May 22, 2007 7:43 am
Baum Drops In
Posted by Will under biking
So yesterday morning the phone rings and its neither a telemarketer nor some misdialer looking for whatever credit union has a phone number that’s one pesky digit different than mine. This is remarkable enough in its own right. But even more surprising I find the person I’m speaking to is basically The Dude of bicycling and bicycle advocacy in Los Angeles.
“Is this the Will Campbell who wrote the article in the Los Angeles Times?” asked a gravelly voice with an accent and pronunciation that sounded not entirely unlike Henry Kissinger (who was apparently sightseeing at the Pantheon in Rome while we were there May 12… but that’s another story entirely).
“Yes it is,” I answered.
“My name is Alex Baum,” came the reply and I paused, not only wondering if it was the Alex Baum, but how he got my phone number.
“Is this the Alex Baum that the L.A. River Bikeway bridge over Los Feliz Boulevard is named after?”
“Yes it is.”
Whoa. See, at risk of hyperbole Baum is pretty much the granddad of cycling in Los Angeles. Founder of the city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) developed under Mayor Tom Bradley in 1974 and its current chairman, among other acheivements he’s credited not only with the development of hundreds of miles of bike paths but also for prodding the MTA to fund millions of dollars of bike projects annually. That, and he fought with the French resistance against the nazis in World War II.
In January my councilman Eric Garcetti’s website
pointed readers to a profile in the Jewish
Journal of the 84 year old cycling advocate.
In a nutshell, Baum congratulated me on the column and expressed his appreciation for what I had to say and for having the courage to say it. He told me the BAC is in the midst of revisiting the city’s bicycling plan and looking at alternatives such as those I suggested in the Times piece. When I responded that it was an honor to be contacted by someone who’s done so much to promote and expand bicycling across the city’s greater grid he waved off the compliment.
“What’s important,” he said, “is that there are people like you willing to be active in your advocacy and vocal with your ideas.” Then he invited me to attend the next BAC meeting Tuesday June 05 at 7 p.m. on the 15th floor of the LADWP building downtown.
I told him I would make a point to be there.


May 22nd, 2007 at 11:50 am
That is so cool.
BTW, if you’re a Yelper, check out this thread.
http://www.yelp.com/topic/_IjcHX0G0xTbda6sGOZJ6A
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:40 pm
Thanks for the link Joz… I think. All was good until I got to the comment that advises me to “try not to be such a goddamn fruit” for using the term “sharrows.” Feh.
May 23rd, 2007 at 11:30 am
Will,
That a cyclist like yourself is advocating making cycling *more* dangerous is both depressing and infuriating.
Yes, I wrote that letter in the LAT in reply today, and here’s something else to look at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYD1cxxA7Zc
In LACo, about 3,000 cyclists are injured and 25-30 killed every year. Wanna break out how many happened in the road vs. bikelanes/bikeways?
This isn’t Amsterdam or San Francisco, this is Los Angeles. If you want to ride a bike in traffic, great for you, but please don’t advocate getting rid of bike lanes because you believe that if we all just wish really hard and click our ruby slippers, LA drivers will wake up and respect cyclists.
The irony is that your regard for Alex Baum comes from his work on a bikeway, contrary to the point of your opinion piece.
May 23rd, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Hi David,
I appreciate you sharing your point of view however colored it might be by the depression and fury mine has wrought upon you. I missed your letter in the Times today and now I’m almost afraid to look for it for fear that you expound on the incorrect assumptions you present here and perhaps in a far more sarcastic and narrow and bellicose counterpoint that such a grandstand has the potential to draw out.
I must say that I resent your characterization that I’m advocating greater danger for cyclists.
Couple points that might allow for the extraction of such a venomous statement: I don’t advocate the wholesale extermination of bike lanes. What I advocate is consideration of what I feel are better options than bike lanes. As I stated in the piece, L.A. has a paltry ratio of bike lanes-to-roadway at present so the vast majority of roadway has NOTHING to offer cyclists in regards to increasing their safety and motorist awareness. My proposal is INSTEAD of going through the glacial bureacratic pace and tremendous expense of planning,approving and laying bike lanes down, shared-use signage aka “sharrows” offer an alternative.
I just don’t get how a lower-cost quicker-to-install alternative that raises cyclist awareness/safety and motorist education of cyclists is so disagreeable.
By the way, I’ve seen that YouTube clip you linked to. My favorite part of it is the idiotic woman who thinks all biking should be done on the sidewalk. Now that’s infuriating.
Your tag attempting to find irony in my thrill at getting a congratulatory call from Alex Baum is odd. As I hope you’re aware, he’s been the city’s Bicycling Czar for more than 30 years, so to limit the scope of his accomplishments to a four-mile stretch of L.A. River bikeway is a bit of an unfair contrivance. And as to your assertion that my opinion of the bikeway is negative, again you’re mistaken. My issue with the L.A. River Bikeway is that its vastly different conditions on either side of Fletcher tell the sad tale of the state of cycling in this city.
-Will
May 23rd, 2007 at 3:19 pm
I can understand that when there isn’t enough space for a bike lane, sharrows are the only option, but that doesn’t make them a viable alternative to bike lanes just because they only require paint and a stencil.
You’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, especially with a statement like “Quit while it’s behind and not stripe another inch of bike lane.”
“I just don’t get how a lower-cost quicker-to-install alternative that raises cyclist awareness/safety and motorist education of cyclists is so disagreeable.”
Because it’s not a real alternative. Sharrows are like relying on a “Baby on Board” car sticker instead of using a seat belt.
May 23rd, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Apologies for the mangled post. Second try:
I can understand that when there isn’t enough space for a bike lane, sharrows are the only option, but that doesn’t make them a viable alternative to bike lanes just because they only require paint and a stencil.
You’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, especially with a statement like “Quit while it’s behind and not stripe another inch of bike lane.”
Because it’s not a real alternative. Sharrows are like relying on a “Baby on Board” car sticker instead of using a seat belt.
If that’s the case, you should have used your soapbox to advocate its extension, not carry water for the car-culture of the city by advocating sharrows over bike lanes. No, I don’t think you’re suggesting we get rid of bike lanes, so much as let them rot slowly by “not striping another inch.”
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:33 pm
David, it’s interesting about that Silverados and Schwinns line as it was pretty substantially whittled down by the Times for space reasons while I was out of the country and unable to respond. I had a feeling the end result might come back to haunt me.
I don’t offer that up as an excuse so much as a clarification that I’m not the total idealistic pollyanna you might think me to be… and as you’ll see what I originally wrote even addresses your claim of me improperly using my soapbox by not advocating for the bikeway’s extension.
From my final draft: