Tuesday night, toward the end of a loooooong Monrovia City Council meeting, agenda item AR-4: “Monrovia Bicycle Master Plan” finally came before the Council. After a brief summary of the proposed bike master plan by the city’s public works manager, Sean Sullivan, the floor was opened for comments. I had hoped there wouldn’t be too much NIMBY opposition to the plan’s proposed bike lanes and in fact all the public comments were positive. A number of members of “Move Monrovia,” the local bike advocacy group, attended and spoke in support of the plan. Monrovia cyclist Robert Lewis, for example, eloquently discussed the need for better bike infrastructure in town. “The fact is, people like me will ride regardless,” he told the Mayor and Councilmembers. “What we need to do is lower the barriers for the rest of the community to ride to the grocery store once a week or to leave their car at home and ride with their children to Monroe Elementary once a week.” After several other speakers praised the plan, the council members voted unanimously to adopt the new bike plan. After such a long struggle to get this plan going, there is a tremendous sense of achievement.
The new plan, drafted by Alta Planning, is a huge step for this community. It addresses a number of critical transportation issues in Monrovia. It extends Class II bike lanes to Monrovia High School and along Chestnut in the western half of the city, as well as Central Ave between Mayflower and Myrtle and Duarte Ave between Montain and California. Existing bike lanes on Olive Ave. by Monroe Elementary will be upgraded to buffered bike lanes, offering added protection for students and their families. The plan also proposes more bike racks and end of trip facilities (such as repair and hydration stations) and promotes bike safety education programs and community rides as a way of encouraging a shift away from the automobile monoculture. In all, there is much to like about this plan.
I do have some concerns, however. First, the plan relies heavily on Class III “bicycle routes” which may or may not mean anything more than sharrows and increased signage. This is especially the case on the area around the new Gold Line station on Mayflower, California, and Pomona streets. If the city makes these “bike routes” real neighborhood greenways, with infrastructure designed to lower speeds and divert cars to other streets, then it will be an major improvement and encourage the “interested but concerned” majority to venture out on their bikes. Otherwise, the improvement will be negligible.
On a number of important streets the plan recommends only “study” of either Class II bike lanes or Class IV separated bike lanes, but no timetable for study, let alone implementation. On a number of these streets, the only way to fit bike lanes would be to remove on-street parking or a “road diet.” Indeed, a number of city officials have remarked about the city’s “narrow” streets being a barrier to bike infrastructure. I fear that, instead of seeing the streets of this old streetcar suburb as perfect for a rethinking of the primacy of the automobile, the needs of people on foot and on bikes will be sacrificed to the continued domination of the most inefficient transportation mode–cars. In other words, the plan puts off the hard choices for a later date (which may be why there was no opposition at the Council meeting). As we learned in Temple City recently, once you start asking motorists to park a little further away, or take 30 seconds longer to get through town, they will scream bloody murder. Inconvenience them just a little, call into question their God-given right to drive everywhere and park wherever they want and they’re ready to string up those awful bikers.
In sum, Monrovia has taken an important step toward the creation of a city grid that works for all road users. The task of organizing and lobbying remains, however, and the hard work of growing and mobilizing a constituency for more ambitious transformation must also commence in earnest. Fortunately, the advocates are in place, and have a victory under their belt.
A sure sign of transportation nerdiness is getting excited about bike lanes. But that little bit of paint increases safety and helps encourage more people to use a bike for transportation. In so doing bike lanes become part of the solution to problems as diverse as air pollution, traffic and parking congestion, and climate change. It’s a little thing, but it is an important step in the right direction.
Back when I started this modest little blog in 2012, my very first post called for bike lanes on N. Halstead Street in Pasadena. As I noted at the time, it is a primary bike route providing “first mile – last mile” connectivity to the Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line station, has plenty of off-street parking, meaning some on-street parking could be removed to make room for bike lanes. Since then, I’ve periodically bugged folks at Pasadena DOT about this route, making myself something of a pest, I am sure. More importantly, the efforts of the good people at the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition, who have provided DOT with input on Pasadena’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure needs, have played a central role in getting improvements like these implemented. To its credit, someone at DOT is paying attention.
I happened upon the restriping of Halstead the other day, and to my pleasant surprise, DOT had instructed the Department of Public Works to install bike lanes. Better yet, they’re buffered bike lanes, which give people on bikes a couple of feet of painted buffer zone separating them from automobile traffic. Such a setup provides a little more space, and thus comfort when riding next to traffic. These buffered lanes will connect riders between Rosemead Blvd and the Sierra Madre Villa station.
These lanes are the first new lanes in Pasadena that connect directly with a Gold Line station and they will enable more people to comfortably bike to and from the station. When we combine a network of bikeable streets with transit, we create sustainable mobility choices for more people.
In the past, when Pasadena DOT has dropped the ball, I’ve been quick to call them on it. Now, when they come through, I gladly give them props. Thanks Pasadena DOT!! Special thanks to Rich Dilluvio, who stayed true to his word on these bike lanes.
Now, if we can get some buffered lanes on Sierra Madre Blvd …. On Rosemead Blvd …. On ….
It’s not news to say our transportation system in Southern California is reliant on cars. Such a system is incomplete, unsafe, and incredibly unhealthy for our communities and for the planet. What is difficult is getting people to realize this transportation system is broken and convincing them they need to change it. Sometimes I feel hopeful about our prospects, other times, not so much. The victories seem small, and so few and far between. The setbacks are not permanent, but with so far to go these delays prolong the time it takes to fix our broken system.
Last week, the City Council of Temple City voted not to adopt a “complete street” redesign of Las Tunas, a commercial street in the heart of that city. The redesign proposal included bike lanes and would have made the street safer and more pleasant for pedestrians and bicyclists. The redesigned street would have made downtown Temple City a destination, not just a thoroughfare.
I thought the signs looked good, but I was wrong. A couple of months ago I attended a community meeting on the Las Tunas redesign and, though there was some opposition from local NIMBYs (one old codger at the meeting said bike lanes were a “sign of mental illness”), the city council voted unanimously to move forward and place it on the agenda for the next meeting. At last week’s city council meeting (which I could not attend because of work commitments), opponents were apparently out in force, and the “streets-are-for-cars” crowd won the day. The opposition—mostly older residents—pressured the city council to abandon even a modest proposal for bike lanes.
It was a setback for the region, and leaves Las Tunas a dangerous commuter arterial instead of a vibrant center for local people and businesses. I have no doubt that the people of Temple City will eventually see the light, but in the meantime the design of Las Tunas remains stuck in the past, serving only a part of the community’s needs, forcing everyone else into a steel box.
Another example of the broken system is that there is still no real usable network of bike lanes that would allow people to get around without a car. Who would want to do such a thing? Consider a family friend of ours, a student at Whittier College. Like many college students, she doesn’t have a lot of money or a car, and she recently got a part-time job down the road from her college. She wants to ride her bike to work, but she’s not particularly experienced, and the route includes some busy arterials like Lambert Rd., where automobile speeds can reach 40mph. There are a few streets with bike lanes (shown in solid green lines on the Google map, below), but there are large gaps including a long stretch of Lambert that would leave her stranded halfway to work on a busy street with no bike lane.
Bike lanes—let alone protected bike lanes—are still a rarity in this part of the San Gabriel Valley. As with many suburban areas, there are few transit options, either. Her parents face the choice of allowing her to ride her bike on incomplete car-streets or shelling out thousands of dollars for a car (adding another car to already-congested roads, adding more pollution and GHGs to our air, depriving a young person of healthy exercise, etc). Here is a person who wants to ride to work, yet our transportation system makes this choice so daunting that one feels almost forced to choose a car. This is the opposite of freedom, the opposite of a complete transportation system.
When we create a transportation system that only works for cars, we create a partial system that excludes and marginalizes people who can’t afford cars, don’t want a car, or who are unable to drive. We essentially force all but the most experienced and confident (or desperate) to buy into the car system. Once people buy into that system they expect cities to design infrastructure for their convenience, which further reinforces the incompleteness of this unsafe, inequitable, unsustainable, people-unfriendly system.
We must create a transportation system that works for everyone and prioritizes more sustainable, healthy, and socially-equitable modes of transportation. We must have the courage to change a car monoculture that impoverishes our public spaces, marginalizes those who can’t afford a car, contributes to our climate crisis, and kills tens of thousands (and injures or maims hundreds of thousands) of Americans every year. We owe it to our children to create a better system. At times the enormity of the task seems overwhelming.
But the work continues and I am not free to abandon it.
When I see a street resurfaced, especially a street that desperately needs a bike lane, a glimmer of hope stirs within me that maybe, just maybe, the street will be restriped to accommodate bikes. This foolish glimmer of hope is usually dashed, as the local DOT simply returns the street to the same old, unsafe car-centric design it had before.
Case in point: the recent resurfacing of Sierra Madre Villa Blvd in East Pasadena between Rosemead Blvd and Sierra Madre Blvd.
The street is marked as a “bike route” with a couple of “share the road” signs, but hardly anybody rides it because automobile speeds average about 40 mph, and it’s designed for automobile speed, not bike or pedestrian safety. The street would require some minor re-design to accommodate bike lanes, as I’ll demonstrate below, but there is room for them and the street is a good candidate for bike lanes because it would close a gap between nearby streets that have bike lanes and it is the main route connecting the the neighborhood to the nearby Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line transit station.
This station is the major bus and light rail hub in the area, and is slated to be a bike share station when Metro eventually expands its bike share program to Pasadena. You would think Pasadena DOT would use the resurfacing as an ideal opportunity to redesign the street for multimodal commuting and safety at minimal cost. But you would be wrong.
Sierra Madre Villa Blvd is a north-south arterial that heads up the hill from the Gold Line station to New York Drive in Altadena (which has buffered bike lanes). As it heads north, it intersects with N. Rosemead Blvd (which has bike lanes) and Sierra Madre Blvd. (which also has bike lanes). Currently, the street has 2 travel lanes in each direction (one 10-foot and 1 12-foot), a 10-foot center turn lane, and 2 10-foot parking lanes on each side. The southbound side is residential with a library at Rosemead Bl. The northbound side has an LDS church and an apartment complex, both of which have ample off-street parking. The northbound side is the most critical for some kind of bike lane, because of the large speed differential between 40mph cars and bicycles heading up the hill.
Below I lay out the current configuration, then offer two alternatives: one that removes on-street parking from the northbound side and provides buffered bike lanes in both directions (option 1), and another that keeps on-street parking but narrows the parking lane and one of the 12-foot travel lanes to provide sharrows on the downhill side and a bike lane on the northbound side (option 2). Neither one of these options would have been cost prohibitive.
Why didn’t DOT consider more bike friendly alternatives for Sierra Madre Villa, especially considering their stated desire for Pasadena to rival Long Beach for bike friendliness? I have several theories, but one is that DOT staff tends to pay more attention to bike infrastructure in the gentrifying downtown area than in East Pasadena, a less glamorous part of town.
It’s a shame, because this was a real missed opportunity. DOT needs to know that people on bikes in East Pasadena deserve safer streets, too.
It has happened again. Another bicyclist killed by a hit-and-run driver who couldn’t be bothered to stop and render aid to his victim. The driver, witnesses said, was traveling in excess of 60 MPH on North Figueroa Friday morning at approximately 3:30 AM when he allegedly ran a red light and struck the cyclist who was legally riding in the intersection. Witnesses told police the driver did not even brake and dragged the victim for 100 feet before speeding off. When police arrested the suspect, he was found to have abandoned his car and walked home, and the next morning was still over the legal limit for alcohol in his bloodstream and had debris from the collision in his hair.
I didn’t know the victim but I thought it was important to pay my respects to yet another cyclist who lost his life to the car culture. I attended a ghost bike ceremony on North Figueroa in Highland Park, where the tragedy occurred, and was heartened by the sense of solidarity that our suffering and vulnerability as flesh and blood in the face of speeding steel brings about. But I also get so tired of having to meet my fellow cyclists under circumstances such as these. Another life lost. Another ghost bike by the side of another unsafe street.
The thing that makes this tragedy doubly infuriating is the fact that this stretch of North Figueroa had been slated for a makeover under the L.A. mobility plan that would have lowered automobile speeds and installed bike lanes. No one can say for sure whether this “road diet” would have saved the victim’s life, but redesigning the street for the safety of all road users would have made it more difficult for any motorist to use Figueroa as a race track. Unfortunately, the previously approved road diet was unilaterally halted last year by Councilmember Gil Cedillo who represents the district. Some of the activists took matters into their own hands and painted DIY bike lane stencils on North Figueroa. We shouldn’t have to do this, but when our leaders fail to act, the people must step forward and take matters into their own hands.
In addition to paying my respects to the victim and his family and friends, I had to attend this memorial in order to bear witness to another example of the failure of car-centric road design and to the fecklessness of Councilmember Cedillo whose craven abandonment of the North Figueroa road diet is one of the more pathetic failures of L.A.’s political system in recent years. Yet Cedillo blithely saunters on, mouthing concern for another victim of car violence while single-handedly blocking an approved road redesign that would have made North Figueroa safer for everyone.
Much has been happening in the bike-sphere, but I’ve been buried under a hectic schedule at my university, and it is only a brief spring break that allows me to break my silence. We’re still fighting bad ideas like Sen. Carol Liu’s ill-considered mandatory helmet law and the multi-billion-dollar 710 freeway tunnels, but there are some hopeful signs here and there. Here in the San Gabriel Valley, the Gold Line extension is nearing completion, and there is potential for this light rail to be a game-changer for commuters in the foothills of the SGV, especially if local cities make an effort to connect bike lanes to the stations.
One of the other bright spots is the growing willingness of cities to consider protected bike lanes (sometimes called “cycle tracks”) that have some form of physical separation, such as planters, curbs, medians, bollards, or other decorative barriers between cars and bikes. For decades, the traffic engineering profession in the US has resisted protected bike lanes, but they have been extremely popular where they’ve been installed, and now they are starting to appear in cities all over the United States. Long Beach was the first Southern California city to install one, and Temple City recently installed another on Rosemead Blvd. There is a proposal by LADOT for the first one in Los Angeles, and I hope that there will be at least one in Pasadena’s pending mobility plan. Once these protected bike lanes begin to proliferate, I believe they will significantly change perception of cycling for transportation in US cities.
Another bright spot is the growth of the “Open Streets” movement throughout Southern California and the US. LA’s own “CicLAvia” is a prime example of an open streets concept that has spread and gained popularity wherever it has been tried. Last weekend, CicLAvia held an open streets festival in the San Fernando Valley, and it was extremely popular (a bad cold kept me from attending). The Valley was in many ways the epicenter of Southern California’s traditional car culture, so the success of a car-free event in the Valley is an indication of how far we’ve moved from the stereotype of American Graffiti. The Valley’s CicLAvia also featured a “pop-up cycle track” on Chandler Ave. that gave people a taste of what it feels like to ride in a protected bike lane. These events are important insofar as they provide people with a vision of street space radically flipped from cars to people and bikes. The popularity of these events underscores the reality that people are hungry for public space that is safe to walk and bicycle in. And where there is popularity, politicians will follow, perhaps even changing their own perceptions.
People who participate in these events often realize they haven’t really seen their city until they’ve seen it on a bike. Businesses realize there is money to be made from clientele on bikes. Open streets events also introduce people to the idea that distance is not really as much a barrier to bicycling as people assume. When you realize that (with car free space) you can easily bike from one end of LA to the other, or one end of the Valley to the other, it erodes the automobile imperative just a little bit more. These events bring people of different backgrounds together in an atmosphere of healthy, active, fun. Every time CicLAvia occurs, I hear someone say I wish it was like this every day. Gliding down the street, free from the fear of cars, free from the noise and the pollution, people begin to imagine car-free space every day.
I’m excitedly awaiting the next iteration of CicLAvia, which will come to Pasadena at the end of May. As it becomes regularized, expected, and anticipated, I think it will continue to grow in popularity and, with it, the subversive idea that streets are not just for cars. To paraphrase Che, we need “one, two, many CicLAvias,” to overthrow the tyranny of the automobile.
Friday evening, BikeSGV, the local bike advocacy organization in the San Gabriel Valley, celebrated the grand opening of its new headquarters in El Monte and gave an update on the area’s regional bike master plan. About 60 people attended the event despite Friday’s heavy rain. The event offered an opportunity to celebrate progress on the SGV’s regional bike master plan and provide the community with an opportunity to hear about the ambitious plans for the new headquarters.
The open house included food, music, and a silent auction to raise money for the new headquarters. BikeSGV director Javier Hernandez touted plans for the new headquarters, housed at the former site of Mulhall elementary in El Monte, for bike safety classes, bike maintenance workshops, a new bike co-op at Fletcher Park, as well as the continuation of BikeSGV’s regular Bike Train community rides and its Women on Wheels (WoW) group rides. The superintendent of the El Monte school district was on hand, as well as staff representatives from the office of County Supervisor Hilda Solis. The new headquarters, located less than a block from the Rio Hondo Bikeway, has the potential to be a center of bike culture in the region.
Hernandez also reported on the progress of the regional bike master plan for the San Gabriel Valley. The bike master plan is absolutely crucial to the efforts to build safer streets in the region and make bicycle transportation a more realistic possibility for more people. Central to this effort has been a push by BikeSGV to get city governments to support the first phase of this plan. I attended the Baldwin Park city council meeting where the bike plan was approved last month and I was impressed with BikeSGV’s ability to bring people from the community—especially youth—to attend the meeting and speak on behalf of the plan. Four of the five cities involved in phase 1 of the plan have officially signed on (Baldwin Park, Monterey Park, San Gabriel, and El Monte), and the remaining city (South El Monte) will vote on whether to support the plan in early 2015. I hope they do.
There are also plans for a “Phase 2” of the regional bike plan that includes five cities along the corridor of the Gold Line extension from Pasadena to Azusa. In addition, BikeSGV is working with Metro to schedule two CicLAvia-style open streets events for 2015 and 2016 in the San Gabriel Valley.
Let’s face it, the San Gabriel Valley has been a backwater when it comes to bike-friendly infrastructure. As someone who lives and bikes in this mostly bike-unfriendly zone, I look with envy on what other SoCal communities are doing. Despite opposition from anti-bike troglodytes like LA council member Gil Cedillo, LA is making strides toward multimodal transportation, Santa Monica has seen its bike mode share grow by leaps and bounds, and Long Beach aspires to be America’s most bike-friendly city with its impressive network of bike lanes. By comparison, it has been frustrating to see the San Gabriel Valley, with a few small exceptions, lag behind these other areas of the Southland in making the streets safer for people on bikes. But Friday’s event is an indication that things may be changing.
I’ll admit I’m impatient for change. We need more bike infrastructure, better bike infrastructure, and we needed it yesterday. But it’s gratifying to see that after so many years of inaction, the San Gabriel Valley may finally become more accommodating for people on bikes. Getting the various cities to sign on to a regional bike plan has been no small feat, and BikeSGV activists are to be congratulated for their hard work. I’m hopeful that this new headquarters will enable the group to build on this foundation and grow the bike culture of the region. Is it too much to hold out hope that we may be on the cusp of real infrastructure changes in the San Gabriel Valley? As far as I’m concerned, these positive steps BikeSGV is taking to make the region a better, safer place to ride are very good news, indeed.
California’s new “3 Feet for Safety” Act, which requires motorists to give bicyclists 3 feet when passing, went into effect last month. While most motorists seem to be abiding by the new law, I’ve had a couple of close calls the last few weeks that suggest motorists could use a bit more education on how to safely pass cyclists. The fact that both incidents occurred on the same stretch of roadway in Pasadena also seems to strongly suggest that this road needs additional infrastructure treatment (i.e., a “road diet” that narrows the traffic lanes and buffered or protected bike lanes) to slow the speed of traffic and provide safe space for bicyclists.
The first close call came a couple of weeks ago when I was traveling south on Rosemead Blvd in the bike lane between Sierra Madre Villa and Halstead. The road curves to the right and as I rounded the curve, a driver in a Honda Civic passed me so close I could feel the wind from her passenger-side mirror brush my left arm, which startled the hell out of me. Her right tires were actually on the bike lane line. She was probably doing about 40 mph, and as she passed I involuntarily yelled out of fear. I tried to catch her, but she was going too fast and I got stopped at the red light on Rosemead and Halstead. As she sped away, she seemed to slowly drift in her lane from left to right and back. Was she drunk (this was a Monday morning about 10:00 am)? On meds? Texting?
The second incident occurred last Friday afternoon about 1:30 pm, traveling southbound on Rosemead again, this time between Halstead and Hastings Ranch Road. On this stretch of Rosemead there’s no bike lane, as it ends at Halstead. There is a shopping center with a new L.A. Fitness center that opened recently, and now that it is open, there are many more cars parked on the street here. This forced me to ride in the traffic lane, as the curbside shoulder is now occupied by the cars of people working out at the fitness center. How ironic that people park their cars on the street here, despite the fact that there is plenty of parking in a lot behind the fitness center, but drivers would have to walk maybe 100 feet farther to the entrance to the gym if they parked in the lot (better to save your walking for the treadmill you’ve paid for inside the gym, huh?). Meanwhile, the presence of their empty cars in the street creates a hazard for those using alternate modes of transportation. There would be plenty of room for bike lanes here if Pasadena DOT prohibited on-street parking here, but clearly the safety of cyclists is not a priority.
As I rode in the right-hand traffic lane and tried to avoid the “door zone” (about three feet away from the parked cars), a driver in a compact sedan sped by me at high speed and far too close for comfort. This time, I caught up to the driver as she sat at the next red light. Her passenger side window was closed, but I leaned over and said loudly (my adrenaline was up from the close call), “you need to give cyclists three feet when you pass.” She rolled down her window and apologized (which surprised me). She explained that another car had been passing her in the lane on her left when she passed me, so she couldn’t move farther to the left as she passed. I thanked her for her honesty, she apologized again, then the light turned green and she took off.
At least the exchange was cordial, but as I rode on, I thought to myself, “if it wasn’t safe for her to move to the left to give me space, shouldn’t she have just slowed down for (at most) a few seconds until it was safe to pass?” The answer is obvious, of course she should have. This is an aspect of driving that most motorists don’t think about when passing a person on a bike. People are often in a hurry, so they figure they’ll just squeeze by. Squeezing by another motorist when you’re both wrapped in 2,000-lbs of steel is not perceived as a problem. Worst that might happen is scratched paint. Squeezing by a bicyclist is a life-threatening move for the bicyclist.
According to the California Vehicle Code, bicyclists are allowed to “take the lane” if it is not safe for a bike and a car to pass side-by-side, and I probably should have been smack dab in the center of the travel lane rather than riding on the right half of the lane. It would have forced motorists in my lane to slow down behind me. Yet, few things irritate drivers more than cyclists “hogging” the lane. Hey, it’s not a picnic for me. I don’t like to slow others down and I don’t like the feeling of a car running up behind me, either. A recent study by the League of American Bicyclists found that the largest portion of car-on-bike fatalities were cars hitting bikes from behind. Nor do I relish being honked at or yelled at by impatient motorists who don’t give a shit about my right to the lane. But, it’s probably safer than having a driver try to pass me too close when there isn’t enough room.
This raises a larger point I made earlier about the lack of bike lanes (including protective buffers between cars and bikes) on high-speed arterials like Rosemead Blvd. There’s plenty of space. For one thing, there’s no need for on-street parking when the adjacent shopping center has an ample off-street parking lot. Buffered bike lanes or cycle tracks (bike lanes with physical separation from automobile traffic) could be installed on the shoulder of the road where empty cars now sit and it would not impact traffic flow. Further south on Rosemead, the city of Temple City has already installed cycle tracks. It’s time for Pasadena to do likewise. At the very least, the Pasadena DOT should ban on-street parking on that stretch of Rosemead so bicyclists can safely use the shoulder out of the way of speeding cars. The fact that I’ve had two close calls on the same stretch of roadway indicates the street is not safe. There’s too little space for bikes and cars are driving too fast.
I’m glad the 3-foot passing law is now in effect in California, but we still need better education on how to pass a bicyclist safely and, most importantly, protected bike lanes on more of our streets. What do you say, Pasadena?
You know you’re a bike geek when the appearance of new buffered bike lanes on a local street makes your day. In this case, Pasadena DOT has at long last upgraded the bike lanes on New York Drive between Altadena Drive and Sierra Madre Blvd to buffered bike lanes.
The addition of a painted 2-foot buffer zone between the bike lane and the traffic lane is especially important on this stretch of NY Drive insofar as cars travel at about 50 mph. That’s right, 50. On the downhill stretches of the road, motorists are sometimes going even faster.
The first time I rode the old bike lanes on NY Drive (about 4 years ago) was the last. There’s nothing like the terrifying feeling of a car or truck passing within a couple of feet of you doing 50 mph or more. It’s enough to make all but the most hard core cyclist say “fugettaboudit.” Today, on the other hand, I rode in the buffered lane and felt much more comfortable. The 2 additional feet of space between you and speeding automobile traffic may not seem like much, but, believe me, it makes a huge difference. Now I feel more comfortable taking this route to visit friends and family in the Eaton Canyon area of Altadena and it cuts a good 8-10 minutes off of the longer route I used to take to avoid what had been an awful stretch of road to ride on.
While the buffered lanes are a major improvement, the route is still not completely safe. Unfortunately, the bike lane abruptly ends and DOT left the shoulder of the roadway open to parked cars for the 4/10ths of a mile between N. Altadena Drive and Eaton Canyon Drive (in front of swanky Gerrish Swim Club). During the summer months and on weekends there are often long lines of parked cars along the entire stretch, forcing bicycles into a traffic lane where cars are moving at upwards of 50 mph. Moreover, on the westbound side, the road pitches uphill steeply, meaning bikes traveling this portion will be going slow, unless being ridden by a Tour de France-level athlete. So with the sudden loss of a bike lanes and parked cars, you go from tolerable comfort and safety level to super high-stress, unsafe roadway.
As such, I give the stretch with the buffered lanes a B+ (because of the high traffic speeds, some plastic bollards along the outer edge of the buffer would earn an A- and a curb-protected bike lane would earn an A), and I give the stretch between Eaton Cyn Drive and Altadena Drive as currently designed an F. Because of the prioritization of curbside parking for cars, I still wouldn’t feel comfortable recommending this stretch of the route for kids, newbies, or less confident riders, and thus it fails the “8-80” test (i.e., is it safe for cyclists from 8 to 80?). If we want to get more people out of their cars, a bike route is only as good as its weakest link, and I fear this design flaw will not make the route more popular with people who don’t already ride.
Overall, however, I have to say that the buffered lanes are huge improvement over the non-buffered lanes that existed before. On the eastbound side, as I rode the uphill stretch going much more slowly, the buffered lane made a big difference.
What a change 2 feet make. We still have a long way to go, but we’re making progress. Here’s hoping Pasadena DOT fixes the weak link on this road and continues to add more buffered bike lanes to more streets.