Tue 3 Jan 2012
First In An Occasional Series: Bikeway Peds Behaving Badly
Posted by Will under biking, outdoors, people, reality
[20] Comments
With the completion of the stretch of the Los Angeles River Bikeway through Elysian Valley have come conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists. Certainly a percentage of inconsiderate individuals from each side are responsible for these negative interactions, but inevitably blog posts about the topic will be published in which proprietary pedestrians seems to relish making broad generalizations about cyclists as the creators of the friction while righteously holding themselves entirely harmless.
It’s a similar infuriating us-versus-them attitude I’ve seen time and time again from hikers/equestrians who can do no wrong and mountain cyclists who they seem to believe unconditionally suck as a whole.
The thing is, whether it’s on roadways, trails or bikeways, my time in the saddle involves only a very small percentage of aggravation because I’m one of those cyclists who actively strives not to suck. As such I found it a bit ironic that during yesterday’s amazingly enjoyable 20-mile morning ride in which the streets I pedaled upon were almost completely empty, I had two encounters with pedestrians on the bikeway, both of which were caught on my handlebar cam and demonstrate the irresponsible behavior many pedestrians simply refuse to acknowledge — while at the same time getting taxpayer money spent on biased signage that strives to reinforce both pedestrian entitlement and cyclist inconsideration.
As such I’m going to begin this “Pedestrians Behaving Badly” occasional series, starting with the following stills culled from yesterday’s timelapse:
In this first one, I began slowing while ringing my bell at about a one-second interval more than 100 yards away from this bikeway bogarting couple and their three canines (two unleashed), increasing it in intensity and decreasing my speed as I drew closer.
Thanks to their inattentiveness (which wasn’t broken until I had passed them at less than five miles per hour), the smallest dog drifted into my path, but saw me at the last moment and abruptly changed direction with an understandably startled growl as I passed.
Continuing on past the startled couple, I have little doubt that despite my best efforts to show a consideration and caution they weren’t willing or able to reciprocate they found no fault in themselves and complete fault in me.
The next image below shows a jogger coming toward me, a pedestrian heading in the same direction as I was, and two unleashed dogs. Take the dogs out of the shot and this scene is full of awesome, with both people moving comfortably out of the bike lanes on the shoulders of the bikeway. Trouble is both dogs belong to the jogger and as I approached they were roaming freely and unchecked back and forth across the width of the bikeway.
Were the dogs aggressive? Not in the slightest, but that’s not the point. Did their guardian seem like he was completely entitled to disregard the city’s leash laws? Absolutely. Fortunately neither dog impeded my progress and instead of having to take some sort of evasive action I was able to proceed around the bend where I soon passed another posted biased reminder whose unspoken intent is “Because Peds Don’t Bloody Well Have To Yield To You.”
20 Responses to “ First In An Occasional Series: Bikeway Peds Behaving Badly ”
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
[...] estimable Will Campbell looks at Pedestrians Behaving Badly on the L.A. River Bike [...]





I say a unleashed dog with an owner nearby is still a lot better that an unleashed dog with no owner nearby or real far away.
However Pre kindergarden kids are also a danger to both themselves and to bicyclists. Then again beginning bicyclists (and scooterists)are another category of danger both to bicyclists and themselves.
In spring and other birding seasons I suppose divebombing birds is a danger. Be very glad bikepaths are not near ball playing children.
Phil, I’m not quite sure what your point is, but it seems like you missed mine, which wasn’t specifically about unleashed dogs toddlers or the “dangers” to cyclists that exist in any of its various forms. It’s about the responsibility of everyone on the bikeway to take responsibility and be aware.
I lived in Elysian Valley (aka Frogtown) for several years and have jogged and (only recently) biked that stretch of road, so I can appreciate it from both perspectives. Though I understand your concerns as a biker, that road has only been a bike lane since Nov. 2010 and was a pedestrian/family friendly area for decades before that. Many of my neighbors saw that area as an extension of their own backyards. Men gathered by the benches to talk…kids fished along the river…women with babies in tow took their afternoon strolls. Now that the area is repaved, the locals are competing with a whole new contingent of bicyclists coming into their ‘hood so you can understand their territorial-ness. Hopefully, time will help create a happy medium where everyone can enjoy the space safely.
Thanks for the comment Veronica. You are correct in it only being an official bikeway for little over a year, but for what it’s worth, I’ve been biking that stretch in its previously unfinished state for nearly 20 years.
I, too, hope for that happy medium in the future, but in the meantime all I can do is wish such a balance might’ve been applied to signage directed to all the path’s users rather than strictly against us two-wheeled outsiders.
Come out to Santa Monica. You’ll see that the Marvin Braude Bike Trail there is the scene for what can only be described as an epidemic of illiterate adults. I can’t think of another explanation for all of the people who walk on the bike path that is stenciled BIKES ONLY and which has numerous signs indicating that bikes should remain on the bike path, while pedestrians should remain ON THE PEDESTRIAN PATH RIGHT NEXT TO THE BIKE PATH. Sadly, many clearly cannot heed these instructions.
I feel your pain.
the leash law one just kills me. Had an offleash Husky charge me while I was walking a client dog. Guy yelled at me that his dog “isn’t a problem”. I asked why she was charging if she “wasn’t a problem”. I explained about leash laws being there for a HOST of reasons, not the least of which was—the dog I had would have ripped his Husky to pieces had I not firmly, but gently put a foot to the Husky’s chest to stop her.
Same goes for being on leash around vehicles, bikes and kids. Safety of ALL involved is the issue, not JUST peds, or dogs, or kids or bikes.
I think the problem is trying to mix all those things together in a relatively small area. Dogs and kids will roam a bit. Peds wander after them, and/or around even without them. Bikes, even moving relatively slowly, can’t stop on a dime. I liken it to trying to drive a 1980 Nova with bad valves, a moped and a Formula-1 all on the same track.
Unfortunately, it isn’t just ONE faction that is the issue. There are asshats in all those circles, there are good eggs in all those circles. If only we could kick out the asshats and ones who think the world revolves around them. Some sort of personal responsibility is everyone’s issue.
Evan, having suffered those infuriating multitudes of illiterates all up and down the beach bikeways from Santa Monica on south and back, I fully empathize and avoid riding there — especially during peak times. The LA River bikeway doesn’t even compare to how bad it is out there.
Trish, You’re exactly right in pinpointing both the root of the problem — being the wide variety of users occupying the same narrow area — and the key to minimizing it: personal responsibility.
Unleashed dogs: always wrong on such a path.
Aside from your description of the circumstances (and it might be completely accurate, although the particular pics don’t always show it), I notice something that certainly would seem to be the route of the problem:
Notice, about 90% of the path is the two lanes for bikes. Pedestrians are somehow supposed to stay crammed up in about a 1-foot-wide lane jammed up against either the rail or the trees, while the bicycles have nearly all the space. That’s ridiculous and cannot be. And so it isn’t. Even if a dog were on a leash, it will never stay in hat small an area, an no one wants to be so crammed up, including pedestrians, so won’t be.
Tom, Bingo. As with most of the river bank bikeways around the region the limitations on the amount of space available precluded a wider design that could better accommodate peds and bikes. As a result it’s inevitable there will be interference — especially so when cyclists or pedestrians demonstrate inconsideration.
True enough Tom, but an attentive pedestrian with a leashed dog could easily control that dog in the pedestrian lane (which looks to be about 3 feet wide)for the second or two it takes for a bicyclist to pass.
Will—they just need to **require** anyone using the trail without a leash for their dogs, to train with this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qFP28ANXLLA&vq=medium
seriously awesome!
Hi Will,
Happy New Year!
In view of what you wrote above, I thought you mind find this interesting/amusing/horrifying/awesome? not sure which…. Definitely watch the video.
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/just-in-hornit-db140-bike-horn-32821
Cheers,
-cvj
OMG Clifford! WANT!!
Regarding bike path space limitations – Even if there had been easily available space to widen the path (and I’m not so sure there isn’t), the design standards don’t require it and it might have been no different than what you now have. The Orange Line bike path has room to double its width, but instead it’s basically the same design as the River path – 8 feet of bike path, with 4 feet of pedestrian margin, divided only by white line. Peds and bikes should each have their own physically separated path with different pavement design.
As someone who rides this path 2-3 times per week, I agree we do have a problem. The city has seen to repave and repair this bike path, and now there is a conflict between the bike riders, and people who have and still do use it as a walking path. The problem is, that it is not a walking path…it’s a bike path. There are not many purpose built bike paths in LA (for shame, LA, but it’s true), so now that this stretch of the river is a place where cyclists can ride free from the risk of automobiles, stoplights, and engine exhaust, they have flocked to it. The problem here stems from the people stubbornly refusing to use it for what it is…a bike path. It’s made for bikes…..not walking your dog or pushing your kid in a stroller. There are hundreds of miles of pedestrian-only paths for walking and hiking in LA….but this bike path is not one of them. Change has come….and it is the people who stubbornly refuse to change their habits and follow common sense that are in the wrong here. Signs that encourage pedestrian use of this bike path only create more confusion and endanger lives of both walkers and riders. If Blake Street was turned into a freeway, would you walk on it and pretend it wasn’t a freeway and post signs telling cars to share the road with pedestrians? When you walk on the LA River bike path, you are doing the exact same thing. Signs that say “Share the Road” were designed for cars and bikes, pedestrians never share the road with vehicles….bikes and cars are vehicles that share roadways….pedestrians use sidewalks and paths and trails. I am sorry to take sides in the affair….but this really is a cut and dried situation: Please find another place to walk…it’s just that simple. Leave the bike path to bike riders and bike commuters and cyclists….that’s what our government decided to use that land for, and then used our tax dollars to build there…a bike path.
DT, I empathize with your argument, but the only thing cut and dried in regards to the LA River Bikeway is that pedestrians are legally allowed to use it. If you think excluding people from walking where they have a right to is the simple solution I’d respectfully encourage you to voice that opinion at a meeting of Elysian Valley Neighborhood Council and see what the reaction to it would be.
My point is I don’t want pedestrians banned from a public place, even if it’s inadequately planned for multiple modes of use. What I want is for peds included as part of the problem instead of being virtually held harmless by community groups. Peds have an equal obligation to share in the responsibility we all have to make the bikeway a safe and enjoyable place to be.
Hi Will, I thought my position was clear: I want to prevent people from walking on the LA river bike path for the safety of all concerned. Just because a space is set aside by the government as a public space, doesn’t mean that people have an innate right to walk there…just try walking on an airport runway or a freeway and you will see…it is not your right to be there. The government decides what the use of a particular area is, and then sets rules and regulations to keep people safe while using those areas. Parks are closed at sunset for the safety of all…..even though I am sure that before that particular law was passed, many used the parks after dark, now they cannot. I suggest that the signs for the LA River bike path should read: Bikes Only, Pedestrians Prohibited. Posting “share the road” signs can only increase danger to citizens and encourages public friction. Using the bike path only for bikes completely solves these issues.
Hi DT, Your position was made abundantly clear, but since you felt compelled to restate it, apparently my disagreement with prohibiting one type of path user to the benefit of another — especially in this day and age when factions are working hard to rightfully promote increased access and activities and revitalization along the LA River for all — was just unclear enough that you thought you could change my mind? Especially not when you demand it be done under the disingenuous guise of “safety for all.”
Next time I encounter a trail or fire road closed to me and my mountainbike by those hikers and equestrians who purport to be concerned for everyone’s well-being, I’ll think of you and your “complete solution,” which is neither. In the meantime I suggest you save any energy expended in further rebuttal here and instead put it toward preparing your presentation for the pedestrian ban to the City Council… but I’d leave out any comparisons of the LA River Bikeway to airport runways. That just ain’t gonna fly.