85th percentile law

[Roadblock]

What if anything has CABO done to repeal the 85th percentile law? Or
are you all on board with that nonsense too.

[DAG]

Weren't you the guy that told us, "10ft lanes cause drivers to slow to
semi-reasonable speeds. that's all you should care about.", right? So isn't
caring about the 85th percentile speed law outside the "all" we should care
about, since by your own words, narrowing lanes causes drivers to slow to
reasonable speeds? Please make up your mind, or better still find another
list to troll.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"CABOforum" group.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.

[Roadblock]

They are related. So what has CABO done on that front? anything? or do
you guys just sit around and jerk off about geometric design
principles and hazard reduction countermeasures.




or is it ok that speed limits be set at whatever the drivers want.

[Roadblock]

and then tell cyclists they should mix it up with 45mph traffic right?

[John Eldon]

For the record, I strongly endorse repeal of the 85th percentile law, which leads to speed creep. Speed IS the elephant in the room in traffic safety discussions.

John E.

--- On Tue, 5/22/12, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

[jimbaross]

I will be requesting that future submittals from Roadblock be blocked from appearing on CABO forum.  

Jim Baross
San Diego, CA
Sent from hard-to-type-on smart phone.
: -)

[Serge Issakov]

On the SD Cycling Forum we have a "must use real full name" rule.  I suggest the same on this forum... you should at least identify yourself in your signature if not in your email address.  That should all but eliminate the sniping posts.

Serge

[CycleCA]

I agree. This is god policy. Real names.

Bob Mack

On 5/23/12 8:32 AM, Serge Issakov wrote:
> On the SD Cycling Forum we have a "must use real full name" rule. I
> suggest the same on this forum... you should at least identify
> yourself in your signature if not in your email address. That should
> all but eliminate the sniping posts.
>
> Serge
>

--
Cycle California! Magazine
1702-L Meridian Ave. #289
San Jose, CA 95125
ph: 408-924-0270
fax: 408-292-3005
toll free: 888-292-5323
www.CycleCalifornia.com

Facebook: www.facebook.com/CycleCaliforniaMagazine

[Bob Shanteau]

On 5/23/2012 5:01 AM, John Eldon wrote:
> For the record, I strongly endorse repeal of the 85th percentile law, which leads to speed creep. Speed IS the elephant in the room in traffic safety discussions.

CABO has discussed the state's policy on setting speed limits before.
See my article:
<http://www.cabobike.org/2010/01/30/ask-the-traffic-engineer-how-are-speed-limits-set>

The data show that speeds increase over time independent of speed
limits. In my opinion, speed creep occurs largely due to the practice of
traffic court judges to allow a 10-12 mph leeway on speeding citations.
The reason they allow such a large leeway is the supposed inaccuracy of
radar cited by some motoring advocates:
<http://www.radarbusters.com/mistakesarticle.cfm>

I have found that working with the state's Judicial Council is the best
way to deal with the issue of decreasing the leeway given by traffic
court judges. Doing that is on my to-do list, but my list is already way
too long. During its annual meeting on Saturday I will be asking CABO to
form a transportation engineering committee to deal with issues like this.

Bob Shanteau
Transportation Engineering Liaison
California Association of Bicycling Organizations

[Roadblock]

I am known by Roadblock online and among advocates and cyclists in Los
Angeles and beyond.

My real name is Don Ward LCI 2931.

I don't use my real name for my google ID for security and privacy
concerns and do not wish to moving forward.
I wouldnt and don't hesitate to criticize CABO under my real name.

If this doesn't satisfy the requirements of the forum then I'll gladly
leave.

Sorry if I got too snarky last night, I was stewing over the fact that
6 friends in the last 2 months have become victims of hit and run
drivers and we've got an LADOT and LAPD advocating for speed limit
increases.

I believe in segregated facilities for roads that facilitate speeds of
more than 25mph which is practically every street in LA.
I ride vehicular because I have to but I've been enlightened by riding
across the netherlands and experiencing the safest cycling environment
in the world.

Lots of advocates point to CABO as an obstacle to safer facilities for
cyclists so I'm a little stand offish admittedly but I will tone it
down.

-roadblock

[Roadblock]

I am a member of the LAPD Bicycle Task force here in LA and according
to LAPD the number one solve for speed creep is engineering of the
roads. LAPD claims there are not enough resources to "hold the line"
on speed limits due to manufacturing of vehicles that are faster and
quicker over the years.

On May 23, 10:40 am, Bob Shanteau <rmsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/23/2012 5:01 AM, John Eldon wrote:
>
> > For the record, I strongly endorse repeal of the 85th percentile law, which leads to speed creep. Speed IS the elephant in the room in traffic safety discussions.
>
> CABO has discussed the state's policy on setting speed limits before.
> See my article:

> <http://www.cabobike.org/2010/01/30/ask-the-traffic-engineer-how-are-s...>

[Serge Issakov]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

My real name is Don Ward LCI 2931.

 

...

 

I believe in segregated facilities for roads that facilitate speeds of
more than 25mph which is practically every street in LA.
I ride vehicular because I have to but I've been enlightened by riding
across the netherlands and experiencing the safest cycling environment
in the world.

Lots of advocates point to CABO as an obstacle to safer facilities for
cyclists so I'm a little stand offish admittedly but I will tone it
down.

-roadblock

Hi Don,

I too would love to be able to travel by bicycle free of cars.  There is a reason they close roads to cars during races.  But here's my problem.  

First, I don't see us getting anything close to that in my lifetime (I'm 51).  

Second, something in between using the roads as drivers and having a car-free environment in which to ride -- being separated here and there in marginal facilities --  seems much worse than no separated facilities, especially when use of the separated facility is legally mandated.  These least problematic facilities are those along long stretches of road with no intersections or driveways.  But as soon as you're talking about an area with intersections or even driveways, riding in the road is much better, and that's all of the urban environment, and most of suburban environment.  

I mean if total separation with grade separated crossings are possible, that's one thing.  But that's normally not an option.  Yes?

Serge 

[roadblock]

I'm not asking to travel free of cars. I'm asking for segregated
facilities as they do in the Netherlands where they separate modes
when speed differentials are too great. I'm asking for traffic calming
where segregated facilities are not possible such as inner city
streets dense areas commercial zones etc.

Will this happen in either of our life times? I doubt it. But it has
to start somewhere even if it means less than perfect facilities to
"welcome" people out of their cars and onto bicycles. This is
happening right now in Los Angeles. Put in a buffered bike lane on
Spring st and the numbers go up. Put in a bike path that takes you to
the valley and people use it. Put in bike lanes and drivers respect
your space.

I DO appreciate that CABO defends our rights to use the roads as
vehicular cyclists. I WISH every driver would just slow down on their
own and respect my use of the full lane, but that isn't going to
happen in our lifetime either. Have to start with paint on the streets
to get the constiuency and normalization of cycling then improvement
of cycliing facilities until one day the Netherlands comes to the USA
and moms and kids ride bikes free of fear.

[Michael Graff]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:29 PM, roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

it has
to start somewhere even if it means less than perfect facilities to
"welcome" people out of their cars and onto bicycles.

I see an awful lot of facilities that must look very unwelcoming to non-cyclists.  For example, bike lanes that appear on one block, and disappear on the next block.  Bike lanes that vanish before an intersection and resume after the intersection.  Bike lanes that zig and zag as if painted by a drunken sailor.  Bike paths that don't go anywhere useful.  Bike path signals that give higher priority to motorized traffic.

It's a good thing I like cycling, or I wouldn't put up with all that half-baked junk.  Some of it, I've figured out how to avoid.

If we built diamond lanes to that same standard, there would be no carpoolers, except for a few carpooling enthusiasts.

[Roadblock]

I 100% agree.

car pool lanes were and are made just like that... they start then stop then go nowhere then start up...

but eventually they have been connecting. you cant just plop facilities in city wide, it's a process that takes decades.

I used to laugh at 1/4 mile bike lanes and talk about how incompetent the city is for doign that. now I udnerstand just how insane the whole process is. I will gladly push for a 1 block long bike lane knowing that next year they will extend it with more chatter and pressure.

[Serge Issakov]

Where there are blocks, I'm more interested in encouraging bicyclists to ride away from the edge space typically demarcated by bike lanes, and getting societal acceptance for bicyclists riding like that, out in the traffic lane, perhaps with sharrows and BMUFL signs, because of the cross traffic hazards (at driveways as well as intersections) and the hazards near the road edge.  Putting in a bike lane for one block (or ten), hinders such efforts.

Serge

[Roadblock]

I KNOW you want to encourage bicyclists to do that... I want that too and thats why I became an LCI. but this isnt north korea. there are millions of people driving fast (from red to red.) there are billions and billions of dollars going in to educating people that cars are sexy and fast and you are never ever going to get to the point where they just let cyclists on to the roads magically without death and destruction on wide roads designed by old men who think streets are for cars. 

the best education is infrastructure that separates modes as is done in the Netherlands and even they did it over a period of decades. They did it right.

[Serge Issakov]

I'm not aware of a period in Netherlands history where they had partial segregation such as that facilitated by bike lanes that encourage cycling that practically invites turning conflicts.  Why do you think that step is necessary here?

I haven't been there, but in parts of Germany where I've cycled they seem to adopt either total segregation, including grade or time separation at intersections, or car-bike integration on the roads.

Serge

[Roadblock]

I'm not aware of anywhere in the world where mode share reached critical mass through mixing bikes into bare naked 45mph traffic either.

Netherlands went through a period in which their death rates went up, and the people demanded safer facilities or? It took  decades to build comprehensive infrastructure. If that path is through paint first here then so be it. Your apparent plan of simply educating people without infrastructure hasnt worked yet... 

[Michael Graff]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

you are never ever going to get to the point where they just let cyclists on to the roads magically without death and destruction on wide roads designed by old men who think streets are for cars. 

But they DO let cyclists on those roads.  I ride on those roads every day, with surprisingly little conflict. And on residential streets.  And across freeway interchanges.  And everything in between.  Sometimes with bike lanes, sometimes with narrow outside lanes.

I don't seek out the busiest, nastiest roads.  But I don't fear them, either.

I'm neither an athlete (ha!) nor a daredevil.  I'm not even an LCI, though I did take the Road I class a while back.

I don't have to wait decades to ride my bike, and neither does anybody else.  It's easy and fun.  Probably the hardest part is getting past the fear-mongering.  Also headwinds and hills.  ;-)

[Roadblock]

they have partial segregation right now in the netherlands by the way.

On May 23, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Serge Issakov wrote:

[Michael Graff]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

Your apparent plan of simply educating people without infrastructure hasnt worked yet... 

We don't have education here.  All we have is "wear a helmet and stay out of the way of cars".  And lots of fear-mongering about how scary it is to ride a bike.

Anybody who has managed to find real cycling education from LAB or Cycling Savvy probably remembers the "aha" moment when they realized how counter-productive that "stay out of the way" message is.  Not only does it not work, but it's insulting and dis-empowering.

Once you stop trying to share unsharable lanes, and the motorists calmly change lanes to pass you, it's like magic.  I love the stories at http://cyclingsavvy.org/ of ordinary people learning how to make the magic work, riding in places most people have been taught to fear.

We can also have some really well-designed bike-specific infrastructure.  And we should insist that it be well-designed and well-thought-out.  We shouldn't accept designs that treat us as second-class citizens.

But we'll never have a 100% duplicate bikeway network.  Every bike trip is going to include some on-street travel.

[Serge Issakov]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

I'm not aware of anywhere in the world where mode share reached critical mass through mixing bikes into bare naked 45mph traffic either.

Netherlands went through a period in which their death rates went up, and the people demanded safer facilities or? It took  decades to build comprehensive infrastructure. If that path is through paint first here then so be it. Your apparent plan of simply educating people without infrastructure hasnt worked yet... 

I'm not suggesting simply educating people without infrastructure in order to increase cycle mode.  I'm suggesting simply educating people without infrastructure to make those people safe and comfortable. riding anywhere current existing conditions, without changing anything.

In order to increase cycle mode, I'd like to see the majority of streets in any one city adorned with properly positioned sharrows and BMUFL signs for at least a year, and see what effect that has on modal share.  As far as I know, that has never been tried, anywhere, so of course it hasn't worked.

Serge

[Roadblock]

really. that's where CABO fails miserably.

you fail to see things from other POV than your own

1273 pedestrians and cyclists were hit and then left behind in 2011 in the city of LA. 

imagine county numbers....

people hear about these things because they happen, not because of fear mongering.

I'm the first person to talk about how FUN and simple it is to ride. but people hear about car drivers and they see the excessive speeds of our roads in LA.

[Willie Hunt]

Roadblock, your logic is flawed. Cyclists and pedestrian get hit
because motorists are inattentive, impaired, distracted and as such
violate the basic speed law. It’s not that speed limits of 45, 55
even 65 cannot co-exists with cyclists in a safe way, but rather
motorists operating at higher speeds need to be even more aware of how
fast they can approach other slower users and drive appropriately for
such speeds.

Now, of course we know that motorists do not drive appropriately much
of the time, so one could argue that lower speed limits would help.
Unfortunately, plenty of data shows that motorists drive at speeds
they feel comfortable driving and pretty much ignore posted speed
limit signs in urban areas. Lowering the speed limits does not do
much, whereas making drivers uncomfortable does. It doesn’t take some
fancy study to see that this is true. Ever noticed how much motor
vehicle drivers actually slow down in a construction zone when no
lanes are blocked? Not much if at all. Same thing is true when a
rural highway passes though a 2 building town with a low posted speed
limit. Ever noticed how much drivers slow down for a rail road
crossing? A lot! Why? Because drivers are comfortable speeding
excessively through a construction zone or a rural highway town but
not comfortable crossing a rail road track. Here’s another example,
take speeds on reasonable long 6% grade hill. Drivers go much faster
down the hill than up the hill. Why? Physics says that your stopping
distance is much longer going down than up, so if anything you should
descend slower than you ascend for the same level of safety. Because
drivers do not feel comfortable mashing into the throttle to maintain
even the speed limit climbing, but they feel comfortable speeding down
the hill because they are barely touching the throttle.

The 85th percentile law does what it was intended to do, reduce speed
distribution among motorists, and it does a good job at this.
However, having cyclists in the vehicle mix greatly increases the
speed distribution because they are quite slow by comparison, and
cyclists cause motorists to slow way down often to pass. Since
cyclists cannot travel at motor vehicle speeds (under most conditions)
and motorists would never put up with driving at cyclists speeds, you
are going to have large difference in speed pretty much as a given for
having both users on the same roadway at the same time.

So would repealing the 85th percentile law help? Maybe, but I doubt
it really going to do much because motorists pay little attention to
posted speed limits anyway in urban areas. What would help is to get
motorists to understand the basic speed law and drive responsibly.
It would also help if both motorists and cyclists understood the
existing laws regarding the operation of both on roadways, because
both groups clearly do not understand and or follow the existing laws.

Willie

[John Eldon]

Plenty of motorists drive as fast as they think they can w/o getting cited. This is the dark side of Willie's "comfort" theory. A stretch of road may appear safe and comfortable for 50mph travel, but an upcoming blind driveway, visibility-obscuring dip, or uncontrolled legal pedestrian crossing may imply that the safe-and-prudent speed is closer to 35mph.

The state's new interpretation of the 85th percentile law makes matters much worse, by forcing cities to round UP to the next 5mph increment. Cities across the state are being forced to raise speed limits to avoid losing enforceability. We see speed creep, pushed by creeps who speed, everywhere. When is the last time you saw a speed limit REDUCED?

I would like to see the 85th percentile law repealed or at least weakened. I also agree w/ Willie that traffic calming measures can help, but we must avoid unintended consequences which endanger or inconvenience bicyclists.

John E.

[CycleCA]

I agree completely with this. As bicycle advocates, we should not tolerate this type of road design. Innovative  projects make news and political victories. However, fixing these types of poor road design woud do more for cycling then all the side paths, colored bike lanes, bikes boxes and such ever will.

Bob

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.

-- 
Cycle California! Magazine
1702-L Meridian Ave. #289
San Jose, CA 95125
ph: 408-924-0270

[Serge Issakov]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 7:33 AM, John Eldon <j.e...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Plenty of motorists drive as fast as they think they can w/o getting cited. 

I'm sorry, but I think this statement exaggerates the role possibly getting cited plays in determining driver speed.  I think if you eliminated speed limit signs overnight the speeds the next morning would not be much different from the previous morning.  Maintaining control and avoiding a crash is a much bigger factor in determining speed.

Serge

[Willie Hunt]

I agree with John Eldon when the roadways in question are rural
highway with no other speed limiting issues (heavy traffic, tight
curves, rough pavement, narrow lanes, weather, etc.) in that fear of
being cited keeps speed down. If you drive to Vegas regularly on the
I-15 it's about the ONLY thing that keeps speeds under 100 MPH for
much of the way! However, I agree with Serge when you are talking
about urban areas with narrow lanes, drives, parked cars, traffic
lights, stop signs, etc. In those urban areas motorist drive within
their "comfort zone" and basically ignore speed limit signs
altogether. I see this all the time on roadways that physically do
not change, but move from one city to the next in dense Orange County
and the speed limit is different. There is no noticeable change in
the traffic speed, even though the post limit becomes lower.

Willie

On May 24, 8:44 am, Serge Issakov <serge.issa...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Serge Issakov]

Agreed.  I was thinking about "in town" areas.

That said, I've also driven on the Autobahn.  And while there is the occasional big Audi or Mercedes that goes 125 mph+, traffic in general is not that much different from our rural I-5/I-15 traffic.

Serge

[Michael Graff]

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

1273 pedestrians and cyclists were hit and then left behind in 2011 in the city of LA. 

imagine county numbers....

people hear about these things because they happen, not because of fear mongering.

This is a masterful piece of fear mongering.  You've presented a number with no context, no details, and no analysis.  You've combined pedestrians and cyclists into a single number, but you did not provide a number for motorist victims.

Your implication is that all non-motorists are sitting ducks, and all motorists are potential felons.  And motorists are perfectly safe inside their cars.  That's the perfect argument for people to keep driving and NOT become cyclists.

Plus, pedestrians already have separate sidewalks and their own traffic signals.  But that doesn't stop them from being victims.  So even if cyclists had a similar network, they would continue to be victims as well.  The fear is perpetual.

As fear-mongering goes, that's brilliant.  Our victimhood status is permanent.

Here's the thing: dangerous drivers are a danger to everybody.  All travelers (by car, bike, foot, transit, etc) want to see dangerous drivers removed from the road.  It's not cyclists vs. motorists, it's everybody vs. bad drivers.  That requires a shift in both the culture and in enforcement, as we've seen with drunk driving.

[CycleCA]

I agree, numbers need context. To throw out these numbers in a lump sum with nothing to relate them to just increases the hyperbole, with no benefit. It just scares people.

Bob M

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.

-- 
Cycle California! Magazine
1702-L Meridian Ave. #289
San Jose, CA 95125
ph: 408-924-0270

[Roadblock]

You just made my case. Instead of fighting to keep bike infrastructure off the traffic grid CABO should be fighting to tame car traffic so that its safe to mix with car traffic in a vehicular fashion. CABO should particularly be fighting against the 85th percentile law.  

You guys think that magically somehow drivers can be educated into driving safe while putting them on racetrack like infrastructure? Show me an example anywhere in the world. Im curious if you have any real world examples.

[Serge Issakov]

Don,

I'm not following.  Is it the racetrack-like infrastructure that you believe is the problem, or the 85th percentile rule?  If both, how would you distribute the contribution?  50/50?  90/10?  10/90?

Serge

[CycleCA]

I ride mostly in urban areas. From my observations most people follow traffic laws (speed, stop signs, etc) when there is a cop present. Take away the cop and the speed goes up, rolling through stop signs and red lights happens more. This applies to cars, trucks, motorcycles, and bicycles.

Lower the speeds and add lots more cops enforcing traffic laws and/or cameras for speed, stop signs, and lights. Brak the law get a ticket, break it too often loose your right to drive any vehicle on the road.

Some parts of Nevada have residential street speed limits at 15 mph. These roads are great to ride on.

Bob M.

[Roadblock]

It is decades of infatuation and propaganda around car culture, plus poor land planning that lead to implementation of racetrack like infrastructure, combined with racetrack worthy personal automobiles that lead people to a climate of despising speed limits rather than respecting the rights of pedestrians and cyclists on the public right of way. That climate isnt going to get educated away (while maintaining racetrack infrastructure) without a North Korean-like police state. Put anyone - a grandma - in a fast car on a racetrack in a racecar and she will drive fast. People seeing racecars zooming on the streets will not want to take the chance of getting in the street!

Tame the most lethal modes of transportation through infrastructure and make the streets safe for everyone. Thats what they did in northern european countries. Thats the mountain we have to climb here. Lets get to work!  

[Michael Graff]

You're doing it again, fear-mongering and demonizing all motorists.

It IS safe to mix with car traffic in a vehicular fashion.  I do it every day.  On fast, multi-lane arterials.  On quiet side streets.  With or without bike lanes.  Everywhere.  It is safe BECAUSE I do it in a vehicular fashion.

[I'm using "safe" to mean "as safe as being in a car".]

We can advocate for better roadway designs, better bike infrastructure, calmer traffic, better enforcement of egregious driving, and other improvements without fear-mongering about current conditions.  Or we can scare off potential cyclists by making cycling sound like a death wish.

Mighk Wilson makes the same case more eloquently: http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/advocacy/doom-or-possibility/

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

[Roadblock]

Who's demonizing anyone for driving fast on racecar infrastructure? Im saying its natural for humans to behave according to the envronment they are given.

You lost your scientific edge. Your own anecdotal experience is NOT relevant. The statistics are.

This is exactly why CABO is reguarded poorly and is frustrating... How many members do you have in your org anyway?

[Roadblock]

that's exactly why I am making the case for infrastructure that tames
motorists and segregates slower vehicle traffic where taming motorists
is not reasonable.

[Roadblock]

again. this ain't north korea. you aren't going to place people in
high power fast vehicles, on wide streets and expect people to go
against the urge to drive according to conditions -fast as they can.

sadly, the old guard of CABO have been around for so long and preach
exactly what car industry people want, that you've all been filtered
into positions of a bit of power - lest ye go against the status quo.

I appreciate the fight you guys put up to keep our legal right to use
the roads, I'm bummed that your mission doesnt include making it safe
to actually be on the road by taming speeders via infrastructure.

ho hum.... maybe next generation....






On May 23, 5:20 pm, Michael Graff <michael.gr...@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Roadblock <roadbl...@midnightridazz.com>wrote:
>
> > Your apparent plan of simply educating people without infrastructure hasnt
> > worked yet...
>
> We don't have education here.  All we have is "wear a helmet and stay out
> of the way of cars".  And lots of fear-mongering about how scary it is to
> ride a bike.
>
> Anybody who has managed to find real cycling education from LAB or Cycling
> Savvy probably remembers the "aha" moment when they realized how
> counter-productive that "stay out of the way" message is.  Not only does it
> not work, but it's insulting and dis-empowering.
>
> Once you stop trying to share unsharable lanes, and the motorists calmly

> change lanes to pass you, it's like magic.  I love the stories athttp://cyclingsavvy.org/of ordinary people learning how to make the magic

[Roadblock]

also, the 85th percentile law I would argue does NOT create even
distribution among motorists it confuses them since the methodology
for tracking speeds involves a 15 minute survey during the ambiguously
defined "free flowing traffic" thereby creating a patchwork of speed
limits that confuse motorists who then just blast from red light to
red light at whatever speed they feel like. They blast past you on
bike right up to the next light where cyclists pass them, then they
get pissed that they have to blast past the same slow cyclist again to
the next light.

it's a stupid law and CABO should be using their political power to
repeal it.

On May 24, 7:09 am, Willie Hunt <willie92...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Serge Issakov]

What I'm gathering here is that CABO's image in the cycling community might benefit from us putting more emphasis on supporting infrastructure that slows down motorists on surface streets.

Serge

[Roadblock]

Yes. Something like the 20 is plenty campaign accompanied by real infrastructure that tames people in cars. The fact is that there is no reason to be setting or encrouaging or facilitating drivers of cars to go anything faster than the average speed across town via surface streets which anywhere in the world is something like 15-25 when considering interesctions and traffic lights. Placing wide lanes with high speed limits that encourage bipolar driving - speeding from red light to red light is insane and deadly and scares most people who WANT to ride, off the roads. It's been happening now for decades and it's got to stop. You guys have some influence in the state. I'm not sure how far that influence would go once you start preaching the true safe streets gospel to the powers that be, but it's damn sure worth a try and you would rally the new generation of advocates who understand that speed is what is keeping people from riding bikes to your side.

[Michael Graff]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

that's exactly why I am making the case for infrastructure that tames
motorists and segregates slower vehicle traffic where taming motorists
is not reasonable.

I think we all largely agree that much of our road infrastructure was designed with a cars-only mentality.  For cyclists, many roads range from unpleasant to daunting.  But you're overselling the problem and pushing a one-size-fits-all view of cycling.

Your framing is that people cannot and should not be biking in that environment.  By doing so, you present cycling as being far more dangerous than it is, thus discouraging cycling and painting cyclists as daredevils.

Your framing also opens the door to outright cyclist bans on roads you dislike.

Our framing is much more inclusive.  We support all cycling modes, and the rights of cyclists to CHOOSE their mode:

• We support top quality bike paths and connecting paths that join "broccoli" neighborhoods.
• We support support well-designed bike lanes and shoulders (if their use is optional).
• We support sharrows, bike-sensitive traffic detectors, small radius turn lanes, and other on-street improvements.

The key is the repeal of mandatory-use laws for specific facility types, such as CVC 21202/21208 which mandate use of bike lanes and the outer edge of wide lanes.

[Sauerwald Mark]

Where I live, if you look at Google Maps and zoom out, you see a grid of freeways and expressways which are the arteries traveled by the bulk of the motorists.   Zooming in a little closer it becomes apparent that there is a finer grid within this grid of major streets - typically 2 travel lanes in each direction, with speed limits >=35mph and most of these major streets, when they come to one of the freeways or expressways will cross - either with an overpass or an intersection.   As a result, either of these two grids of streets can be used for travel from most any point to any other.   Zooming in further there is a third group of streets which are more local in nature.  Typically one travel lane in each direction, and with speed limits ~25mph.  Because of the speed differential issue, these local streets are the streets that I find most friendly to cycle on, but since in most cases they dead-end when they come to the freeways or expressways, they do not constitute a contiguous grid which allows for transportation from one point to another.   The result is that when I am cycling from one point to another, I am almost always finding myself on streets that are not the best streets for cycling, but they are the only ones available.  Since they are the only ones available, I am sharing them with motorists who are driving faster than they should - a bad situation all around.    For my commute home from work, one barrier that I must cross is the CALTRAIN tracks.  I can cross on Lawrence Expressway, Bowers Rd, or San Tomas Expressway.  The least bad of these is Bowers - and here is a video of an incident that I had on Bowers, just south of where it crosses the tracks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAkPlAkGTMo 

I believe that if there were more opportunities to cross freeways, expressways and train tracks on narrower, slower streets, finding a good cycling route that my mother would be comfortable on would be much easier.   Speed is less the issue than an infrastructure which crowds traffic together on a small number of arteries.

Mark Sauerwald

---

From: Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com>
To: Serge Issakov <serge....@gmail.com>
Cc: CABOforum <cabo...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

[Roadblock]

my framing is that people DO NOT like to bike in that environment and therefore they DONT.

I'm a 6'8 trained vehicular cyclist LCI who has been riding in LA since I was 5 years old.

I ride at NIGHT. I ride ALL CITY. I ride EVERYDAY and I dont often get into conflicts with drivers BUT it happens often enough that there are days I don't ride and instead drive.

I've been hit by a drunk at speed at 1 am while riding vehicular with bright lights and a helmet and was thrown 50-75 feet after impact. I survived but others havent. 

I organize thousands of people on bikes who also ride every day all day all night and therefore I KNOW personally 6 hit and run victims this year and tens more who have been simply hit THIS YEAR. Cases come up every week. I wonder how many people CABO actually communicates with that are riding in big cities?

I could guess that 90% of people in cars are respectful and careful around cyclists when they see them, but riding in this city, you feel like the percentages are going to get you.

I know you scientific people get disguated when people talk about feelings but there they are. 

 The majority of people FEEL like mixing it up with cars is a percentages game. Well, if it is then mizing it up with bipolar speeding cars is a deadly percentages game.

I'm tired of being told that I'm wrong for wanting safe infrastructure akin to the Netherlands. I'm tired of old men in postitions of power telling me that riding in LA is safe when my personal experience tells me otherwise.

CABO has power in the state. Wish you guys were more connected to the people instead of brow beating them with meaningless jargon and spell check quips.

I gotta split. someone kick me off this forum already. I got things to do places to see.

[Jim Baross]

It was probably over ten years ago that I first noticed in a community transportation plan – this one for central downtown San Diego – the statement that the presence of people bicycling helped to reduce motor vehicle traffic speeds; encouraging bicycling was to be considered an appropriate approach to traffic calming! At that time I considered it silly, but I’ve changed my view… And, I am also choosing to travel slower than most people when I use a motor vehicle… and I am assertive as a pedestrian, requiring motorists to yield, when I want to cross a street.

 

As I expect is the case in many places, even North Korea, most people respond to the environment around them and are likely to behave as most other people do.

 

Jim (be the change you want in others) Baross

 

From: cabo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cabo...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Serge Issakov
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 1:35 PM
To: road...@midnightridazz.com
Cc: CABOforum
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

 

What I'm gathering here is that CABO's image in the cycling community might benefit from us putting more emphasis on supporting infrastructure that slows down motorists on surface streets.

[John Forester]

I see that Roadblock says that his description is of traffic in Los
Angeles. Well, roadblock, you should spend great effort on getting many
more freeway miles and freeway lane-miles in Los Angeles, which has
among the lowest level of freeway service in American cities. Freeways,
until they are crowded, take traffic off surface streets where cyclists
operate. Then more motorists would be using the freeways so that the
need to speed on local arterials would not be so great.

Roadblock appears to say that LA arterials should allow for average
speeds of 15-25 mph for longish trips across town. It is my impression
that that range is pretty accurate for the present arterials at times of
dense traffic. So what's the complaint?

On 5/24/2012 1:53 PM, Roadblock wrote:
> Yes. Something like the 20 is plenty campaign accompanied by real
> infrastructure that tames people in cars. The fact is that there is no
> reason to be setting or encrouaging or facilitating drivers of cars to
> go anything faster than the average speed across town via surface
> streets which anywhere in the world is something like 15-25 when
> considering interesctions and traffic lights. Placing wide lanes with
> high speed limits that encourage bipolar driving - speeding from red
> light to red light is insane and deadly and scares most people who
> WANT to ride, off the roads. It's been happening now for decades and
> it's got to stop. You guys have some influence in the state. I'm not
> sure how far that influence would go once you start preaching the true
> safe streets gospel to the powers that be, but it's damn sure worth a
> try and you would rally the new generation of advocates who understand
> that speed is what is keeping people from riding bikes to your side.

--
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481 fore...@johnforester.com
www.johnforester.com

[Tim Oey]

I think Roadblock's main point is that we cannot insist that all
cyclists be confident, grizzled, veteran vehicular cyclists (like most
people who probably are on the caboforum list).

We need more cycling facilities that attract family and kid and novice
cyclists so they see cycling as safe and fun and a good alternative to
driving a car.

I agree with Mark Sauerwald about the micro-grid and finding ways for
cyclists (and pedestrians) to get across car-built barriers (freeways
and expressways). The Borregas bridges in Sunnyvale (over 237 & 101),
the Mary Ave bridge over 280, and trails like the Stevens Creek Trail,
Los Gatos Creek Trail, and Bay Trail -- these all attract cyclists to
pleasant routes to ride rather than fighting traffic on big busy
streets like El Camino Real or Mathilde/Sunnyvale Saratoga.

Cheers,
Tim Oey
Sunnyvale CA

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, John Forester
<fore...@johnforester.com> wrote:
> I see that Roadblock says that his description is of traffic in Los Angeles.
> Well, roadblock, you should spend great effort on getting many more freeway
> miles and freeway lane-miles in Los Angeles, which has among the lowest
> level of freeway service in American cities. Freeways, until they are
> crowded, take traffic off surface streets where cyclists operate. Then more
> motorists would be using the freeways so that the need to speed on local
> arterials would not be so great.
>
> Roadblock appears to say that LA arterials should allow for average speeds
> of 15-25 mph for longish trips across town. It is my impression that that
> range is pretty accurate for the present arterials at times of dense
> traffic.  So what's the complaint?
>
>
> On 5/24/2012 1:53 PM, Roadblock wrote:
>>
>> Yes. Something like the 20 is plenty campaign accompanied by real

>> infrastructure that tames people in cars...

[Bob Sutterfield]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Tim Oey <tim...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think Roadblock's main point is that we cannot insist that all cyclists be confident, grizzled, veteran vehicular cyclists (like most people who probably are on the caboforum list).

Certainly not - though that's an inaccurate caricature and disingenuous framing.  Likewise, we cannot insist that all cyclists behave as NACTO or LA's MDMLS would force us to.  CABO's position is the more inclusive.

We need more cycling facilities that attract family and kid and novice cyclists so they see cycling as safe and fun and a good alternative to driving a car.

Certainly.  And since those facilities are designed to attract children and novices, they must be engineered carefully.  That's why CABO supports AB819, the innovative bikeways bill.

 

I agree with Mark Sauerwald about the micro-grid and finding ways for cyclists (and pedestrians) to get across car-built barriers (freeways and expressways). The Borregas bridges in Sunnyvale (over 237 & 101), the Mary Ave bridge over 280, and trails like the Stevens Creek Trail, Los Gatos Creek Trail, and Bay Trail -- these all attract cyclists to pleasant routes to ride rather than fighting traffic on big busy streets like El Camino Real or Mathilde/Sunnyvale Saratoga.

Funny you should mention the Mary Ave bridge as an example of bicycle infrastructure.  I haven't checked lately, but are the bollards still there?  Ed McLaughlin passed recently, robbed of cycling his last few years because he was paralyzed by hitting a bollard just like those.  

The bollards on the Mary Ave bridge were installed when it was constructed, years after Ed was crippled and the hazards of bollards were well known.  The City of Cupertino has steadfastly refused to remove the bollards, even though they violate the design standards, even though their liability was pointed out to them.  The City and the bicycle advocates continue to celebrate that bridge as a shining accomplishment for bicycle advocacy, though it's designed to exclude and maim cyclists.  Tell me again why cyclists - novices or grizzled veterans - should put up with crap like that?

[CycleCA]

I agree with the last point below. We need to stop accepting substandard, hazardous, and poorly designed projects. We need to insist on safe, well designed and well maintained bicycle infrastructure.

The current attitude among many bicycle advocates is "lets take what they give us and call it a victory". This has to stop. It is only a victory when what we get truly meets the needs of bike riders.

Bob M.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.

[Serge Issakov]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

I'm tired of being told that I'm wrong for wanting safe infrastructure akin to the Netherlands. 

You're not wrong.  But you are reinforcing bigotry against bicyclists by advocating for that.

Please take a few minutes to read this recent essay from Keri Caffrey.

Bigotry is Blinding

Excerpt:

The notion that a bicyclist shouldn’t be on the road is bigotry.

The notion that two bicyclists should not ride side by side, when doing so makes zero difference, is bigotry.

The inability to recognize that having to wait 5 seconds to change lanes was a result of you choosing a lane that had bicyclists in it to begin with (or a result of you not paying attention), is bigotry.

The inability to recognize that the extra 5 seconds to change lanes makes zero difference to your trip time because the red light at Colonial is 1:30, is bigotry.

The inability to recognize that the two people in front of you were, well, PEOPLE! on their way home — just like you — just using different vehicles, is bigotry.

Every lame excuse about bicyclists delaying motorists is bigotry. I-4 looks like this —> 

every afternoon and there are no bicyclists there.

The reason this is on my mind is yesterday’s kerfuffle over 60 high school students being suspended for riding bikes to school. The reasons cited by the principal (despite the kids having a police escort which included the mayor!) was that it was unsafe and they were causing a traffic jam. The principal, who I’m sure was horrified to find her 15 minutes of fame involved being the center of a national hatestorm, has apologized. But I think the initial reaction is telling. Because it is bigotry. Anyone who has ever witnessed traffic near a school knows motorists cause massive traffic jams all by themselves. I also wonder if the public reaction would have been as intensely in their favor if the students hadn’t enlisted the police to help them.

Bigotry against bicycling exists because it is a product of our culture. Militant bigots act out because they feel they are supported by their peers (but just in case, they have the anonymity of their cars). Why do they feel that? Because for almost 100 years we’ve been indoctrinating people into a dysfunctional belief that roads are for motor vehicles and anyone not in one is an interloper. And yet that’s only 100 years of dysfunction, superimposed on a public space with centuries of history that did not traditionally include cars or the speed, throughput, fear, selfishness and entitlement that came with them.

THAT, my friends, is what we have to tackle if we want bicycling to become normal, accepted and respected as a mode of transportation. We won’t tackle it by avoiding and reinforcing it with facilities that get us out of the way at our own expense. 

[Roadblock]

No. Its not bigotry. Then you might as well say not mixing pedestrians into travel lanes is bigotry. After all they are humans travelling too. Or that freeways are bigotry. Why not throw wheel chairs and razor scooters there too right? 

No its simply sorting out travel modes according to speed and capability.

Bigotry is NOT providing safe space for people to use bicycles human powered devices and walking devices. 

[Michael Graff]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

No its simply sorting out travel modes according to speed and capability.

Don, you sound like a spokesperson for AAA.  We must not restrict the free flow of automobiles, so we have to keep the slower users out of the way.

[Seth Davidson]

He doesn’t sound at all like AAA. He sounds like someone who’s trying to get more people on bicycles.

 

Nor does CABO sound grizzled and grouchy. It sounds like a group who’s trying to get more people on bicycles.

 

Law Office of Seth Davidson

20355 Hawthorne Blvd., 2^nd Floor

Torrance, CA 90503

310-371-2500 (TEL)

424-241-8118 (CELL)

213-402-3049 (FAX)

 

--
My firm is a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United States bankruptcy code that assists people with filing for bankruptcy. This message may contain privileged or confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. The receipt of this email or any documents attached to it do not create an attorney-client relationship with my firm. If you are not the named addressee you should not disclose, disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system.

 

From: cabo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cabo...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Graff
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 9:10 AM
To: road...@midnightridazz.com
Cc: Serge Issakov; CABOforum
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

 

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

 

No its simply sorting out travel modes according to speed and capability.

 

Don, you sound like a spokesperson for AAA.  We must not restrict the free flow of automobiles, so we have to keep the slower users out of the way.

 

 

--

[Michael Graff]

What I mean is that he's making the same argument that pro-motoring, anti-cycling groups make: That cyclists need to be kept out of the way because cycling is incompatible with the speed and capability of a motor vehicle.  That cyclists are interlopers in a world built for cars.  If I wanted to discourage cycling, I can hardly think of a better argument.

We reject that argument.  Cyclists are traffic, no less or more important than any other traffic.  Roads are built to move people and cargo.  And if somebody is going too slow for you in the slow lane, then change lanes to pass.  Whoever is ahead of you has the right of way.

Yes, on some roads, it will be more efficient, and more pleasant for everybody, to provide additional room for slower traffic.  (This is no different from providing a truck lane on uphill grades.)  In many places, it will be desirable to connect lower-volume streets so that cyclists have that option.  There are lots of things we can build to make cycling more pleasant, efficient, and desirable.

But there will always be places where none of those options exist.  If motorists have to slow down or change lanes when they encounter bicycle traffic, so be it.  That should be normal, expected behavior.  If we can't agree on that, then cycling advocacy has no foundation.

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Seth Davidson <se...@sethdavidsonlaw.com> wrote:

He doesn’t sound at all like AAA. He sounds like someone who’s trying to get more people on bicycles.

 

 

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

[Roadblock]

Nice try. Im asking for space to be given to cyclists not shove them out of the way. You guys are smart enough to understand the difference you're just being feciscous. <--- (spell check that for me when you get a chance Jim.)

You guys are dreaming of a north korean style police state in which everyone is perfectly educated to resist the urge to drive according to the race track like conditions they are given as they drive faster and faster vehicles. Not happening now, never did, never will. Prove me wrong.

Does anyone on here even live in LA?

Who commutes in the city of LA here? 

[Roadblock]

Well maybe we should allow bicycles onto the right lanes of all the freeways right?

[Michael Graff]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

Im asking for space to be given to cyclists not shove them out of the way.

So far, I've seen you accept door zone bike lanes (which you agree are sucky) and claim that it's politically impossible to get more than that.  Painting cyclists into the door zone = shoving them out of the way.

[Roadblock]

CABO comes off rigid and incapable of underdtanding human behaviour. Humans generally behave according to the conditions they are presented with. 

Give them a race car and a race track and they will drive fast. Put a vulnerable obstacle in there way and they may or may not see it in time. They may be upset they have to slow down they may be understanding.

I think we can all agree that when a road facilitates speeds of less than 20-25 that mixing modes is fine. Its when the speeds creep past 20 that we disagree. 

You want perfect infrastructure. 

I'll take imperfect infrastructure then improve it next time around. Both are deadly but at least my way is a step in the direction of safety. CABO's way is effectively no steps at all.

[Michael Graff]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

Well maybe we should allow bicycles onto the right lanes of all the freeways right?

No, but we should remove freeway-like conditions from surface streets.

[Bob Sutterfield]

"Giving" means receiving is optional.

"Shoving" means the one being shoved has no choice.

I'd be happier if the space were optional - then it's only an ethical issue (spending public money to endanger the population) and I won't myself be forced into hazardous behavior.

Will you support CABO's campaign to repeal CVC 21202 and 21208?

[Roadblock]

Now we are zeroing in on agreement....

[Roadblock]

Not in my world... Sure, part of some bike lanes are in door zones and they suck. But part of "no bike lanes at all" is either in a share-able lane that is 14ft with 35-50mph traffic speeds or in non share-able lanes with 35-50mph traffic and that sucks too. Pick your poison.

[Bob Sutterfield]

I pick the non-shareable lanes.  That way I get it all to myself.

[John Eldon]

How about a 10- or 12-foot lane w/ central (not near the outer edge) sharrows and BMUFL signage? John E. --- On Fri, 5/25/12, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

From: Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

[CycleCA]

Signs suck. There are way too many. People don't see them or read them.

The main purposes of road signs is to protect government agencies from liability and to make bike advocates think we got something.

That said, we do need some signs. But they are not a panacea.

Bob M

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.

[Roadblock]

Sharrows so far are not really respected in my experience. Needs a lot of education and the LA drivers are an aggro bunch at least over here in hollywood. 

How about 10' lanes and 6' bike lanes and 7' parking.

[Donny Digital]

Yeah right. Come do that on the non share-able glendale ave lanes in echo park heading towards dtla at 8am. Bet after 3 months you'll feel differently. 

I just now got speed rev buzzed on my way to lunch by an aggro driver who was pissed i was taking the lane. 

Dont get me wrong, i love the thrill of mixing it up with aggro traffic.... Sometimes. Other times i get scared. Im a big guy. A lot of Non daredevil regular size humans feel less comfortable than i do.

[Roadblock]

Yeah right. Come do that on the non share-able glendale ave lanes in echo park heading towards dtla at 8am. Bet after 3 months you'll feel differently. 

I just now got speed rev buzzed on my way to lunch by an aggro driver who was pissed i was taking the lane. 

Dont get me wrong, i love the thrill of mixing it up with aggro traffic.... Sometimes. Other times i get scared. Im a big guy. A lot of Non daredevil regular size humans feel less comfortable than i do.

On May 25, 2012, at 12:06 PM, Bob Sutterfield <b...@sutterfields.us> wrote:

[Bob Sutterfield]

Parking takes 8', and the door zone another 5'.  So the area delineated by your proposed 13' BL stripe lies entirely within the door zone.  That's a hazardous condition that satisfies one of the requirements (CVC 21208(a)(3)) for cyclists to be permitted outside the bike lane, so I'll ride in the 10' travel lane.

Since your proposed 10' travel lane is "too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane", it satisfies one of the requirements (CVC 21202(a)(3)) to release me of the requirement to ride "as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway".  So I'll ride far enough left to make it clearly apparent that I'm not offering to share my lane, typically centered or in the left tire track.

That's how I ride on the way to my office, in a 10' travel lane beside a 2' bike lane (beside a 2' gutter, not beside parked cars).  This morning I got honked at three times and buzz-passed once, in the space of about three blocks.  Tell me again how bike lanes either improve safety or offer encouragement?

[Sauerwald Mark]

On my commute, there is a section of road with Sharrows, and I find that I have more issues on that piece of road than I do with similar geometry roads without the Sharrows.   I am not convinced that sinage is seen, especially on roads with on-street parking, so that the sign is behind the plane of parked cars - the drivers attention does not often stray further to the right than the left side of the parked cars.

I have not seen a BMUFL sign in my area, so I have no opinion on their effectiveness.

---

From: John Eldon <j.e...@sbcglobal.net>
To: road...@midnightridazz.com
Cc: CABOforum <cabo...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 12:13 PM

Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

How about a 10- or 12-foot lane w/ central (not near the outer edge) sharrows and BMUFL signage? John E. --- On Fri, 5/25/12, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote: From: Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law To: "Michael Graff" <michae...@pobox.com> Cc: "Roadblock" <road...@midnightridazz.com>, "se...@sethdavidsonlaw.com" <se...@sethdavidsonlaw.com>, "Serge Issakov" <serge....@gmail.com>, "CABOforum" <cabo...@googlegroups.com> Date: Friday, May 25, 2012, 11:59 AM Not in my world... Sure, part of some bike lanes are in door zones and they suck. But part of "no bike lanes at all" is either in a share-able lane that is 14ft with 35-50mph traffic speeds or in non share-able lanes with 35-50mph traffic and that sucks too. Pick your poison.

[Michael Graff]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

Come do that on the non share-able glendale ave lanes in echo park heading towards dtla at 8am. Bet after 3 months you'll feel differently. 

I just now got speed rev buzzed on my way to lunch by an aggro driver who was pissed i was taking the lane. 

We all agree that no driver should treat a cyclist that way. We all agree that our culture treats cyclists as second-class citizens. 

We all agree that there are roads where cyclists are extremely unwelcome.  We all agree that most cyclists and potential cyclists do not want to ride under those conditions.  We all agree that changing the streetscape is mired in politics.

Where we disagree is that you seem to be resigned to it.  You seem to accept these conditions as unchangeable.  You keep telling us what's NOT possible.

We accept the challenge of fixing these things.  I'll refer again to Keri's essay on bigotry, Mighk's essay on the politics of doom, and the student success stories at cyclingsavvy.com.  We see a future where all cyclists are welcome, be it on the street or on a path.  We see a future where motorists expect bicycles and treat cyclists with respect.  We see a future where ordinary people are comfortable riding their bikes anywhere they wish.  And we already see some of this in the present.

[Roadblock]

does this website actually register comments or are they being
screened?




On May 25, 1:56 pm, Michael Graff <michael.gr...@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Roadblock <roadbl...@midnightridazz.com>wrote:
>
> > Come do that on the non share-able glendale ave lanes in echo park heading
> > towards dtla at 8am. Bet after 3 months you'll feel differently.
>
> > I just now got speed rev buzzed on my way to lunch by an aggro driver who
> > was pissed i was taking the lane.
>
> We all agree that no driver should treat a cyclist that way. We all agree
> that our culture treats cyclists as second-class citizens.
>
> We all agree that there are roads where cyclists are extremely unwelcome.
>  We all agree that most cyclists and potential cyclists do not want to ride
> under those conditions.  We all agree that changing the streetscape is
> mired in politics.
>
> Where we disagree is that you seem to be resigned to it.  You seem to
> accept these conditions as unchangeable.  You keep telling us what's NOT
> possible.
>
> We accept the challenge of fixing these things.  I'll refer again to Keri's

> essay on bigotry<http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/05/23/bigotry-is-blinding/>,

> Mighk's essay on the politics of

> doom<http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/advocacy/doom-or-possibility/>,

[Roadblock]

Seems like every time I post direct to the site it doesnt show up so I will rewrite my sentiments here:

The bigotry argument needs to be killed because it makes you guys look irrational and frankly silly.

Separating modes of travel is not bigotry. You don't have bicycles "taking the lane" on freeways. 

You don't have cars "taking the sidewalk" on sidewalks and neither of those restrictions can rationally be 

called bigotry. 

I'm the one that is resigned to grabbing space from cars and giving it to human powered modes and creating a safe space for it.

[Serge Issakov]

Did you read the complete eessay, Don?

http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/05/23/bigotry-is-blinding/ 

By the way, this essay was written by a woman, Keri Caffrey, in Florida - not a CABO director or member or anything.

Serge

[Mark Sapiro]

Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

>does this website actually register comments or are they being
>screened?

Is midnightridazz.com serviced by googlemail? If so, see
<http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6588>.

I've seen many posts from you. At the moment, there are 75 posts in the
thread at
<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/caboforum/0WHzJk5XnUY>,
about 30 of which are from you.

What's missing?

--
Mark Sapiro <ma...@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

[petev...@cox.net]

What Don, a.k.a. Roadblock, is saying is that the culture on CA city streets has to change in consideration of people using slower modes. That’s not a radical position.

It’s also not impossible. In fact cultural change occurs all the time, albeit slowly.

Complete streets is not a fad, it’s now Federal and State policy. It’s also an economic necessity. Walkable, bikable communities bring life to cities starved by auto dominated design. A component of complete streets is traffic calming. But we don’t have to wait for politics to slow traffic, congestion everywhere is slowing it down. The slowing isn’t immediately noticeable nor has it yet reduced the deaths that occur annually. Here in Orange County we manage to kill about one cyclist per month on average. But changes in enforcement policy, coupled with some quality infrastructure ( not the knee-jerk BS kind, but well engineered of a type still rare in CA), coupled with education can create cultural change. And will ultimately reduce fatalities.

Does CABO have a vision for the future? Does Don? If CABO doesn’t have a vision then it leaves our future to the myriad views of idealists and zealots, many of who can only further alienate the majority of road users already biased against us. We need a guiding vision for CA cities. Not “the Netherldands” or Kobenhaven, not even vaunted Portland, but an inclusive vision for cities like LA and Santa Ana based on a realistic bicycle mode share with today’s financial realities as a starting point.

If CABO can’t describe that vision, who can?
What conditions qualify a CA city as “bicycle friendly?”
Can we really leave it up to the L.A.B. to tell us?
How will non-motorized city traffic move north/south, east/west and cross major barriers like RR lines, freeways, and rivers?
Will we fawn over the traffic averse cyclist so much that we tolerate habitually illegal riding?
Or will we support enforcement that encourages behavior predictable by other road users?
Can we really expect today’s traffic averse parents to allow their 10 year olds to bike to school in the street?
How many generations until they will?
Will we fight for funding for bike education of school age kids?
Or will they remain ignorant of the rules of the road until they get a drivers license?

The Dutch did not solve their car/bike conflicts with infrastructure alone. Don and more zealous advocates overlook the fact that Europeans train their kids to use the roads-- yes, roads-- like responsible citizens. As cyclists they carry respect for cyclists into the car when they grow up. And they navigate sometimes complicated fietspad/ highway intersections with more patience than Californians can currently muster. But I believe that will change with time.

I respect CABO and its directors and would love to see the association get the recognition it deserves. As advocates when it comes to “bicycle facilities” our first responsibility is be sure they don’t suck. But beyond that we should require that every new cycle track, bike lane, or “Class 1” integrate gracefully with surface streets, and despite protests from zealots, oppose those that don’t. We should request all narrow lanes get sharrowed, that police treat bicyclists as fully entitled road users, and that drivers treat us like nothing less than the fellow citizens we are.

And to all those CABO reps in Paso this weekend: Wish I were there!

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
> To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/caboforum?hl=en.
>

--
Regards,

Pete van Nuys
Executive Director
Orange County Bicycle Coalition
LCI 2060

[Roadblock]

whenver I post direct to the site the comments disappear... I think it's a google groups problem with the fact that I have a google email and a regular email associated with my account. whatever I'lll just use email to post. thanks

[John Forester]

Roadblock does not believe the opinion that motorists express bigotry
toward cyclists is correct and he believes that expressing that opinion
make its presenters "look irrational and frankly silly".

In my opinion, nothing that Roadblock has presented since his words
started appearing on this list has shown any better understanding of
traffic than that which we had been criticizing as bigoted. It is one of
the major problems of American cycling that those who had the
responsibility for knowing better chose to frame the discussion, laws,
and facilities in such emotional terms that we have been suffering from
that decision ever since.

On 5/25/2012 2:39 PM, Roadblock wrote:
> Seems like every time I post direct to the site it doesnt show up so I
> will rewrite my sentiments here:
>
> The bigotry argument needs to be killed because it makes you guys look
> irrational and frankly silly.
> Separating modes of travel is not bigotry. You don't have bicycles
> "taking the lane" on freeways.
> You don't have cars "taking the sidewalk" on sidewalks and neither of
> those restrictions can rationally be
> called bigotry.
>
> I'm the one that is resigned to grabbing space from cars and giving it
> to human powered modes and creating a safe space for it.
>

--
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481 fore...@johnforester.com
www.johnforester.com

[Seth Davidson]

John, Bicyclists disagree for the same reason that motorists disagree.
They're people, and people love nothing more than they love disagreement.

Don's voice is a great one. I don't agree with everything he says, just like
I don't agree with everything that anyone says, including my wife.
Especially my wife.

What I really like about CABO is what I really like about Don. They beat
each other over the head and, in my opinion, thereby advance the argument
(certainly they educate me), but their main goal seems to be
identical--increasing the number of people who ride and the quality of rides
available.

Those are great things. However much you may disagree with each other, the
salvos in this discussion have been educational for me. I've learned a ton
about sharrows and about design philosophy, and I've learned even more about
late night rambles and a whole different part of the two-wheeled world
(thanks to Don's website).

Much appreciated. Keep banging away! Even if neither of you "wins" the
argument, those of us who know less are, after reading this type of
exchange, "winning." Apologies to C. Sheen.

Thanks again--

Law Office of Seth Davidson
20355 Hawthorne Blvd., 2nd Floor
Torrance, CA 90503
310-371-2500 (TEL)
424-241-8118 (CELL)
213-402-3049 (FAX)

--
My firm is a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United States
bankruptcy code that assists people with filing for bankruptcy. This message
may contain privileged or confidential information and is intended only for
the individual named. The receipt of this email or any documents attached to
it do not create an attorney-client relationship with my firm. If you are
not the named addressee you should not disclose, disseminate, distribute or
copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please notify
the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system.

-----Original Message-----
From: cabo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cabo...@googlegroups.com] On

Behalf Of John Forester
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 3:29 PM
To: cabo...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

[Seth Davidson]

This is another example of educating those of us who lurk on this forum. Thanks.

Law Office of Seth Davidson
20355 Hawthorne Blvd., 2nd Floor
Torrance, CA 90503
310-371-2500 (TEL)
424-241-8118 (CELL)
213-402-3049 (FAX)

--
My firm is a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United States bankruptcy code that assists people with filing for bankruptcy. This message may contain privileged or confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. The receipt of this email or any documents attached to it do not create an attorney-client relationship with my firm. If you are not the named addressee you should not disclose, disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system.


-----Original Message-----
From: petev...@cox.net [mailto:petev...@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 3:12 PM
To: road...@midnightridazz.com; Michael Graff
Cc: se...@sethdavidsonlaw.com; CABOforum; Serge Issakov; Bob Sutterfield
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law

[Roadblock]

On May 25, 2012, at 3:12 PM, <petev...@cox.net> wrote:

> What Don, a.k.a. Roadblock, is saying is that the culture on CA city streets has to change in consideration of people using slower modes. That’s not a radical position.
>
> It’s also not impossible. In fact cultural change occurs all the time, albeit slowly.
>
> Complete streets is not a fad, it’s now Federal and State policy. It’s also an economic necessity. Walkable, bikable communities bring life to cities starved by auto dominated design. A component of complete streets is traffic calming. But we don’t have to wait for politics to slow traffic, congestion everywhere is slowing it down.

It slows down during peak hours... but guess what. I and many many people ride at night and all hours of the day everywhere in LA. and with speed limit signs suggesting to drivers that should be going 45mph.... I dont feel too comfortable taking the lanes. I do... but I'm also a gigantic human.... smaller folks kids and women are probably a bit more intimidated with cars blasting by to the next red light.

> The slowing isn’t immediately noticeable nor has it yet reduced the deaths that occur annually. Here in Orange County we manage to kill about one cyclist per month on average. But changes in enforcement policy, coupled with some quality infrastructure ( not the knee-jerk BS kind, but well engineered of a type still rare in CA), coupled with education can create cultural change. And will ultimately reduce fatalities.
>
> Does CABO have a vision for the future? Does Don?

Good question... what is CABO's vision? And it can't be some heaven's gate brainwashing of car drivers to just magically respect cyclists. hasnt happened. prove me wrong. deaths are still big. hit and runs are still big. riding around town feels like a gamble. after a few years the feeling that your time is coming creeps in as you hear about people going down.

Yes I have a vision for the future. That future is 0 deaths on the road.

CABO seems to want a North Korean style dictatorship in which every single driver is "educated" to resist the urge to drive fast on racetrack like streets in racecar like vehicles ever increasing in speed due to laws like 85th percentile for which CABO has done nothing to battle against....

SPEED should be your number one issue. You all should be working hard on that. It's what keeps kids and women off the roads no matter how much you think driver SHOULD respect cyclists.

You guys want to wait decades for perfect infrastructure to appear and are willing apparently to wait out the deaths and destruction and tiny mode share until it's gets vetted through some car-centric expensive glacial cal trans uberburreau process. There are already "innovative" facilities working in cities around the US and especially in the Netherlands which is basically the vision I would like to see here. The Netherlands took decades to build their infrastructure and educate themselves and calm car traffic. Thats what it will take here too. Stop hindering the new generation!

I and tons of advocates would have LOVED to have seen the vetting process for "innovative" facilities go to local municipalitiies to experiment with. THANKS for killing that hope CABO. The Cal Bike summit was rife with grumblings about you guys.

BTW What's good for Orange County is not good for LA and likewise for all kinds of cities. OC has big long even width streets LA has streets with irrational irregular widths every where on every street as a n example. LADOT refuses to experiment and uses cal trans standard as an excuse every time.

Meanwhile people get hit and killed every year in the city. My friend Hamilton - a reliable vehicular cyclist just got hit 2 hours ago while we were all jabbering back and forth!

So what's the difference? both methods involve blood shed but at least the methods that the majority of advocates want actually will lead to safe streets. CABO seems to be just fine with letting the death and destruction continue for decades and decades and decades and decades until the "perfect solution" is available. Stop the nonsense!

I'm glad cities like Long Beach and SF have decided to go out on their own and experiment. I hope it continues to spread. Riding there and SF is a PLEASURE. I'm never in the OC and not much in the Lemon Grove or SD area but you guys can handle it your selves just dont interfer with my area.

I'd like to see some diversity on CABO since you guys have state political clout.
Why not fill the empty seats on your board with women, people of color and young people please.

>
> The Dutch did not solve their car/bike conflicts with infrastructure alone. Don and more zealous advocates overlook the fact that Europeans train their kids to use the roads-- yes, roads-- like responsible citizens. As cyclists they carry respect for cyclists into the car when they grow up. And they navigate sometimes complicated fietspad/ highway intersections with more patience than Californians can currently muster. But I believe that will change with time.

please do not assume things. Why do you think I became an LCI?! I am taking part in EDUCATING the cycling public. I am WELL aware of the education programs that couple with comprehensive segregated infrastructure in the Netherlands.

Guess what, car companies have a bigger budget. I work for crumbs while you cant flip on a TV for more than one minute without some well produced mulitmillion dollar ad campaign flashing before millions of people's eyes telling them that cars should be fast they are sexy and if you dont have one you are trash. Yeah sure, education for bikes is going to make a dent in that.

[Roadblock]

yes I did. doesnt matter who wrote it, it's still irrational esecially when pushed in a forum currated by mostly privileged old white males. 

You would do better to call it classism. The public roads should include safe ample space for human powered transport as well as motorized transport. We all pay for the roads I want me space!

Where do you all live anyway? No one has fessed up to living in my area and the only rep I could find is Dan Gutierrez who doesnt live work or commute in Los Angeles that I could tell.  yet there he is... my rep and ventura county's rep. that bogus if you ask me. I know you are volunteers but you apparently have influence in govt and you arent repping my voice. 

[Roadblock]

testing.

caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Michael Graff]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

Yes I have a vision for the future. That future is 0 deaths on the road.

The good news is that the number is trending down.  The bad news is that we're a very long way from zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

Most of the victims are vehicle occupants, so this is an issue where we have natural allies outside the cycling community.

[Roadblock]

good news for motorists. is there a stat for cyclists and pedestrians? 

LAPD claims the ped/cyclist injury death rate has held steady for LA.... would be useful to compare trends across portland, sf and Los angeles.

http://t4america.org/resources/dangerousbydesign2011/

"pedestrian fatalities have actually increased, even as overall traffic deaths fell."

[Michael Graff]

I've seen a couple places that say bicycle deaths are about 2% of the total.  Here's one:

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/two-cent-us-road-deaths-are-cyclists.html 

So 98% of the victims are outside the cycling community.  This isn't our cross to bear alone.

[Serge Issakov]

A statistic I recent encountered that I find shocking is that over 90% of the people killed in bike crashes were NOT wearing helmets (http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm).

Regardless of the reasons for that (personally I think it's about attitude and behavior more than actual improved safety from the helmet), that means the number of helmeted cyclists killed per year in the US is under 100, and some years close to 50.  That's still not 0, but much closer than 800.

I suggest that wearing a helmet makes one much more likely to engage in a few other things, like ride with rather than against traffic, avoid riding at night without lights, yield if not stop at stop signs and red lights, stay on course without swerving.  

All this supports my long-held theory that through changes in his own behavior, and nothing else, a cyclist can reduce his chances of getting hit by one if not two orders of magnitude  as compared to the average cyclist.  Nothing else we can do can come close to improving safety like that.

Serge

[Bob Sutterfield]

http://bikesafecalifornia.org is a nice portrayal of the "layers of safety" approach.

[Serge Issakov]

There ya go.

"Using Skills 3 + 2 + 1 can help you avoid about 99% of all potential crashes" (popup graphic associated with POSITIONING).

99% is 100 times (two orders of magnitude) safer.

Wow, that's from the CBC?  It's not perfect, but I'm impressed.

Serge

--

[jimbaross]

Last I checked Roadblock was being moderated, messages checked before posting. It was that or blocking his posts for.the less.than courteous messages.
An apology for the previous poor choice of words to describe people spoils be appropriate, nice.
Meanwhile I've been enjoying the discussion...
We really have more in common than some seem to think.

Jim Baross
San Diego, CA
Sent from hard-to-type-on smart phone.
: -)

----- Reply message -----
From: "Mark Sapiro" <ma...@msapiro.net>
To: <road...@midnightridazz.com>, "CABOforum" <cabo...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [CABOforum] Re: 85th percentile law
Date: Fri, May 25, 2012 3:08 pm


Roadblock <road...@midnightridazz.com> wrote:

>does this website actually register comments or are they being
>screened?


Is midnightridazz.com serviced by googlemail? If so, see
<http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6588>.

I've seen many posts from you. At the moment, there are 75 posts in the
thread at
<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/caboforum/0WHzJk5XnUY>,
about 30 of which are from you.

What's missing?

--
Mark Sapiro <ma...@msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

[Alan Forkosh]

Roadblock was moderated for a period of several hours on Wednesday. However, after he complied with requests to identify himself as a person, gave some background, apologized for the tone of his messages on 5/22, and also posted some messages with real content., moderation was removed late in the afternoon. No messages were rejected, but some were delayed up to an hour as the moderator (me) was not tracking the list constantly.

Alan Forkosh                    Oakland, CA

afor...@mac.com

http://al4kosh.com

[John Forester]

In the late 1960s I lived in west L.A., near Cienega and Venice, and
cycled a lot with Los Angeles Wheelmen. I then moved to Northern
California until 1998, when I moved to Lemon Grove, near San Diego. In
these last fourteen years, I have attended many business and social
functions in various parts of Los Angeles. Business events during
business days, social events often in weekends and often with nighttime
driving. I find that motoring in the LA area does not fit with the
description provided by Roadblock.

[Roadblock]

I did everything by the book and I got hit from behind by a speeding drunk thanks in large part to failed infrastructure that facilitated speeding on a surface street next to a park (45mph zone) as part of an overall traffic grid that encourages speeding from red light to red light. 

Driver was educated and had insurance but decided to run.

I personally know 22 people who were hit and run in the time since in similar situations and can vouch that at least 15-16 of them are responsible educated experienced riders. One died. This doesnt count the many members of Midnight Ridazz community in which drivers stopped.

Can there be more education? Of course. North Korea seems to have robust education. 

Or.

You can have comprehensive edication AND remove all temptation to operate heavy machinery on public roads with wreckless abandon like they've done in Northern European countries.

[Roadblock]

Someone moderate this guy, he's calling myself and the 1273 peds and
cyclists who were victims of hit and run in the city of Los Angeles
last year liars based on non scientific anecdotal opinion from 40
years ago.

This is an outrage.





On May 26, 2012, at 7:57 AM, John Forester <fore...@johnforester.com>
wrote:

[Tim Oey]

It's easy to get heated, I think we need to relax and realize that bicycle advocates need to work with each other and not against each other.

This discussion illustrates a classic confrontation between 2 bicycle advocate viewpoints:
1) Making sure bicycles are recognized as vehicles with rights and privileges on all regular roads
2) Improving bicycle facilities so novice and casual cyclists want to ride their bike instead of drive

These are not necessarily incompatible. However:
- Hardened bicycle advocates often strongly push #1 and appear reluctant to support #2 because that might give motorists ammunition to force bicyclists from #1 to #2. Vehicular cyclists often poo poo bicycle lanes as bad design because they want full rights on the road. Everyone using roads should be well educated so all can use them safely.
- Other bicycle advocates strongly push #2 because they see that ones pushing #1 turn off many casual cyclists and it is too hard to adequately train all motorists and bicyclists (as illustrated by the accident that Roadblock survived). Bicycle facilities should make it easy for bicyclists as well as motorists by keeping them out of each others way with little education necessary.

It is important that these two objectives be balanced and that bicycling advocates pursue both because both are important -- we have a lot of different bicyclists with different capabilities and bicycling objectives. One size does not fit all. Compromise is necessary to get anything done.

This discussion also illustrates classic communication problems:
- it is hard to communicate clearly and completely
- many assume the worst of others and try to minimize/denigrate their "opponent"
- people like getting up on soap boxes and engaging in fiery dialog because their own viewpoint is right!!

Cheers,
Tim Oey
Sunnyvale, CA

[John Forester]

If you will notice, the disagreement was not about bicycling facilities.
The situation was a verbally violent response to a mildly stated
disagreement about the character of traffic on the streets of Los Angeles.

The compromise has been stated for quite a while. Let the bikeways
advocates have all they can persuade government to give them, provided
that cyclists always have the option to obey the standard rules of the
road instead of whatever a bikeway might encourage. That means repeal of
the cyclist-FTR and bikeway traffic laws, CVC 21202 and 21208.

I suggest that we need to see much work being done by the bikeway
advocates toward repealing 21202 and 21208 before their other activities
can be accepted.

[Roadblock]

I can def agree to all of what you said. I appreciate CABO for doing
what it does to keep our rights to the road.

I think i realized also that once upon a time not 10-15 years ago it
wasnt possible to communicate with thousands of people as easily as
anyone can today. So while Forrester might have thought, in his own
group of LA Wheelmen - experienced educated and generally safe based
on his account - times have changed now where we have heightened
networking ability, better quicker communication and broader awareness
of cycling issues county wide that people just didnt have access to
before.

Maybe its time for the old guard to listen to the new crowd and not
just dismiss us or try to censor us out of the conversation.

[Roadblock]

I said nothing verbally violent. I take offense to that the same way i
take offense to your dismissing of my arguments without providing
anything to counter my arguments. You just brushed away my comments
with a "you're wrong." and that was the end of it.

1273 people, according to LAPD statistics were cycling or walking when
they were hit and left behind. Thats a testament to how criminal the
roads are let alone how dangerous they are considering 1/3 of
collisions in the city of LA are hit and run.

Im making a point that things have changed since 1960's. Cars got
faster, there are more of them the roads got wider and faster and the
law enforcement remains weak. That is a problem that new riders have
to wonder about that you have forgotten about in Lemon Grove.

Midnight Ridazz has 10,000+ registered users so perhaps the increased
mass and ability to communicate between its members in the
(unmoderated) forum and in facebook heightens the senses because I
hear about the issues so freeeeking much. But there it is. Having some
voice come down from above telling me im imagining things is verbal
violence.









On May 26, 2012, at 1:46 PM, John Forester <fore...@johnforester.com>
wrote: