LADOT Puts “James M. Woods” on a Mini-Road Diet. ABC Wonders About the Street Parking.

Yesterday, I saw a promotional spot on ABC for the evening news that promised help people that are upset about automobile parking restrictions on their local streets.  Needless to say, I was excited.  This was an easy story.  Get some angry residents complaining about parking, a nice car-culture report from a television reporter.  Bam!  Instant Streetsblog story.

But then I actually watched the story and it turned out to be more complicated than that.  Turns out the example street from their story, "James M. Woods" in the Downtown has recently undergone something similar to a road diet.  LADOT designed a project, completed by Bureau of Street Services, that actually took the former four-lane configuration for Woods and turned the road into a two-lane road with a turning lane in the middle.  With the reduced capacity for the street, the residents wanted the promised rush hour street parking restrictions lifted.

Woah!  Way to bury the lead.  LADOT reduced the through traffic capacity on a local road because the street traffic didn’t justify four travel lanes?  Just paint a couple of bike lanes and I’d think I was living in Burbank.

  • LOVE THE GUY RIDING BY ON THE SIDEWALK AT 1:34!! Funny too cause we recently started taking James M. Woods instead of 8th street on our cut around South Downtown, on the way to the Day Laborer Bike Repair Space. It definitely has nice new pavement, and plenty of room for bikes (with or without ladder trailers). The only bummer is it runs into the 110 and a nasty high speed, tightened underpass just before it gets into Downtown heading east…not sure what it does going west.

  • That actually looks wide enough for some decent sized bike lanes.

  • What were the criteria for taking away this car lane?

    North Figueroa St. in Cypress Park and Highland Park is 10,000 cars short of its minimum average daily car trips (30,000 min. ADT), the LADOT’s consultant for the bike plan said this section should have traffic calming, yet the LADOT dropped the recommendation.

    What the hell are the criteria being used by these guys?! Do they have a stated policy, or is it just willy nilly one-hand-doesn’t-know-what-the-other-one-is-doing?

    New motto! LADOT, doing all the right things, in all the wrong places.

  • BikePlanner

    Someone go measure from curb to yellow center line. If it’s 22 feet or more you can add bike lanes with no impact to travel lanes or parking.

    If it’s 21 feet, then we need to pressure LADOT to relax their standard center turn lane widths from 12 feet to 10.

    ADT’s up to about 18,000 will accommodate a “road diet,” although at those volumes you have to start paying attention to the density of traffic signals and signal timing.

  • I caught that sidewalk rider too! It’s a sign of a hostile street environment and an INcomplete street.

    Also, don’t knock on-street parking (I know, no one has). It can be very effective traffic calming and eliminates the need to build streetscape killing, parking lots.

  • LAofAnaheim

    Agreed with commenter # 5….street parking is a very important tool for “road diets”/”traffic calming”. I hope we see some backlash against this bar-none ridiculous “anti-gridlock” zoning, which makes our city streets miniature highways.

  • LADOT is proposing to enlarge Bundy Drive as it approaches Olympic without adding bike lanes or dedicated bus lanes. They are also proposing to turn Olympic into a Class I highway near Bundy, again without the addition of bicycle or bus lanes. Much of this is designed to increase the ease of using cars to get around this highly congested area. However, in the same breathe they are seeking to increase the density around this area because it is near a future, proposed Expo line stop. One proposal that they are in support of is Bundy Medical Complex, which will add >20,000 new car trips to this intersection each and every day (~50% increase). They seek to encourage alternative transportation by building near these stops. Yet they fail to envision alternative ways to get to and from future Expo stops and transportation hubs.

  • Agreed, its definitely a good thing, and the pathetic feedback the residents gave against it did nothing to dissuade me, lol. I think you can measure the lane width via GoogleEarth?

    It is problematic that LADOT’s engineers can’t seem to synchronize themselves with any methodical, bike friendly philosophy…

  • I’m not finished read this yet, but it’s so fabulous ‘n I’ll back again when I was finished my job :D

  • I’m not finished read this yet, but it’s so fabulous ‘n I’ll back again when I was finished my job :D