Cars are exceptionally good at staying off sidewalks…. but not off of bike lanes… or out of crosswalks.

I have found that on rural roads without decent sidewalks, the safest way to walk is to walk right down the middle of a lane in the opposite direction to traffic. The cars *never* fail to see you and they get the hell out of the way.

There are places where the safest way to cross the road is against the light, or in the middle of the block, or diagonally through the intersection. :-P

I’m not sure what the lesson of this is. Be very careful how you design things, I guess.

Do you want your 5 year old or your mom to go riding down Ballona path, or even you with 100 lbs of cargo? Give it a try and get back to me.

Or do you want your daughter or mom to get smacked by a bike going 30 mph down a blind ramp?

Regarding the LA paths – I lived in LA in the early 80s and commuted to work from Venice to Culver City on the Santa Monica trail and the Ballona trail. The Ballona trail was just as dangerous then – so dangerous I stopped using it. I can’t believe it is still so bad 25 years later.

I eventually quite using part of the Santa Monica trail, too. There were a few spots where bicyclists entered onto the trail on ramps around blind corners. Too many near collisions.

I eventually felt the streets were safer. Still do.

I adamantly disagree that this pathway should be considered dangerous.”

dennis, are you serious? You must be; you have taken the time to lock the caps in announcing yourself.

The Orange Line racked up 32 (thirty-two) collisions in its first year. The 32nd was done on the very day the Orange Line celebrated it’s one-year anniversary.

“To the best of my knowledge no one has been killed by a Orange line bus to date either.”

I suppose being merely maimed is just fine, correct?

Finally, you are a male, and an obnoxiously ignorant one at that. I too am a guy, and I like to employ my 6’3 scottish/brooklyn/alabama attitude as I see fit. As such, I get pestered by very few people. Even the cops know to not bother me (for the most part; I tend to inadvertently bait the stupid ones), whereas my wife (who is female, natch) rides Metro as well as bikes frequently— and as a result gets pestered a lot.

Get out of your bubble, boy; there is a world far larger than the blinkered perspective you so whimsically present.

There needs to be a far better bike plan than the scraps thrown out the window by those who view Los Angeles from their taxpayer-paid SUV fleet.

I decided to go ahead and do the research, as this was often cited by VC’s as reasons to not build bike infrastructure.That same study showed ridership increased and that the “increase in accidents” was less than that of ridership. In other words, let’s say in April you had 100 people bicycling and 1 accident w/no bike facilities. In May, you have 1,000 people bicycling and 2 accidents w/newly installed facilities. That’s a 100% increase in accidents from the prior month…which is better? You see what I’m getting at?

The studies conclusion states that the benefits far outweigh the risks, which is why it’s actually been used in Europe to add more cycle tracks, not remove them. We interviewed Soren Jensen, the studies author, to discuss this further. You can read it here: http://bikefriendlyoc.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/ask-the-experts-s%c3%b8ren-underlien-jensen-and-dr-lon-d-roberts-phd/

On the other hand, some of those meandering trails on the side of the road that you see in places like Valencia and Walnut are fine for both commuters and recreational users. In the morning you will see more commuters, in the afternoon and on weekends more recreational users. Since they parallel major streets you do have the option of using the arterial road, which of course has traffic zooming by at 55 mph, but may be safer because they also have wide lanes and no on-street parking. This gives riders a choice based on their comfort level.

I adamantly disagree that this pathway should be considered dangerous. One of the reasons for my saying this is that when the light is triggered to cross an intersection either by the Orange line bus or by someone hitting the pedestrian button, the vehicle traffic is stopped from turning right or left and are kept far away from the busway or crosswalk. This is done by flashing lights that let drivers know that a bus is approaching and also several intersections have cameras that will flash a powerful light at drivers who encroach. Believe me I am not taking this pathway because I like to go slower than if I would ride in the street. I ride it because it’s more relaxing and safer than riding in the street. That’s right I said safer. I defy anyone to show statistics that would indicate that the Orange line pathway is in anyway less safe than riding in any street in Los Angeles. To the best of my knowledge no one has been killed by a Orange line bus to date either.

As to the possibility of being helplessly trapped or accosted, I have found the most dangerous part of the route is going through Balboa park at night with a fox and on another occasion a rat startling me by running across the bike path directly in front of me, an owl taking flight several times upon my approach and rabbits (hey, didn’t they read the sign that this is for bicycles only!). This is in a area with no sound walls or fences and it within a few feet of Victory Blvd. Of course you will not likely find this kind of wild life when you stick to just riding the streets. Although I have heard that Volkswagen will start making the Rabbit again and there is that occasional Jaguar to look out for. But I would rather take my chances of falling of my bike or getting bitten from these animals rather getting hit by a three thousand pound metal Rabbit moving at 40 miles an hour.

I consider the Orange line pathway to be a long recreational area or park with people walking their dog, jogging, roller skating, kids on tricycles and bicyclists who are mainly recreational, with a few commuting bicyclists like me.

The costs of putting in a bike pathway next to a waterway or mass transit line gets back little in terms of increased bicycle commuting. One of the reasons which was mentioned is that they don’t usually get you where you want to go. There are two community colleges and a high school next to the Orange line bike path, along with Costco. But you can get there quicker if you just took the Orange line bus. I use the Orange line pathway, but from day one I’ve always thought it was a waste of money in terms of transportation. As a recreational path it has merits.

whut?

Somebody call Holland — American wants their segregated bicycle facilities.

some of the arguments make sense, but we’re just talking about priorities, here — it’s not an either/or situation, it’s how much money goes towards each. we need to pick the best solutions that can work into our overall plan for making it easy and safe for people to bike. simple.

generally, i lean heavily towards on-street facilities, buffered, segregated, bike lanes — as opposed to ‘bike paths through the woods’. but those bike paths are often magnificent, and used heavily for commuting and recreational.

we should be trying to achieve a non-motorized world. keep our eyes there, and make funding/project decisions based on achieving that goal.

I am not from LA (thank god) but I feel that cycle paths are great greenways that can cut out suburban sprawl between city and country, for transportation and recreation.

I have also been to and cycled around Europe, and I was amazed at the arterial system of bike paths found for cycle commuters in the Netherlands. To get around the city, bike paths are useless, however to get into and out of the city, they can be greatly beneficial in reducing car travel for those who choose to live out of the city.