product should look like.  I would like to offer them examples of four cities that have an impressive bike plan in place.  Feel free to correct me if I&#8217;m wrong in my observation, but I like <a href="http://bike2015plan.org/execsumm.html" rel="nofollow">Chicago’s bike plan</a>, <a href="http://www.cityofseattle.net/transportation/bikemaster.htm" rel="nofollow">Seattle&#8217;s</a>, <a href="http://www.sfgov.org/site/bac_index.asp?id=11525" rel="nofollow">San Francisco&#8217;s</a>, <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bike/mp.shtml" rel="nofollow">and New York&#8217;s</a>  bike plan.  I would say Chicago&#8217;s topography and demographics are about the closest to what LA has.  LA is about twice as large in square miles, and about 25% more in population.  It wouldn&#8217;t be out of the realm of expectations to want a plan produced that looks like theirs, would it?</p>
<p>(hope the links work)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jessica</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-35281</link>
		<dc:creator>Jessica</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-35281</guid>
		<description>fyi - Joe Mamma - awesome name, lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>fyi &#8211; Joe Mamma &#8211; awesome name, lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SoapBoxLA</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-35091</link>
		<dc:creator>SoapBoxLA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:27:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-35091</guid>
		<description>Joe, the Draft Bike Plan opens with a vision that holds respect and consideration up as the ideals that will lead us to the promised land. Those responsible for the Draft Bike Plan promptly demonstrate disrespect and a lack of consideration for the cycling community with the flawed process that prevents robust civic engagement.

Show yourself and the cycling community some respect and simply support the request for appropriate consideration.

The local Piggly Wiggly must go through a much longer process of public comment and civic engagement when it simply asks for a variance in order to move its awning closer to the sidewalk.

The Draft Bike Plan is a document of such potential significance, it deserves to be enhanced, not diluted. 

But moving past the process, what&#039;s it going to take to get something like the Long Beach standard into the LA Draft Bike Plan:

&quot;Consider every street as a street that bicyclists will use.&quot;

Let&#039;s move from soft words and establish a baseline standard of absolute accommodation. It&#039;s happening at the Federal level, it&#039;s happening at the State level, why not here in Los Angeles?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe, the Draft Bike Plan opens with a vision that holds respect and consideration up as the ideals that will lead us to the promised land. Those responsible for the Draft Bike Plan promptly demonstrate disrespect and a lack of consideration for the cycling community with the flawed process that prevents robust civic engagement.</p>
<p>Show yourself and the cycling community some respect and simply support the request for appropriate consideration.</p>
<p>The local Piggly Wiggly must go through a much longer process of public comment and civic engagement when it simply asks for a variance in order to move its awning closer to the sidewalk.</p>
<p>The Draft Bike Plan is a document of such potential significance, it deserves to be enhanced, not diluted. </p>
<p>But moving past the process, what&#8217;s it going to take to get something like the Long Beach standard into the LA Draft Bike Plan:</p>
<p>&#8220;Consider every street as a street that bicyclists will use.&#8221;</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s move from soft words and establish a baseline standard of absolute accommodation. It&#8217;s happening at the Federal level, it&#8217;s happening at the State level, why not here in Los Angeles?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ubrayj02</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-34981</link>
		<dc:creator>ubrayj02</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-34981</guid>
		<description>Enough about the process! The &quot;substance&quot; of this plan is a flaccid swipe of damp paper stuck on the bottom of a DOT staffer&#039;s shoe.

We need specific types of data collection (on a calendar) mandated in the plan. We need full environmental review to allow staff to plan for bike lanes that negatively impact Level Of Service for cars. We need a set of ordinances drafted for the council to approve with this plan that will increase cycling and reduce automobile dependence.

Box isn&#039;t wrong in his critiques. The process has been pretty awful to watch unfold and the substance of the plan is similarly flawed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Enough about the process! The &#8220;substance&#8221; of this plan is a flaccid swipe of damp paper stuck on the bottom of a DOT staffer&#8217;s shoe.</p>
<p>We need specific types of data collection (on a calendar) mandated in the plan. We need full environmental review to allow staff to plan for bike lanes that negatively impact Level Of Service for cars. We need a set of ordinances drafted for the council to approve with this plan that will increase cycling and reduce automobile dependence.</p>
<p>Box isn&#8217;t wrong in his critiques. The process has been pretty awful to watch unfold and the substance of the plan is similarly flawed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Mamma</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-34971</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Mamma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:08:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-34971</guid>
		<description>word, on the number of meetings. 1 meeting per 1,000,000 people? how many people are employed in ladot working on bike stuff? weren&#039;t they hiring another planner earlier this year? what ever happened to that? what do those people do all day? i will call all my city reps on this one.

but sr. box, i&#039;m confused by para 3 of the &quot;content&quot; section. with regards to colored bike lanes, the la plan is saying cars should watch out for cyclists in colored lanes. how is that different from the long beach colored sharrows? and no &quot;local sensitivity?&quot; i feel like i&#039;ve seen this critique elsewhere in your posts. i asked around, and my friend said the consultants have an LA office with staff who bike all over los angeles. are you calling my friend a liar?

seriously, this is a draft plan. isn&#039;t the whole idea for us to send in our comments and questions so they can be addressed? (by the way, you don&#039;t need a $450k plan to answer the issues you raised in para 5. they are 1) duh: joggers and dog-walkers go wherever they want; 2) no: bike lanes are cool, mopeds are lame; 3) yes: the concept is valid, moreover, it happens in reality; and 4) crosswalks are like hot lava, touch them on a bike and die.) 

i&#039;m okay with critiquing process--for now. call your neighborhood council. call your community planning group. call your councilman! anyone who might have leverage. but please, PLEASE, do not go to my public meeting and complain further about process. i don&#039;t want to hear it there. the fact that we have limited time for involvement makes all the time more valuable, and i, for one, want to use it to improve the plan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>word, on the number of meetings. 1 meeting per 1,000,000 people? how many people are employed in ladot working on bike stuff? weren&#8217;t they hiring another planner earlier this year? what ever happened to that? what do those people do all day? i will call all my city reps on this one.</p>
<p>but sr. box, i&#8217;m confused by para 3 of the &#8220;content&#8221; section. with regards to colored bike lanes, the la plan is saying cars should watch out for cyclists in colored lanes. how is that different from the long beach colored sharrows? and no &#8220;local sensitivity?&#8221; i feel like i&#8217;ve seen this critique elsewhere in your posts. i asked around, and my friend said the consultants have an LA office with staff who bike all over los angeles. are you calling my friend a liar?</p>
<p>seriously, this is a draft plan. isn&#8217;t the whole idea for us to send in our comments and questions so they can be addressed? (by the way, you don&#8217;t need a $450k plan to answer the issues you raised in para 5. they are 1) duh: joggers and dog-walkers go wherever they want; 2) no: bike lanes are cool, mopeds are lame; 3) yes: the concept is valid, moreover, it happens in reality; and 4) crosswalks are like hot lava, touch them on a bike and die.) </p>
<p>i&#8217;m okay with critiquing process&#8211;for now. call your neighborhood council. call your community planning group. call your councilman! anyone who might have leverage. but please, PLEASE, do not go to my public meeting and complain further about process. i don&#8217;t want to hear it there. the fact that we have limited time for involvement makes all the time more valuable, and i, for one, want to use it to improve the plan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ubrayj02</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-34841</link>
		<dc:creator>ubrayj02</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:35:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-34841</guid>
		<description>To answer &quot;What now?&quot; I propose the following:

(1) Prevent city council approval/adoption of this plan. Take dedicated bikeways money (not affected by slump in Genneral Funds due to budget crisis), fire a staffer or two, and run the Bike Plan through a full EIR and city-wide community outreach program. Build into the plan measures of roadway performance that will count bicycles (and pedestrians and transit users) and the regular collection of data regarding injuries, deaths, etc. on any of Los Angeles&#039; streets.

(2) Lobby the mayor&#039;s office hard to wrestle some political focus on this, the greenest of transportation modes. With the mayor&#039;s mandate, and a properly engaged Transportation Deputy, bicyclists can make changes in the LADOT without needing to jump through legislative hoops with the council. The mayor can, more or less, issue an executive order (or whatever it is called in the City) and have a DOT policy changed.

(3) MOVE BIKEWAYS MONEY OUT OF THE LADOT. The Bikeways Coordinator(s) need to be in the mayor&#039;s office, or a deputy to the head of Planning - the only office(s) with overarching legal authority to make a decision like this: &quot;This street&#039;s quality of life is measurably worse with this volume of cars, we need to calm car traffic and increase other modes here.&quot;

tl;dr: RRRRRAAAAAAGGGGGEEEE!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To answer &#8220;What now?&#8221; I propose the following:</p>
<p>(1) Prevent city council approval/adoption of this plan. Take dedicated bikeways money (not affected by slump in Genneral Funds due to budget crisis), fire a staffer or two, and run the Bike Plan through a full EIR and city-wide community outreach program. Build into the plan measures of roadway performance that will count bicycles (and pedestrians and transit users) and the regular collection of data regarding injuries, deaths, etc. on any of Los Angeles&#8217; streets.</p>
<p>(2) Lobby the mayor&#8217;s office hard to wrestle some political focus on this, the greenest of transportation modes. With the mayor&#8217;s mandate, and a properly engaged Transportation Deputy, bicyclists can make changes in the LADOT without needing to jump through legislative hoops with the council. The mayor can, more or less, issue an executive order (or whatever it is called in the City) and have a DOT policy changed.</p>
<p>(3) MOVE BIKEWAYS MONEY OUT OF THE LADOT. The Bikeways Coordinator(s) need to be in the mayor&#8217;s office, or a deputy to the head of Planning &#8211; the only office(s) with overarching legal authority to make a decision like this: &#8220;This street&#8217;s quality of life is measurably worse with this volume of cars, we need to calm car traffic and increase other modes here.&#8221;</p>
<p>tl;dr: RRRRRAAAAAAGGGGGEEEE!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SoapBoxLA</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-34801</link>
		<dc:creator>SoapBoxLA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-34801</guid>
		<description>On Saturday, October 3, 2009, Dr. Alex Thompson will be presenting the Cyclists&#039; Bill of Rights to the NC Action Summit, calling for an endorsement and enlisting them in the campaign to support cycling as a viable transportation solution.

http://NCActionSummit.com

Right Now! We need your help! LA City College in East Hollywood @ 10:30 am for the Cyclists&#039; Bill of Rights and citywide action to make LA a great place to ride!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Saturday, October 3, 2009, Dr. Alex Thompson will be presenting the Cyclists&#8217; Bill of Rights to the NC Action Summit, calling for an endorsement and enlisting them in the campaign to support cycling as a viable transportation solution.</p>
<p><a href="http://NCActionSummit.com" rel="nofollow">http://NCActionSummit.com</a></p>
<p>Right Now! We need your help! LA City College in East Hollywood @ 10:30 am for the Cyclists&#8217; Bill of Rights and citywide action to make LA a great place to ride!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ramonchu</title>
		<link>http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/09/29/l-a-s-draft-bike-plan-enters-civic-enragement-phase/comment-page-1/#comment-34791</link>
		<dc:creator>ramonchu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=12801#comment-34791</guid>
		<description>bummer...but what now?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bummer&#8230;but what now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

