BIKES ONLY on LA beach bike path

[Gary Cziko]

People,

I've often wondered about the legal basis for the BIKES ONLY stencils on the LA bike path where there is no adjacent pedestrian walkway.

A little searching found the following Q&A which only adds more confusion as to why the BIKES ONLY stencils exist on this path. They do make sense, however, in Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach where there is a separate adjacent walkway for pedestrians.

Question:
The Marvin Braude bike path was created for bicycles, yet there are hundreds of walkers and runners using it daily. This creates a dangerous situation. It is clearly marked 'Bikes Only'.

Answer:
Thank you for contacting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. According to the California Vehicle Code 21966. No pedestrian shall proceed along a bicycle path or lane where there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility. As there is no adequate adjacent pedestrian facility, pedestrians may, in fact, proceed along the Marvin Braude Bike Path.

Source 

-- Gary

[clint.sandusky]

Gary,

You forgot the "Solution" to LAC Dept. Public Works' "Answer."  Good luck with that!

Clint

Sent from my Galaxy Tab A

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CABUB_YxfHCzNq84isfkfVJkG-s%3DF2yvezJ%3D%3D9X2QV0hu40oFPQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Michael Graff]

Oh goody, another puzzle ;)

Well, they're right. The stencil is meaningless:

A Class I path is for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians 

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=890.4.&lawCode=SHC

Unless there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21966.&lawCode=VEH

[William Sellin]

BIKE ONLY seems to be code for “no vehicles” 

Would make more sense if only used on Class I paths with adjacent foot path & Class IV Cycle Tracks where peds are prohibited...  

One of my pet peeves:

There should be a clear breakdown of bikeways:

Class I BIKEWAY  "BIKES ONLY” bike path or side path for exclusive use of cyclists with or without adjacent sidewalk or foot path 

 Class I-A Shared-Use paved path or side path 

 Class I-B Bike Trail (dirt) for exclusive use of cyclists with or without adjacent trail or foot path 

 Class I-C Shared-Use Trail (dirt)

CLASS II BIKEWAY “BIKE LANES” 8-10 feet wide 

  Class II-A Narrow: 3’ minimum pavement between gutter pan & stripe, 5’ curb to stripe, 6’ curb to stripe >40 MPH 

  Class II-B Buffered 18” or more left of Bike Lane, painted double striped, 

  Class II-C Double Buffered: Buffered between travel lanes and parking lane 

  Class II-D Door Zone Buffered: Painted buffer 3’ minimum between parking lane and Bike Lane 

Class II RTOL treatment options:

  A: Extended left of RTOL,  with weave or conflict zone called out per MUTCD and signed 

  B: Shared intersection line - last 200' to 50’ before intersection, shared with right turning traffic who must use right most lane to turn from

  C: "Except Bicycles" RTOL: Cyclists allowed to proceed straight from RTOL; only when marked with sharrows and posted with signs

  D: Bike Lane dropped: Cyclist chooses to merge into through lane to proceed through or use right turn only lane to turn right 

Class III BIKEWAY “BIKE ROUTE”

  A: “Greenway" "Bike Blvd" with restricted vehicle access and street calming to make cycling a priority and preferred option for cyclists

  B: Street or highway or freeway with rideable shoulders and preferred option for cyclists

  C: Street with wide right most lane and preferred option for cyclists

  D: Street with narrow lanes, marked with sharrows and BMUFL signs and preferred option for cyclists

  E: Street that is a preferred option for cyclists

Class IV BIKEWAY “CYCLE TRACKS” for exclusive use of cyclists 

  A1: One-way with separate signal controls at controlled intersections and cross bikes

  A2: One-way with conversion to Class II before any intersection (with marking and signage and RTOL treatment)

  A3: Parking Separated with parked cars blocking the cycle track from the travel lane - Door zone buffered or wide island for door zone

  B1: Two-Way with with separate signal controls & phases at controlled intersections and cross bikes

  B2: Two-way with conversion to Class I side-path before every intersection 

Bill

“Of all the paths you take in life, make sure a few of them are dirt.” – John Muir

On Mar 2, 2021, at 9:37 PM, Michael Graff <michae...@pobox.com> wrote:

Oh goody, another puzzle ;)

Well, they're right. The stencil is meaningless:

A Class I path is for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians 

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=890.4.&lawCode=SHC

Unless there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21966.&lawCode=VEH

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:08 PM Gary Cziko <gcz...@gmail.com> wrote:

People,

I've often wondered about the legal basis for the BIKES ONLY stencils on the LA bike path where there is no adjacent pedestrian walkway.

<image.png>

A little searching found the following Q&A which only adds more confusion as to why the BIKES ONLY stencils exist on this path. They do make sense, however, in Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach where there is a separate adjacent walkway for pedestrians.

Question:
The Marvin Braude bike path was created for bicycles, yet there are hundreds of walkers and runners using it daily. This creates a dangerous situation. It is clearly marked 'Bikes Only'.

Answer:
Thank you for contacting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. According to the California Vehicle Code 21966. No pedestrian shall proceed along a bicycle path or lane where there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility. As there is no adequate adjacent pedestrian facility, pedestrians may, in fact, proceed along the Marvin Braude Bike Path.

Source 

-- Gary

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CABUB_YxfHCzNq84isfkfVJkG-s%3DF2yvezJ%3D%3D9X2QV0hu40oFPQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CANe0fGVeULhagff5eu%3DX_7hDBRUgpgZEGhsQ%3DtKUrrJD_KTN8w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Michael Graff]

For traffic engineers, I think their only references are the manuals and guides: CA-MUTCD, HDM, and (ugh) NACTO.

We can refine SHC 890.4 (and the CVC) all we want, but the engineers will not refer to it. They have no need to.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/E65C3F1E-9285-4893-853B-BD0F68B4D925%40sellin.com.

[William Sellin]

Solution?  Give the antique BIKE ONLY stencils to Irvine (they still use them on Bike Lanes) or the California Bicycle Museum in Davis… 

Better option for Class I paths:

 use DOT’s Class II “B” Standard  

or green it up with the newer 'Complete Streets' Class II standard 4x20’ marking:

...and at least highlight 2-way direction, priority and presence of cyclists to all users… 

Bill Sellin

714 943 3678

WASe...@gmail.com

"Most of the World is either Downhill or Flat…"

On Mar 2, 2021, at 9:08 PM, Gary Cziko <gcz...@gmail.com> wrote:

People,

I've often wondered about the legal basis for the BIKES ONLY stencils on the LA bike path where there is no adjacent pedestrian walkway.

<image.png>

A little searching found the following Q&A which only adds more confusion as to why the BIKES ONLY stencils exist on this path. They do make sense, however, in Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach where there is a separate adjacent walkway for pedestrians.

Question:
The Marvin Braude bike path was created for bicycles, yet there are hundreds of walkers and runners using it daily. This creates a dangerous situation. It is clearly marked 'Bikes Only'.

Answer:
Thank you for contacting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. According to the California Vehicle Code 21966. No pedestrian shall proceed along a bicycle path or lane where there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility. As there is no adequate adjacent pedestrian facility, pedestrians may, in fact, proceed along the Marvin Braude Bike Path.

Source 

-- Gary

[clint.sandusky]

Good one Bill!

Or spend millions of tax payers dollars to build a separate pedestrian path???

Clint

Sent from my Galaxy Tab A

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/02BD03FE-6103-4C95-9EC1-05E7BA95BE65%40gmail.com.

[Michael Graff]

A little bit of black paint to cover the "ONLY"?

What fraction of Class I path-miles has adjacent ped facilities? I'm guessing it's pretty small. Most paths I encounter are multi-use.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/603fe523.1c69fb81.66cbe.92b1%40mx.google.com.

[Pete van Nuys]

Thanks, Bill. Very useful opening to a needed discussion.

'have to remember that TEs look at everything from their motorist perspective. A "bike facility" is primarily a way to get bicyclists out of the way of motorists.

Class 3 was a transparent (to most cyclists) attempt to route bikes off more direct main streets, under a veil of  "safety," for the benefit of drivers. The routes were-- and still are in many cases-- circuitous and hillier than the main drag.

Class 2 is bicycle jail, doubling down on 21202.

Class 1-- hell, anything that a fatass bureaucrat might think would be OK to ride with his grandkid. No matter it didn't go anywhere, or was interrupted by a cross street, was paved or not.

Some of these have been buffed up with newer standards, of course. But no one has buffed up the brains of most (but not all...) of the TEs.

So Bill's idea of giving them all a limited number of graphics in their "tool box" (Oh, how I've longed to use that term! I feel like a real professional now) may be a way to get them to focus on the needs of a growing number of modes. To be more "inclusive." (Oh, Wow. Two buzz terms in a single email. What a day!).

Let's promote these ideas in the name of "diversity."  More Modes. More Choice. More Freedom to Move.

And do it with a rational eye on cost to the taxpayer. There is actually room for us all out there, Engineering can plan a more useful, more articulate role than it does. And Education needs a commitment to Enforcement if it is to have a real effect on motoring culture.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CANe0fGWTsQ5NOfpPS3aQpbYm-Dq8us6eQ%3DFq9pps8cHq2og6Zg%40mail.gmail.com.

--
Pete van Nuys Exec. Dir. Orange County Bicycle Coalition ECI, LCI, CSI 949 492 5737

[Alan Forkosh]

caboforuyIn the late 1960’s or early 1970’s (before I knew about bicycle clothing, bicycle advocacy or John Forester)), I ended up on a bike safety video after I completed riding a bike path along the beach in either Ocean Park or Venice. As I recall, the path was a somewhat serpentine cement path 30 of 40 feet into the sand from a straight asphalt path between the beach and city streets. The cement path was marked or signed for bikes only while the asphalt path signed for no bicycle riding. I recall that I complained in the short impromptu interview about the pedestrians using the bike path when a shorter route was available to them.

Alan Forkosh                    Oakland, CA
afor...@mac.com

https://al4kosh.com

On Mar 2, 2021, at 9:08 PM, Gary Cziko <gcz...@gmail.com> wrote:

People,

I've often wondered about the legal basis for the BIKES ONLY stencils on the LA bike path where there is no adjacent pedestrian walkway.

<image.png>

A little searching found the following Q&A which only adds more confusion as to why the BIKES ONLY stencils exist on this path. They do make sense, however, in Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach where there is a separate adjacent walkway for pedestrians.

Question:
The Marvin Braude bike path was created for bicycles, yet there are hundreds of walkers and runners using it daily. This creates a dangerous situation. It is clearly marked 'Bikes Only'.

Answer:
Thank you for contacting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. According to the California Vehicle Code 21966. No pedestrian shall proceed along a bicycle path or lane where there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility. As there is no adequate adjacent pedestrian facility, pedestrians may, in fact, proceed along the Marvin Braude Bike Path.

Source 

-- Gary

[Michael Graff]

It's weird that when faced with a bog-standard Class I path, which happens to have an incorrect stencil, we seem to jump to the conclusion that a whole 'nother pedway needs to be installed, at great expense. Instead of just removing the incorrect stencil.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/4c717218-7bbe-3c4f-5602-5290c96f17e0%40cox.net.

[Gary Cziko]

Alan, 

That's in Venice.

In that serpentine section, the bike path wanders quite far from Ocean Front Walk--here as much as 500 feet. So I that would not consider that an "adjacent pedestrian facility."

Adjacent pedestrian facilities do exist close to the bike path for all of Santa Monica, much of Manhattan Beach, and some of Hermosa Beach.

-- Gary

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/0030D189-F5F7-443F-B761-DD3DAD4B1418%40mac.com.

[Alan Forkosh]

Bank when I rode it (50 years ago), the area between the path and Ocean Front  was not landscaped—it was all sand. I vaguely n that I thought the path inconvenient, since it was longer that using Ocean Frot and couldn’t imagine why anyone would use it unless compelled to.

Alan Forkosh                    Oakland, CA
afor...@mac.com

https://al4kosh.com

On Mar 3, 2021, at 3:20 PM, Gary Cziko <gcz...@gmail.com> wrote:

Alan, 

That's in Venice.

In that serpentine section, the bike path wanders quite far from Ocean Front Walk--here as much as 500 feet. So I that would not consider that an "adjacent pedestrian facility."

[Gary Cziko]

People,

I see a broader issue here concerning traffic signs and stencils.

• We have speed limit signs that are considered minimum speeds by most drivers.
• We have STOP signs where drivers rarely make a full stop unless they must to prevent a collision.
• We have BIKES ONLY signs where all kinds of pedestrians are permitted.
• We have KEEP OUT and NO THRU TRAFFIC signs on Marine Avenue just west of LAX, a road that parallels the beach bike path and that I and hundreds of other cyclists pass by each week to avoid the congestion and sand on the path.

• We have double solid yellow center lines on roads that don't stop passing (and often make no sense for motorists passing much slower bicyclists).

I have the feeling when I am motoring or cycling in Europe that the signs make much more sense (few if any STOP signs for example) and speed limits and other traffic control devices are more seriously enforced.

Here it's basically just do whatever you can get away with and the signs should all have a "JUST KIDDING" plaque on them because many of them don't make much sense (such as almost all the STOP signs we have) and just about everyone knows it. I find that a very odd traffic system indeed.

-- Gary