Pobble.808

Courtesy of the BBC no less...

https://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20...ly-los-angeles

Ekdog

That was interesting. Thanks for sharing it.

Lonely Planet has also written an article about my adopted city:

Seville goes green.

Artkansas 

Yes, it's nice to see that L.A. has become more bike friendly since my car-free days there.

Roody

One thing I'm wondering about that the article didn't mention: Did LA actually dosomething to make the city more bikefriendly? Or is it more the case that more people started cycling and discovered/demonstrated that it never was really that bad?

Artkansas 

From my perspective, it actually has gotten more bike friendly. I was carfree in L.A. in the late 70's and early 80s. With it's weather and comparatively flat terrain(with a few exceptiongs), LA was always bikeable and California traffic laws were pretty benign. The distances in L.A. were a big factor and still are.

The big advances I see are bike racks on buses, and being able to carry your bike on board trains. That does a lot for the distance problems. I can't speak for that much of the traffic flow. But when I worked downtown in the early '80s, I was practically the only bicyclist I saw. Last time I was in downtown L.A. there were a lot of young cyclists on the streets. There always were a lot of cyclists out in the Santa Monica direction, but it seems more widespread.

I don't think it's an either or situation. I think that the two grew up hand in hand. Better facilities encouraged people, which caused more facilities which encouraged more people.

The downtown situation was also helped by the build up of apartments, and some bad timing, so that just as the apartments were available, the economy tanked and a lot of inexpensive housing was available to young hipsters who liked being able to live and work close together and be near the transportation hubs so that the clubs were easily accessible with USC close by to add something to the mileau.

Booger1

Anybody planning to go bike riding in south L.A. better bring a flak jacket.....

Let's go riding around the Hollywood hills and look at the stars......UMM......gates to their houses.

Riding the west beaches is nice......except for the other 50,000 people doing the same thing.....along with the joggers and dog walkers.

I'm gathering they don't bike in L.A.

Dahon.Steve

I was in Downtown LA several years go for training and can't remember seeing one cyclist. I hoped things changed.

Artkansas 

I was there two years ago, lots of cyclists at all hours.

folder fanatic

That was around 30 years ago. Much has changed here since you went away. I bike then and even now pretty much the same locale. Los Angeles might have (for the most part) nice weather, somewhat flat terrain (depending on precisely the neighborhood or even street being described), and depending on who is behind the wheel of an auto (many are rather hostile to anyone not cocooned in some sort of motorized 4 wheel vehicle). Besides the distance needed to go somewhere at all is still the same.

What big advantages? Some too stupidly artsy bike stands in which if you lock your bike to is a lesson in guaranteed bike theft most of the time? Or jam your bike on board some already-overcrowded-with-bodies train filled with bicycle-hostile passengers? In the early 1980s, most of my friends and even myself gave up on bikes and started to own/drive cars-even in Santa Monica. And the young cyclists of today is probably only on his/her bike because they cannot afford to drive-not because they are into bikes. Dangle keys or a bike in front of them and 99% of the time, they will lunge for the keys for a chance to drive somewhere.

Better facilities for bikes? Where exactly? You mean the West Side, not the whole of Los Angeles itself. There are a couple of manned stations for bike parking/repair over in Long Beach and now Santa Monica-not anywhere else. Which is totally useless for most cyclists here anyway.

Young hipsters are not a very stable crowd. I find them rather a flaky lot as most businesses that were establish to serve them go under very quickly. They are not really a part of the communities they inhabit-all they seem to do is gentrify an given area and jack up the prices with their flaky presence without contributing anything with real value. They generally are not from that community-or even Southern California. They rent-cheap as possible-apartments or even rooms, not own a house. And they don't have children yet for the most part not going to the local schools which are usually the majority is Hispanic. As for this imagined revitalization of the Downtown region, the truth is, there are not all that many hipsters or whatever they call themselves there. A few might belong to that group. Most of the people that live there are not even well-to-do, much less viable in their finances. They rent some places that are more likely than not run down rooming houses, long term living hotels, skid row. Now there have been some stellar developments in the Downtown area. And the wealthy that don't care to drive lease or even buy these luxury units. I think that the next time you visit here, how about really touring the rest of real Los Angeles. Hipsters, college students from somewhere else, the West Side, and the South Bay are not it.