Matt on June 09, 2009, at 03:06PM – #3

Wow, it's almost as if they are trying to make it impossible for this to work. Oh wait, that's probably what they are doing! Thanks again LADOT. Just as visionary and useful as the bike programs.

David on June 09, 2009, at 03:16PM – #4

OMG! WTF?! Helmets for passengers?! WHAT is it with LA bureaucracy?! The people that attempt to govern this metropolis try so hard to define itself as a world class city, but it's idiotic CRAP like this that stymies growth, tourism and small business and makes Los Angeles the butt of jokes worldwide. There is no city in the world with pedicabs rules as harsh and so archaic as these proposed rules. What tourist (or local for that matter) is going to put on a helmet? For crying out loud, just adopt the pedicab service already working flawlessly in NYC! For some reason LA is always 3-hours behind the times.

Ken Cameron on June 09, 2009, at 03:22PM – #5

Studies have shown that cars pass bicyclists with less room to spare when the cyclist is wearing a helmet. The presence of sweaty, dirty, ill-fitting helmets are not going to protect the passengers. Helmets will only serve to reduce the anxiety levels of a few of the council persons and cause customers to not use the service. Further it projects the message that cycling is unsafe and requires special protective measures and rules that are not already on the books.

The national highway transportation safety administration will not allow the manufactures of road going vehicles, farm equipment, or low speed vehicles to install seat belts unless that vehicle has a safety tested roll over protection system. With out some sort of roll cage, seat belts will cause more harm than good. Think about the bike flipping with the passengers are strapped in as it slides down the road. Not a pretty image. If the city is to require a seat belt, it will need to require that a roll cage be installed. Currently no pedicab manufacture offers roll cages.

To quote from the NHTSA ruling:

"It was noted by NHTSA during its proposed rulemaking that the NGCMA viewed the seat belt requirement as antithetical to the personal safety of drivers and occupants of golf cars [2] and cited ANSI/NGCMA Z [3] which required a ROPS (Roll Over Protection System) for any golf car containing seat belts. NGCMA also commented that seat belts enhance the risk of injury or even death if the occupant is restrained in the vehicle by a seat belt assembly upon rollover."

-Ken Cameron

Dave on June 09, 2009, at 04:31PM – #6

I imagine a hopeful pedicab operator would feel much like K did in Kafka's The Castle

D on June 09, 2009, at 04:35PM – #7

These rules are ridiculous. Let them operate like they do in SD, SF, Austin, NYC etc. jesus christ, whats wrong with these people at LADOT? maybe we should forward this thread to them. They are so damn out of touch with reality. i think most of these people on the LADOT board must live in suburban hell.

loveandhatela on June 09, 2009, at 04:47PM – #8

Seriously..honestly they cant even get the taxi cabs stuff straight or right. Last thing we need is Jan Perry tipping over a pedicab...look closely at the picture..its leaning to the right..lol

• just walk this is not the Philippines

Jon on June 09, 2009, at 05:04PM – #9

What's wrong with walking in the Philippines (aside from the brutal humidity)?

Vanzant on June 09, 2009, at 05:58PM – #10

helmets? San diego has no such policy and pedi-cabs are abundant....and safe. Wow, it seems like LA wants to not have the growth that san diego enjoyed when it became a downtown with life again.

Omg on June 09, 2009, at 08:30PM – #11

If anybody on this thread has an e-mail for someone at LADOT, please forward this aeticle to them. They must be confronted with their own ridiculousness.

Angela Jude on June 09, 2009, at 11:28PM – #12

It's not that there is a specific problem with walking in the Philippines, its just that there is an abundance of these over there. Btw, I laughed out loud when I read that.

I agree with previous comments that the city should get the taxicab thing straightened out first.

Anton Amurskiy on June 10, 2009, at 12:12AM – #13

Dear god, anything but pedicabs... As if there aren't enough slow moving vehicles on the streets of downtown.

JM on June 10, 2009, at 09:33AM – #15

I think the focus should be on improving LADOT buses, rather than on these PR stunts. I don't really see the point. Downtown, you can either: walk, take a bus, or take a taxi. The state of LADOT buses is shameful for a city that claims to be a major player. Also, I see more advertising on LADOT buses now. Where does that money go?

Dave Wyman on June 10, 2009, at 10:51AM – #16

I don't imagine the 10 a.m. meeting on June 11 will garner a huge audience. Too bad. I think pedicabs are a great idea.

"Dear god, anything but pedicabs... As if there aren't enough slow moving vehicles on the streets of downtown."

More bikes, some pedicabs, more pedestrians - LESS slow moving cars. It's cars that by their own overabundance cause traffic congestion.

By the way, biking downtown at rush hour in the evening last week from my mid-town accommodations, I was surprised at how light traffic is in the center of the city. Certainly I felt no worry riding my bike on any of the thoroughfares.

ubrayj02 on June 10, 2009, at 11:03AM – #17

Thanks for covering this topic. I've been reading through Transportation Board of Commissioners' agendas for weeks in anticipation of this - and I can't believe I missed this! You guys are good.

The LADOT is re-doing the board order from the 1980's that ended pedicabs in LA because the CRA/LA was awarded nearly $1 million to start pedicab service from Union Station to the Civic Center.

The LADOT is horrified at anything other than cars using public space, so they're trying to make it completely impossible for anything other than the deep pockets of a taxpayer funded agency to operate a pedicab service in LA.

They do have good reason to worry about pedicab regulation: other cities have trouble with mangy homeless/exploited pedicab operators. It is an industry that is rife with exploitation of pedicab operators, and one that often provides the poorest people with a legitimate reason to be poor in plain sight of the upper classes. So, along with slowing down traffic in downtown, making way for pedicabs also goes against the deeply held suburban hatred for the city housed in the hearts of those who run LADOT's offices.

ubrayj02 on June 10, 2009, at 11:13AM – #18

I'd also like to add that the LADOT's Selwyn Hollis setup a pedicab operation at Ontario International Airport that was operating until the bottom fell out of our economy. MagicCab Express or something like that.

Selwyn is now one of the top brass at the DOT and is a sharp guy with some hands on knowledge of this issue.

David Kennedy on June 10, 2009, at 11:21AM – #19

"deeply held suburban hatred for the city housed in the hearts of those who run LADOT's offices"

This is the key comment which applies in spades to so much of the city's governance. L.A. is a suburban city. Its mandarins are steeped in the values of suburbia. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. However, too often these policy-makers find urban living mysterious and/or loathsome. It would not surprise me if this policy were consciously crafted to be dysfunctional as a kind of bureaucratic sabotage.

Tornadoes28 on June 10, 2009, at 12:40PM – #20

I'd love to see them run up Grand from the library towards Bunker Hill.

JM on June 10, 2009, at 12:52PM – #21

Which proves that all roads eventually lead back to Angels' Flight ;)

MarkB on June 10, 2009, at 07:26PM – #22

@Ken- I read that NHTSA study you linked to. In its conclusion section, page 6, it says the data support requiring seat belts in low-speed vehicles on public roads. It specifically discounts the probability of rollover because such low speeds don't contain the energy needed to flip a vehicle. Further, the quote you provided was from the golf-cart industry group, which is against requirements, and not from NHTSA.

As far as I can tell, you've provided a seriously misleading argument.

Ken Cameron on July 08, 2009, at 02:32AM – #24

@MarkB,

Mea Culpa. The most recent pedicab accident in San Diego has show explicitly how low speed passenger-ejection type accidents can result in fatal head injuries.

I am sorry that I misread the report's findings. Thank you for pointing out my misunderstanding. I'm sorry that it took such an accident and your corrections to bring light to this.

The following is a more appropriate quote from the study:

"The data from the testing supports the implementation of rules and regulations requiring seat belts in LSV’s and golf cars which are to be utilized on roadways by the general public, regardless of whether or not their top speed is less than 20 mph. The potential for ejection is significantly higher for an unbelted occupant during a cornering maneuver as opposed to a rollover event, even for vehicles with a maximum speed of only 11 mph. The potential for a rollover event decreases at the lower speeds, thereby significantly decreasing the theoretically detrimental effects that a belted could present over an unbelted occupant. The theory that an occupant is better off jumping from a moving cart on a roadway is simply speculation and fails to consider, among other factors, the age and health of the occupants."

More on the San Diego accident can be found here:

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/06/san-diego-8212-police-are-investigating/

NTSA report: (see conclusion on page six) http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-01/esv/esv19/05-0431-W.pdf

Alberto Guia on August 20, 2009, at 02:46PM – #25

I would like to know where are the rules for the pedicabs, where are the laws that regulates the pedicabs