Photo Potpourri
I found a new constituency while riding the Balboa Island ferry this week:
Hey, move over and share the road!
I’m sure he has unique safety requirements. Notice, no helmet.
In other news, cyclists gather to re-enact the Portland version of the final scene in Rise of the Planet of the Apes:
Of course, they’re doing it with their preferred mode of transportation. Actually, it’s a shot from a prior Bridge Pedal, planned for tomorrow, when cars are excluded from the Providence Bridge. They’ve been doing this ride for 16 years; people seem to like it.
Is this even legal?
What’s changed in NB? Certainly not this street for the past 70 years… If you’re a kid on a beach cruiser, you may choose to walk it on the sidewalk. If you’re out for a ride on any other bike, the 50 yard climb/descend at Fernleaf is just part of the normal route through CdM and has been for decades. It would appear the only thing to change is NB’s attitude toward cyclists using the road.
What’s next?
"They're useless"
Well, I was taking this shot, on the hill down to Big Corona, when the next car to come down the hill is a NBPD SUV. The officer sees me poised to shoot as he rides over the Botts’ dots, so he stops to ask why. I tell him that a few of my bike advocate pals are working up a Top 10 List, like on David Letterman, but focused on cycling safety issues; ten things maybe the Bike Safety Committee could act on quickly.
This officer agreed, the dots are useless when it comes to getting motorists to slow down; instead the dots make a lot of noise and present a hazard to cyclists. I said, “I know there are more dots on Bayside Drive, where else can you think of?” He thought for a moment, “none in China Cove, what about Fernleaf?” I said I knew there weren’t any on Fernleaf because I ride it almost every day. “You mean you walk your bike down it.” Uh, no.
If you’ve got a bike safety suggestion why not join our intrepid band of bicycling advocates, 2pm Wednesday at Starbucks on Balboa Island. Details at bikeNewportBeach.org; come by bike, of course.
Monday, August 15th 2011 at 10:44 am |
Yes Karen, but if there is a hazard built-in to the road, a sign like that is not the way to address it. It really only helps the few locals who are warned of its meaning. Just looking at the matter practically, is the sign lit at night? Cyclists on public roads in California are required to have forward lighting to see the road in front of them. (Not to see little signs like this one.) And in any case, any passing cyclist who is not familiar with neighborhood history will not anticipate any kind of sign like that. He may only see that sign out of the corner of his eye and probably dismiss it as a ‘NO CYCLING ON SIDEWALK’ sign. Why? Because that is the only kind of sign regulating cycling a cyclist usually sees. The only time a cyclist in California would anticipate a sign saying his use of the road is restricted is at the entrance to (some but not all) freeways.
Saturday, August 13th 2011 at 1:45 pm |
I can’t imagine anyone who has ever driven up or down the Fernleaf ramp to Bayside Dr. would object to the sign asking cyclists to walk their bikes on the sidewalk. It is dangerous for cars, let alone a bike. There is a blind spot when driving up around the curve. If there is a bike at the top, well it dosen’t take a genius to guess the result.