BCI COUNTS! Has Moved to Pacelines

BCI COUNTS! has moved from the Statistics section and found a new home on Pacelines Newsletter. BCI COUNTS! are articles by Dick Brock, BCI’s 2023-24 Statistician and his posts feature articles ranging from personal profiles, stories about accomplishments, trainer tips, and enhanced statistics.

You can search for the past posts here by typing in “BCI COUNTS! into the finder window on your browser.

Understanding California Bike Lanes

Bill Sellin, BCI Ride Coordinator and also serving on the
Infrastructure Review Committee of the Orange County Bicycle Coalition
and as the Area Director of CABO for Caltrans District 12,

The California Highway Design Manual defines the Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane).
“Provides a striped lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway.”
CA HDM, Chapter 60, Topic 62.1(2)
They are NOT obstructed with any barrier or divider from traffic lanes - there is no such thing in California as a “Protected Bike Lane” - those are Class IV separated Cycle Tracks.

Pavement MARKING Bike Lanes are marked with a standardized symbol and directional arrow. Below is the current ‘Best Practice” Complete Streets format suggested by the Department of Transportation. The helmeted bicyclist symbol (facing traffic not the gutter), and a directional arrow reminding that they are one-way and usually with traffic, and on a green background to be highlighted even when no cyclist is present.

This is the best choice of the 3 standard options:
A is a bicycle symbol, B is the bicycle rider with helmet and C is BIKE LANE in english

The National MUTCD has deleted Option B - The CA MUTCD may also drop it in the 2026 Revisions to match the National Standards...

No longer supported by the MUTCD
(National or California)

In Irvine, we don’t see the green backing yet, and still see some bike lanes marked with the 1970s standard “BIKE ONLY” - which was rejected across California as it dissuaded motorists from using Bike Lanes as they should to turn right from. Motorists are legally required to merge into the bike lane before turning right to avoid the common right hook crash. This is true in every state but Oregon. Large vehicles can’t pull this off, so always watch wide turning trucks…and some places the bike lane is way less than the 6 foot minimum on streets over 40 mph so it just won’t work (ie University WB to Culver NB). The Orange County Highway Design Manual calls for 10 to 8 foot bike lanes. The State minimum is 4 feet at 40 mph or less, 5 feet with a gutter & curb, with 3 feet between the stripe and the edge of the pavement & gutter pan, or 6 feet when the speed of traffic is over 40 mph.

We also see BIKE LANE in some places, and in some locations where a contractor uses the incorrect direction of the Fig. B marking: facing the gutter. That WAS standard in the MUTCD from 2003 to 2010, but no longer.

SIGNS Bike Lanes have a special sign: A white sign means it is regulatory and has laws in the CVC about it. That is why California has it’s own white BIKE LANE sign designated R81 (CA) which is different from the Federal standard R3-17 with a black background:

In most places, parking is not allowed in a bike lane, so there are also special R7-9 signs to remind motorists who might look to park there.

WIDTH and STRIPING Bike Lanes are only helpful when they are wide enough to ride in. Typically a cyclist needs 4 feet of operational space to ride. California standards call for a MINIMUM 4 foot wide Bike Lane except adjacent to on street parking - then a minimum of 5 feet, or when posted speed limit is over 40 mph then a minimum of 6 feet. When there is a concrete curb & gutter, the minimum width is 3 feet from the bike lane stripe to the joint between the pavenet and gutter pan - both so we won’t clip a pedal on the raised curb and also to reduce the need to ride in the gutter. The joint between the asphalt road surface and the concrete gutter pan of a standard curb can be a lateral hazard and gaps or uneven surfaces there can cause a crash.
”As grades increase, downhill bicycle speeds can increase, which increases the width needed for the comfort of bicycle operation. If bicycle lanes are to be marked, additional bike lane width is recommended to accommodate these higher bicycle speeds.”
Highway Design Manual, Chapter 300, Topic 301.2 (1)
The Orange County Highway Designs Manual calls for typically 8 foot bike lanes. 11 feet with parking. Additional width when prevailing traffic speeds are over 40 mph. They can be as narrow as 5 feet if being added to an existing roadway.
Orange County Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000, § 1003.2 (1)
Orange County Traffic Manual, Chapter XIII, B.3

The WHITE STRIPE between the Bike Lane and Traffic Lane is 6” wide. When solid, the line is described as “Detail 39” and it is OUTSIDE of the Bike Lane width. A ‘buffer’ is when a double white strip is put down. The minimum buffer of 18” means two 6” stripes plus a 4” gap = 18”. Buffers serve to highlight motorists to stay clear of the bike lane, and provide a bit of space to pass slower cyclists or avoid debris without having to merge all the way out into th traffic lane. A buffered Bike Lane is sometimes referred to as a “BBL” or “Class 2B”.

The lane line stripe is dashed before an intersection where it is required for turning traffic to merge over & turn from the Bike Lane. When dashed, this is called a Bike Lane Intersection Line and described as “Detail 39A”. This portion of a Bike Lane is called “shared”. The standard is a 4 foot dash with 8 foot gaps. With short blocks less than 40 feet the dashed line is the minimum of 50 feet. On longer blocks or with traffic speeds of over 35 mph, the length of dashed stripe should be 200 feet. Vehicles are required to merge into the shared Bike Lane at these points. They are NOT allowed to drive in the Bike Lane before the dashed line. As Complete Streets green paint is rolled out, we will se many of these shared segments striped with green 4 foot wide blocks to the right of the white dash, with 8 foot gaps. As experienced cyclists - we know to merge out of the shared lane when the intersection line starts - or sooner if traffic permits - for 2 important reasons: 1 - Safety; by signalling and safely merging out into the traffic lane we are most visible to motorists. We control the lane and keep them from right hooking across us. We give them space to do the right thing and merge into the shared bike lane to make a right turn. 2 - Courtesy; By freeing up the shared bike lane for right turning traffic, we help motorists and other road users , have the space to turn right as required without having to wait for us to go straight. Legally we can stay in the shared bike lane, but that invites right hook overtaking by impatient traffic and holds up others who may more patiently wait behind us to make their right turn. If a motorist is doing it right, taking the shared bike lane with blinker on, scanning traffic before turning - DO NOT ‘filter up & squeeze past them in the gutter!
CA MUTCD 2023 revision, Page 1395 §20 & 21

“FILTERING UP” is the dangerous habit of passing slowing vehicles on their right, when any one of them might start to move & turn right without blinker or warning, or turn from the traffic lane instead of the shared bike lane. It is illegal to pass on the right. You are coming up on the driver’s blind side. Large vehicles can not turn from the shared bike lane and WILL turn right from the traffic lane, right hooking you. Many cyclists have been killed ‘filtering up’ on the right of moving vehicles. It also means if you come to a stop, you are now blocking the right turn option of other road users - including cyclists, who want to turn right, as they should, from the shared bike lane.

AT RIGHT TURN ONLY LANES Bike Lanes have 3 options:
1: The Bike Lane will END and we are expected to shoose the traffic lane going in our direction; Either stay to the right and use the right turn only lane (RTOL), or merge left to the through traffic lane. When the Bike Lane is ending, signal and safely merge out as early as traffic will allow.
2: The Bike Lane will be extended left of the RTOL and you will be expected to safely weave left in the conflict zone across traffic that is weaving right to the RTOL. More of these are getting Complete Streets green treatment to highlight the conflict zone. Again, either stay to the right and use the RTOL, or merge left to the extended Bike Lane. When the Bike Lane weaves left, signal and safely merge out as traffic will allow. There may be a R40-4 sign supporting the weave that tells traffic to BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE ~ YIELD TO BIKES but always check and expect traffic to not see you.
3: In some places, the bike lane ends - maybe even with a conflict marking - into the RTOL. The sign that says RIGHT TURN ONLY may have a R118 (CA) sign added that authorizes you to stay in the RTOL even though you ar egoing straight. There may also be Sharrows painted near each right turn arrow on the pavement which authorizes ignoring the right turn controls and going straight. With out the sign or the sharrow, see #1 - it is illegal to proceed straight from a RTOL.

To go straight at a RTOL, take the green path of travel. To turn right, control the RTOL and turn right.

MANDATORY USE Using Bike Lanes is required by law, but with many exceptions including if we are moving as fast as the normal speed of traffic at that time…

California Vehicle Code 21208

(a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207, any person operating a bicycle upon the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride within the bicycle lane, except that the person may move out of the lane under any of the following situations:

(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle, vehicle, or pedestrian within the lane or about to enter the lane if the overtaking and passing cannot be done safely within the lane.

(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

(3) When reasonably necessary to leave the bicycle lane to avoid debris or other hazardous conditions.

(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
Including every driveway!

(b) No person operating a bicycle shall leave a bicycle lane until the movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 22100) in the event that any vehicle may be affected by the movement.
WE should to signal and yield as we merge out of a Bike Lane to the traffic lane.

Should Irvine convert Bike Lanes into Cycle Tracks or add buffers ?

Member Rick Levin shared this photo October 20th: of the ‘progress’ on Cadence in the Great Park.
Class 2 Bike Lanes being replaced with Class 4 Cycle Tracks by the City of Irvine.

Opinion and Call to Action by Bill Sellin, Ride Coordinator and also serving on the
Infrastructure Review Committee of the Orange County Bicycle Coalition and as the
Area Director on the California Association of Bicycle Organizations for Caltrans District 12,
City staff, politicians, their appointees and many of their constituents are fully enthused about going with ’protected bike lanes’ all over Irvine.
Bill thinks they create more problems than they avoid; trading a fear of traffic without understanding that being visible and part of traffic is safer than being separated and then placed in conflict with traffic.

The City of Irvine Transportation Committee will be hearing comments and staff reports on the plans to narrow travel lanes on Irvine roadways to calm traffic and allow space to add buffers to existing bike lanes or remove the bike lanes and instal cycle tracks at their regular meeting on September 3rd.

Motorists may be there to loudly complain about any attempt at slowing down their vehicles, and cyclists who are afraid of bike lanes will clamor for ‘protection’ but there needs to be voices of cyclists who don’t want cycle tracks to also be heard -
PLEAsE attend and support narrowing travel lanes, but ask the city be realistic about Class 4 vs Class 2 bikeways.

Class 2 Bike Lanes are subject to the CVC and are mandatory use.
The State minimum width is only 3 feet between the edge of the gutter pan and the stripe. The County standard calls for 8 to 10 feet which works better for right turning traffic to use it. ”Buffered” Bike Lanes (BBL or “Class 2B”) are those where extra paint has been added as an island between the bike lane and the travel lane. Painting a buffer helps make the bike lane more obvious to motorists, but still allows us to merge out to pass slower traffic, to avoid hazards and debri, and to clear the ‘gutter lane’ at intersections and driveways where right turning traffic might overtake and ‘right hook’ us.
We may use the buffer to pass or ride in, but vehicles are not supposed to drive on them except when turning or parking, and hopefully yielding to us if and when they see us …
We are seeing new buffers added on many street in Irvine over the last year.
The California DOT says a minimum buffer can be as narrow as 18” (1.5 ft) and the long standing buffer on University (see picture below) is a full travel lane width. The buffer may also be painted in the door zone of parked cars when a painted as Door Zone Bike Lane (DZBL) - or on both sides of the bike lane as a Double Buffered Bike Lane (DBBL).

Class 4 Cycle Tracks (“separated bikeways”) are seperated with obstacles from bollards to curbs to lines of parked cars. (see pictures of local examples below) They promise more “comfort” from traffic but they create real hazards. They look great mid-block - which is how they alway picture them, but the intersections, driveways and actual movement are problems unless there are just well spaced bollards that we can weave in and out through:
You can not escape to the travel lane to pass a slower cyclist in the cycle track, or to avoid debri, glass, or other hazards if the barrier is solid as proposed on South Yale.
You can not merge left to the travel lanes to make a left turn as we do from bike lanes.

Without complete intersections, or traffic circles at every intersection, they are keeping us in the far right gutter lane when regular traffic may turn right - setting us up the classic and common ‘right hook’ crash that we avoid by merging out of the gutter lane where vehicles might turn right.

The traffic on a road, and street sweeping clears bike lanes of small debri, but a cycle track does not benefit from the regular traffic wind and regular full sized street sweepers can’t fit - so Irvine will have to invest in a special narrow street sweeper that may sweep out gutter lane less…

California has 4 classes of bikeways: Class IV is the newest option…

Typically disingenuous ‘marketing’ graphic showing all 4 classes of bikeways under California law. It shows a Class 1 side path, set back at least 5 feet from the street and with 2 foot clear at grade shoulders on both sides… shows a worst case Class 2 DZBL, A Class 3 Bike Route (not all get sharrows marked on them - Laguna Canyon Highway 133 is a Class 3 Bike Route) and the class 4 cycle track. Extend these mid-block views to intersections, driveways and multi lane roads and you could see better how they really compare… and the problems with Cycle Tracks in most locations.

Source: https://issuu.com/katreyes/docs/pa795_finalcapstone_spring2021_equityincycling_wit/11citing Caltrans as the source of this graphic. The Class II / 2B - 2B indicates ‘buffered’ : BBL although the image shows a worts case DZBL with no buffers.

Examples across Orange County:

Class 2 BBL Irvine - Southbound University Avenue is a 4 lane road but the south bound side was built wide enough for 3 lanes; the bike lane is buffered with the widest buffer we know of. Of course, being in Irvine, the bike lane is wider than the State 6 foot minimum, there are no Bike Lane signs to be seen, and the posted speed limit (despite the curves and the bike lane) is sparsely posted at 55 mph.

Class 2 DBBL Irvine - Hearthstone was a 3 lane road with standard bike lanes but some time before Jan 2019 on-street parking was added on the northbound side and the bike lane took the space of the NB #2 travel lane: It is a Double Buffered Bike lane (DBBL) - with the space between the bike lane and the travel lane diagonally hatched as a typical buffer, but also has a buffer between the bike lane and the parking lane. This keeps cyclist out of some of the ‘door zone’ and is the best option for a door zone bike lane (DZBL), although the door zone should be at least 3 feet and the bike lane is wider than needed inviting confused motorists to occasionally drive in it. Of course in addition to the dooring hazard, each parked car must merge across the bike lane to park or pull out, but the cyclist is visible to motorists driving alongside, rather than hidden behind the parked vehicles. Irvine, so no speed limit or Bike Lane sign is posted. The old BIKE ONLY marking is being replaced with current standard markings as streets are being resurfaced.

Class 2 BBL Newport Beach - MacArthur Boulevard Newport Beach is way ahead of Irvine in adding buffers to existing bike lanes; these buffers were added before June of 2017 and look about 3 feet wide. Note how despite the buffer, vehicles still drive in the right half of their very wide travel lane, right along the buffer. Narrower travel lanes make room for a wider buffer and calm traffic speeds. Posted speed here is 60 MPH despite the bike lane. Because there ar eno driveways and few intersections, some of this segment might warrant consideration of a Clas s4 - but why? Every intersection would require shifting to a Class 2 and the sidewalk option should make a ‘comfortable’ option for the traffic averse. (Newport Beach, unlike Irvine, PROHIBITS cycling on sidewalks EXCEPT when, like here - the wide sidewalk is designated as a sidepath “Bike Route”.

Class 4 w/BOLLARDS Costa Mesa - Merrimac Way was a 4 lane street with a minimum standard bike lane - now a 2 lane street with a bollard separated cycle track. Speed has remained at 35 mph. Costa Mesa has not yet removed the old tiny sized Bike Lane signs, even though this is no longer a bike lane. CalTrans has still not come up with a sign to post on a Cycle Track.

Class 4 w/ISLANDS Santa Ana - Bristol Street had 6 wide travel lanes and a wide sidepath but despite many intersections and driveways, all 3 travel lanes were narrowed to fit in a narrow island with a separated Cycle Track. Note that that island has a gutter pan on BOTH sides so the pavement between gutter pan joints is less than 3 feet. Santa Ana posted new Bike Lane signs, even though this is not a bike lane. Cyclists (and eBikes) still ride with the pedestrians on the side path (wide sidewalk) and some cyclists still prefer sharing the #3 travel lane over posted 40 mph over the narrow Cycle Track.

Class 4 w/PARKING Santa Ana - Hazard Avenue had 4 lanes and on street parking. It now has a parking separated class 4 that wobbles in and out of a Class 2 buffered Bike Lane and then reduces to a 2 lane Class 3 bike route with sharrows. The parked cars are supposed to ‘protect’ the cyclists, but they are hidden and invisible behind the parked cars and a surprise at every driveway and intersection. the people that park there walk in and across the Cycle Track to reach their vehicles, and passenger side dooring is now a real concern. Garden Grove also added new Bike Lane signs even though this is not legally a Bike Lane.

Join me in
SUPPORT of narrowing travel lanes AND LOWERING POSTED SPEEDS
SUPPORT of Buffers if the width is taken from the travel lanes - NOT THE BIKE LANE
SUPPORT of keeping bike lanes 10 to 8 feet wide as the County Highway Design Manual requires, not the 6 foot minimum called for by the State of California standards on street posted over 40 MPH.

I DO NOT SUPPORT Class 4 cycle tracks for all the reasons discussed above. The cost alone could go a long way to improving pavement, curb cut width, wayfinding signage, conflict zone marking and other infrastructure that would make cycling better for all of us.

Irvine requested a letter of support on their plans for YALE:

BILL said no on behalf of BCI.

Hi Bill,

This is Derek Meksavanh from the City of Irvine. I recall in the past, Cheryl Lea reached out regarding the Yale Corridor project, including a stakeholder meeting in October 2022 (attached is a PDF for reference). I am reaching out now to request a Letter of Support for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), administered by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), for the safety improvements on Yale Avenue, as determined through the outreach process. We kindly request support from BCI, as this project significantly enhances the pedestrian and bicycle environment with safety improvements.

The proposed project is located on Yale Avenue from University Drive to 350ft north of Michelson Drive (highlighted in yellow in the map below). The project area was identified as a priority through extensive community outreach efforts. Among all community outreach efforts, students and residents emphasized the importance of improved multimodal safety and connectivity along Yale Avenue. 

The City aims to apply safety countermeasures and enhance safety through improvements such as implementing landscaped buffers and protected bike lakes in each direction, a pedestrian crosswalk with new rectangular rapid flashing beacons - connecting the community paseos, restricted on-street parking near Rancho San Joaquin Middle School to improve safety, new streetlights, and bicycle crossings with the addition of dedicated signal phases for bicyclists at the Yale Avenue and University intersection, connecting the University Trail. The City aims to bring the concepts and planned designs to construction to enhance safety and connectivity, with HSIP being the next step toward achieving this.

The City would greatly appreciate BCI's support in providing a letter of recommendation for this Project's grant application. The application is due on 9/9, but we are submitting a week prior to this deadline. If this works, may we receive a signed letter by Thursday, 8/29? 

Attached, please find a draft letter for ease. Please feel free to make changes as appropriate and reach out to any of us if you have questions. Thank you again for your time and continued cooperation.

Bill Sellin, as Ride Coordinator declined in this reply:

Hi Derek,

Normally we would be happy to, and the OC Bicycle Coalition also weighs in with support, but this project is not supported.

I, for one, would rather see these competitive and limited resources better spent in a grant to another worthy project in Orange County, than see it wasted on this one.

We were asked when the demonstration was laid out, as well as at the community meeting at University Park, but our minority position in resistance to this project as proposed was not heard then, and may not now, but we would rather support real improvements in pavement quality and consistent marking of Bike Lanes across Irvine, especially at every freeway intersection, or get round-a-bouts at Yale and Yale Loop, than this plan as presented or moving forward. 

Unless there are complete intersections, the creation of narrower Class 4 cycle tracks in place of the existing wide Class 2 bike lanes is not a real safety feature.

The separation of cyclists into a narrow curb-bound path may look fine in the middle of a block, with only 1 or 2 single-file cyclists in it, but in actual use it makes it dangerous by putting cyclist out of the way - inconsequentially invisible, separated in the gutter, and the common 'right hook’ crash hazard is actually increased. 

The reason a Bike Lane is dashed at corners or extended left of a right turn only lane is to reduce the conflict zone for cyclist safety.

The last 50 feet before a corner, right turning motorist are required to merge into the shared bike lane and turn from that right most lane. 

Safe cyclists will merge out of the bike lane to give space for motorists to merge in behind and turn right when the cyclists are going straight.

Your selected image of the Cycle Track in Santa Ana in your presentation shows how obviously the Cycle Track makes right hook conflicts warrant conflict zone paint and significant trust that the cyclist is even seen by turning motorists. 

Adding a second gutter pan and reducing the Bike Lane width for a Cycle Track will make it harder to avoid road hazards, debris, pass slower cyclists or be able to merge out when desired, like to make a predictable left turn in traffic.

Riding on the pavement between the gutter pan and stripe is tight with the State’s 3 foot minimum. Reducing the existing bike lane AND taking another 2 feet of pavement away for the gutter pan of the island is a real reduction of space.

Street sweeping between the curbs may require special equipment and the light debris that now is blown along by traffic ‘wind’ will collect in the Cycle Track. 

Cyclists who start riding in the travel lane (Cycle Tracks are not subject to the mandatory use laws of Bike Lanes) will no longer be able to merge into the bikeway if they wish to between intersections.

…and then there are Irvine’s drivers of "out of class" illegal eMopeds and eMotorcycles, many with out a drivers license, who will drive down these Cycle Tracks at well over 20 mph or even against traffic as they do now in Bike Lanes - with no way to merge out to pass the bicyclists these bikeways are intended to serve.. 

We would certainly support:

• Wide painted buffers like we have on SB University; much more cost effective and could also reduce the travel lanes & speeds of motorists. 

• Having the REMOVED bicycle signal returned for NB cyclists to cross from the NB University Class 2 - and return the REMOVED signal request button that was there - would help allow cyclists to travel on the predictable and legally required correct side of the road rather than using the pedestrian crossing only available on the south bound side and then typically riding up Yale on the wrong side of the street. A short side path to get to the button out of the bike lane could be located behind the guard  rail. We would welcome the signal phasing for a bicycle cross-bike at University - but serving connection to BOTH sides of Yale from the University Biek path in Mason Regional Park.

• Splitting the Class 1 bikeway off the bridge at the north end of the segment, along with pedestrian separation. That would properly address the south bound cyclist being fed into the wrong side of the street as currently configured.

• Adding a landscaped center divider, like the ones added to slow down Michelson, rather than two islands, at twice the price.

• If Irvine really wants to spend limited funds, we would strongly support replacing the stop intersections with round-a-bout traffic circles at Michelson and Yale, as well as Royce and Yale to reduce speeds, conflict points and make safer traffic flow.
That would make it safer for ALL road users. You could even try to model a more expensive ‘Complete Intersection’.

• Making Royce and Yale a 4 way stop - with high contrast crosswalks. Or adding an on demand flashing pedestrian signal like across Michelson to the shopping center. The crossing now is unmarked and the vertical curve of Yale makes it hard to see small children crossing there now. Turning left or crossing on Royce across high speed Yale traffic, when it occurs, can be challenging for a cyclist.

• Putting a 2 way Class 1 Bike Path along the west side of Yale, in addition to the sidewalk, and in addition to the on-street Bike Lanes and complete with grade separation over University, Royce and Yale if you are serious about making Yale a primary bicycle corridor. THAT would serve the ‘8 to 80 year olds' your consultant thinks will use the corridor and provide true separation from traffic that a Cycle Track cannot accomplish. Taking some of the right of way to do this would also meet your desire to narrow the travel lanes to reduce speeding.  

We really like and feel comfortable cycling on this segment of Yale as it is, 
with wide Class 2 Bike Lanes that exceed the State Minimums and meet the Orange County Highway Design Manual 8 to 10 foot Bike Lane standard.
Reducing the width and thwarting our ability to merge into the travel lane, would be a very real detriment to our safe and legal road use. 
We would likely take the travel lane and not use the Cycle Track if this project is ever completed.

Your description of the plan as including a “Protected Bike Lane” reveals your subscription to the false marketing bias of Separated Cycle Tracks as always being better than a Bike Lane in every situation.

California Standards do not use the term “Protected Bike Lane" for good reasons. Bike Lanes have specific legal standing and rules in the California Vehicle Code that do not apply to Cycle Tracks. 

Maybe they have advantages in some specific locations, but not this one.

Attached is a comprehensive guideline on how to implement them successfully compiled by the San Diego Bicycle Coalition;

Respectfully,

Bill Sellin BCI#2
Bicycle Club of Irvine
Ride Coordinator
rides@bikeirvine.org

---

Here is another expert opinion: CyclingSavvy.org How-to-ruin-a-buffered-bike-lane

---

Nextdoor 9/23/24:
Class IV bikeways are not mandatory use like Class II bicycle lanes are, so expect to see cyclists in the traffic lane, being honked at by impatient motorists, and unable to move over into the 'cycle trap' due to the 'protective' concrete curbs... 

Do You Know Where Your Bike Is?

-by Peter Gerrard

This week, two friends—one a cyclist and the other not so much—texted me links to feature stories about the business around stolen bikes. 

The main takeaway of both: over the past few years, as bike sales soared during the COVID-19 pandemic, what had mostly been a “one-off crime of opportunity” became a well-oiled international, and highly profitable enterprise

Wired magazine’s  article reported on  “…a bicycle theft pipeline of astonishing scale.” Writer Christopher Solomon teamed with Bryan Hance of Bike Index to detail the convoluted trail of bikes stolen, disappearing, and then showing up for sale on a Facebook page. Hance uncovered the business and man behind it in Jalisco, Mexico. He also tracked down one of his “suppliers” in Silicon Valley’s San Jose. Hance estimates that, in the Bay Area alone, it’s netted the bike thieves more than $2 million since 2020. 

It's a story that almost seems unbelievable (unless you’ve had a bike lifted). And it’s a great read:

https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valleys-fanciest-stolen-bikes-trafficked-mastermind-jalisco-mexico/

“Wired magazine’s  article reported on  “…a bicycle theft pipeline of astonishing scale.””

About a week after the Wired piece, the Bay Area’s KQED aired a podcast titled “Bikes Stolen In the Bay Area Show up on Global Black Market.” Both Solomon and Hance took part in the live broadcast. The host and other guests expanded on their reporting, adding additional community perspective. And hearing bike theft victims tell their tales personalizes what it’s like to find your bike is suddenly gone.

The podcast is archived, and you can listen to it here:

https://www.kqed.org/forum/2010101906075/bikes-stolen-in-the-bay-area-show-up-on-global-blackmarket

What do riders whose bikes are stolen go through? Certainly, there’s the stages of grief (mostly, from my experiences, anger, depression, and acceptance). I’ve had three bikes filched. The first one was probably gone from my parent’s garage for at least a month before I noticed it wasn’t there. The second form my garage when I accidentally left it open all night. The third was within  a few minutes after I finished a ride and went into the house, got distracted, and saw a blur as a rider went past my back window. I felt the cold chill of certainty that he was on my bike, confirmed when I ran outside to check. 

Unfortunately, there’s also a general lack of concern from law enforcement. It’s detailed quite well in both pieces. Overall, let’s leave it at most police departments are overworked with property crime incidents even as violent crime is decreasing.

But, as I read the last paragraph, I realize how much emotional baggage having a bike ripped off carries, and how these feelings surface even years later. So, here’s my take.

There’s possibly a lack of understanding, and maybe empathy, about the monetary investments and emotional attachments riders have with their bikes.  I had a detective dismiss my inquiry about the investigation of my stolen Colnago as being less important than the theft of a laptop from a car that was on his plate. “This computer cost almost $3000,” he dryly told me. I asked him to pull up my police report and really look at the details, especially the receipt from when I’d bought it. “Oh…” was about all I got out of him.

Incidentally, I got that one back exactly a month after it was taken. I’d reported it to a stolen bikes website, and one morning I got an email that a pawn shop had inquired about the serial number. Apparently the “loan” agreement was for 30 days.

What can you do, after this prompts you to check to see if your bike is where you think you last left it?

If you’ve registered through an app or website like Bike Index or Project 529 (badged “Garage 529” in at least parts of Orange County), consider adding it to other available ones. Why? As far as I can tell, don’t assume that information is automatically between law enforcement and public databases. In fact, Bike Index confirms that, while they share data with other organizations, most of them don’t reciprocate.

Take pics of your bike, the serial number, any parts you’ve added, and you with the bike

Check to confirm your bike is included under your homeowner’s or renter’s insurance. You might have to add it as a specifically covered item.

Consider locking your bike to something in your garage that’s fixed in place. Use that lock that you don’t carry on group rides as it weighs more than the bike you bought for its light weight.

Add an Air Tag or other GPS tracking device to your bike. But if you’re alerted your bike is “not with you” or at home, think carefully about chasing after it yourself.

Last, keep in mind that pictures you post on social media often have metadata that gives GPS coordinates. Check to see if you can block this “helpful” feature. Have you noticed that Strava “hides” the start and finish points of your rides? I’m not sure if it’s totally effective, but it’s a good feature that’s automatically available.