Driver on University Harasses Us for a While Through Hillcrest 

Your channel is growing , keep biking.

You can't win with these motorists. I was riding with my daughter in a trailer in a right-lane sharrow on a 40 mph street (also a 25 mph school zone) with 2 lanes in each direction. We were going 30+ mph downhill and still got honked at! I can only assume that he expected me to weave in and out of parked cars for his convenience so that he wouldn't have to change lanes. He was in a rush to turn right on red light a quarter mile up ahead which of course we met him at. It's funny that what is safest for you is most convenient for her. Just because she has ridden a bike doesn't mean that she entitled to think that she's a road expert. I just wish that motorists understood that people on bikes are doing what they are comfortable with and what makes them feel the safest: riding counter flow when there is only a shoulder on one side of the road, going on the sidewalk for a narrow bridge over a freeway, etc. Especially in your case, you were completely in the right since bikes are allowed to ride in the full lane including one lane side by side. Like you said, this isn't being done to upset motorists, it's because the infrastructure is lacking! Maybe next time you both can say "If you ride a bike, then you should know better!" or "Even though you said you rode a bike, you didn't learn anything!" Anyway, here's hoping you can deal with less aggressive/annoying motorists in the future.

4:05 is so cathartic

This woman looks so freaking familiar to me!!

SHe needs to get a car with all four wheels in a single line. Her dumb car is taking too much space.

I agree it's down to the road design. We tried it the other way. We tried to share the right-of-way, a couple walking, someone cycling, someone in a car, maybe someone on a horse. Everyone will use common sense, wait their turn, operate their vehicle safely. But that didn't work because some people are simply entitled and/or don't like to see anyone enjoying themselves. It's obvious at this point that the minimum requirement is physically separated routes and all it takes is moving the painted lines and using all those empty cars as a barrier or maybe throwing up some Jersey barriers where needed which is not that difficult. Chicago just put up 15,000 concrete barriers for the NASCAR race there. Monaco does the same thing for the Grand Prix every year.

They never get it through their heads that passing in that situation is pointless. They'll just end up waiting in line sooner. If they slowed down and just chilled, they might not have to stop at all as the light will probably turn before they get to it.

Great hanging out with you guys last night. Cheers!!!

She's a "cyclist". Yes she puts her bike on a rack and drives to a bike path.

I'm your 640th subscriber & also a cyclist. p.s. Spiderman Cyclist sent me. Entertaining useful content you got going on here.

LOL I think I've seen that lady a couple times in Ralph's. Never interacted with her but pretty sure it was her but of course she wasn't wearing her shades. On a separate note, I've lived in Hillcrest since 05 and in the past couple years I ride along Uni in Hillcrest all the time going to or from Mission Hills. Anyway in all this time I had no idea about that bridge. Next time I will have to check it out. Anywhere interesting it goes to?

You say in your video at 1:00 "We have the sharrows the whole way". While the "sharrows" on the road are generally a well-meaning attempt by municipalities, I feel they are widely misunderstood and are an attempt to compensate for a general lack of understanding of the aspects of the vehicle code that pertain to bicycles by almost everyone on the road, bicyclists and motorists alike. The word "sharrow" appears nowhere in the California Vehicle Code, and therefore having a sharrow painted on the roadway conveys no ADDITIONAL rights to bicyclists, other than what is codified in the vehicle code. A sharrow is a "road marking used to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automobiles", that according to the National Association of City Transportation Officials. For California, a "shared lane environment" is covered under section 21202 of the CVC where it states "(a)Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:... (3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane." So the vehicle code is saying it's OK for bicyclists to "take the lane" when they are on a substandard width lane, with the restriction of secion 21656, covered in a subsequent paragraph. So when a municipality paints sharrows on the roadway, they are saying they THINK this is a substandard width lane, they are encouraging bicyclists to "take the lane", and they are alerting motorists that bicyclists may be taking the lane. Of course, 99.9% of the motorists do not know diddly-squat about section 21202 of the vehicle code or what a substandard width lane is. Whether said roadway actually is a substandard width lane or not is unchanged by slapping some paint on the roadway. The vehicle code loosely defines what a substandard lane is, but as far as I know, there is no official designation as to which roadways in the state have officially been designated as substandard. One other point that needs making is that "taking the lane" is not without restrictions. Look closely at section 21202 and you can see that "taking the lane" has limitations as evidenced by the the phrase "subject to the provisions of Section 21656". Section 21656 says "On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, any vehicle proceeding upon the highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed.". So if you're taking the lane on a 2-lane road and 5 or more cars pile up behind you, you are REQUIRED by the CVC to pull over and let them pass. So I guess my point is that the driver in your video clearly was uninformed regarding the vehicle code, the sharrows painted on the roadway did nothing to improve her understanding, and she is far from alone in her ignorance. Further, many other bicyclists, you and your friend excepted, may feel the sharrows give them unlimited access to taking the lane which clearly is not the case as evidenced by section 21656.

I'm thinking of getting a bike and I like your front/rear camera setup, what do you use and do you recommend it? Thanks in advance for your reply.

Greetings from the Netherlands

That woman probably didn't have an experience on the road you passed. I saw lots of rider say like that without having enough information. Single file or double file does not matter much when a cyclist wants to control the traffic.

"You know I'm something of a cyclist myself"

Cycle lanes are NOT for cyclist safety. I've been in many more very dangerous situations in bike lanes than I have while riding in traffic. Cycle lanes ARE for motorist convenience and political clout.