Streetsblog Los Angeles

The first time I biked down Main Street in Santa Monica and then into the Venice Neighborhood of Los Angeles was the summer of 2008.  I was following Santa Monica Critical Mass and part of the comically over-aggressive antics of the SMPD included herding cyclists into the lane by buzzing groups of cyclists on motorcycles and cruisers until we passed into Los Angeles.  When we crossed the border two things vanished, the police presence and the bike lane.

Fast-forward three and a half years and the situation has changed.  While Santa Monica has sporadic Critical Mass rides, they don’t draw near the number of riders or police presence their predecessors dud.  And as of Friday night, the transition from Santa Monica to Los Angeles on Main Street is seamless for bicyclists.

At long last, the Main Street Road Diet is in place.  The former five lane configuration has been re-striped to have three through travel lanes, including a turn lane, two bicycle lanes and two lanes of car parking.  The road diet connects Windward Circle at the south end to the Santa Monica border, just North of Rose Avenue.  The diet is .8 miles long.

There are many reasons to consider “putting a road on a diet” by reducing the capacity for cars and increasing capacity for everyone else.  Usually, diets are completed on streets with lower traffic volumes and higher than average bicycle and pedestrian use.  By giving more space to bicyclists, diets don’t just benefit cyclists but also pedestrians who benefit from a better walking environment and car drivers who get to drive in a safer environment.

After other road diets drew opposition from neighborhood groups and ABC 7, LADOT met twice with the Venice Neighborhood Council.   The feedback they received was requests that the Diet either give more space to cyclists or abandon the diet for a series of traffic calming and Sharrows.  In response, LADOT increased the width of the bike lanes by six inches so that the bike lane and adjacent parking weren’t both the minimum widths.  The “compromise” plan didn’t leave critics happy, but at least made the project better than “minimum width for bikes, maximum space for cars.”

Joe Linton reviewed the lanes over the weekend for the Eco-Village Blog.  Some more of his pictures are available after the jump. Read more…

(Note: If you’re not familiar with the history of the Westchester Station, check out this City Watch article by Westchester Neighborhood Council Member Denny Schneider)

Let’s start with the basics.

The budget for construction of the Crenshaw Light Rail Line is $1.7 billion which will connect the Expo Line to the Green Line and eventually LAX.  The budget includes at least six stations.  Thanks to a new resolution passed by the Metro Board of Directors,the total number of “approved” stations has ballooned to eight, but the total funding still only guarantees six.

A coalition of community activists, Westside City Councilman Bill Rosendahl and County Supervisor Don Knabe scored a victory yesterday, when the Metro Board of Directors unanimously passed a motion “approving” a station in Westschester for the Crenshaw Light Rail line.  The Westchester station would be the farthest west station in the Crenshaw Corridor.

“I am thrilled to see that a Manchester/Aviation station will be included in the construction bids,” commented Rosendahl, who hosted an online petition to the Metro Board asking for the Westchester Station’s inclusion.  ”Hats off to Supervisor Knabe for his leadership and the Westchester community for their support.”

But for station supporters, the victory could ultimately be a hollow one.  Westchester residents were stunned to learn earlier this year that funding for the station was not included in Metro’s final project alternative and scrambeled to get the station included again.  Yesterday’s vote makes it possible for the station to be built, but doesn’t guarantee it.  While the resolution authorizes the station, it doesn’t require it.  Contractors bidding on construction can include the station in their bids, it wouldn certainly make for a stronger bid, but adding the Westchester Station isn’t a requirement to submit a bid. Read more…

Finally, L.A.’s new commitment to bike planning brings some paint to the Westside.  Last Friday Joe Linton noted at the Eco-Village blog that the city had placed down markers for 0.77 miles of new bike lanes from Grand View Blvd to Albright Avenue, in my own neighborhood of Mar Vista.

By Sunday morning, the new lanes were already in place and captured on film by local green living advocate Sherri Akers.  If you see new bike lanes somewhere in Los Angeles, drop us a line at damien at streetsblog dot org.

The lanes meet up with newly implemented lanes on Washington Place and Bentley Avenue in Culver City.  This sort of inter-city coordination is going to be necesary for real bike mobility to come to L.A. County, especially the Westside which has Culver City and Beverly Hills surrounded by City land and Santa Monica between much of the Westside and the ocean.

Linton has more to say about the lanes, and bike planning on the Westside in general.  For more on these lanes, check out the Eco-Village blog.

LADOT Environmental Documents for Expo Phase II Bikeway

What a difference a few weeks make.

Before the Thanksgiving break, Streetsblog reported on how many Westside bicyclists were concerned about bike planning for Phase II of the Expo Line.  While planning for the second phase of the light rail portion of the Expo Light Rail project is nearly 60% complete, the bicycle planning hasn’t really begun.   One of the main reasons for the delay is that Caltrans had not certified environmental documents needed before the bike planning could begin.  To make matters worse, the Culver City Bicycle Coalition complained that a planned bike-transit center for the Culver City station seemed to be dropped from the plans.

But much of that has changed.  Caltrans has granted the Categorical Exclusion (CE) needed for bikeay construction to begin, a prerequisite for the Expo Construction Authority to begin planning the bikeway.  The Authority also announced that it will soon create a long-promised bicycle advisory committee to help with the bicycle plans for Phase II.

To top it all off, a bike parking plan for the Culver City Station was presented, although advocates want to see a greater commitment to bring a bike-transit facility to Culver City.

“Both the City of Los Angeles and City of Santa Monica have obtained environmental clearance for the bikeway project,” begins Gabriela Collins, spokesperson for the Expo Construction Authority.  ”Once the funding from both cities comes through, Expo plans to contract the bikeway design and construction to Skanska Rados, a Joint Venture, the current design-build contractor for the guideway.  The Bicycle Advisory Committee will be brought to the Expo Board for approval at that time.”

While many bike advocates cheered the news that the CE has been finalized, there are still some lingering concerns that the Expo Construction Authority wasted time waiting for environmental clearances for bikeways while the rail project planning moved forward.

“The bikeway was inevitable, so it is unfortunate that preliminary engineering of the bikeway was not done at the same time,” says Jonathan Weiss, a member of the City of Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee.  ”How many bikeway options have been foreclosed because of this avoidable delay?  Thankfully, the City of L.A. has ramped up its support and unstuck the bikeway design.”

Federal funding for the bikeway project has already been guaranteed, so it would seem that the bikeway project could finally be moving forward.  However, there’s still one more hurdle that could be placed in front of the Bikeway.  There’s no guarantee that the group of homeowners that have sued to stall the bike project thus far could bring suit against the new CE as well.

Meanwhile in Culver City, a small campaign to urge the Construction Authority to bring a bike plan to the Culver City Expo stop has met with success. Read more…

I have to admit that when Jonathan Weiss first described his idea for a Westwood-Expo Botanical Water Garden (WEBWG) at the Westwood Station for the Expo Line, I thought it would never happen.  Three years later, it would be a major upset if some sort of Botanical Garden wasn’t built at the station site, as the concept has gained traction even with groups opposing the rail line itself.

Today and tomorrow, WEBWG faces a new audience, the Proposition O Oversight Committee.  In 2004, the voters of Los Angeles passed Prop. O, which authorized the City of Los Angeles to issue a series of general obligation bonds for up to $500 million for projects to protect public health by cleaning up pollution, in the City’s watercourses to meet Federal Clean Water Act requirements.   The committee has an agenda item entitled “Discussion and Possible Action: Westwood-Expo Botanical Garden.”

Ryan Thiha, an Environmental Engineering Associate with the city’s Watershed Protection Division is the project manager for WEBWG and explains the project.

“The (WEBWG) is located on City owned properties located along Exposition Light Rail and Westwood Station Stop between Overland and Westwood,” Thiha explains.  ”The project proposes to divert, treat, and use dry-weather flow from Overland by using bioremediation such as plants, soil, and UV exposure (natural treatment process). Project also proposes educational display boards, pedestrian walkways, and outdoor classroom area where local students can come and learn about the ecology and local hydrology. In
summary, it provides environmental, educational, recreational benefits to local community, students, and Light Rail passengers.”

While the WEBWG concept has political momentum, the “no-parking” concept for the Westwood Station of the Expo Line was approved in March and the city unveiled its concept for the WEBWG in May, the project is not full funded.  Funding support from Prop. O could be the difference between having a beautiful and environmentally friendly park and a station surrounded by weeds.

Read more…

Earlier today, the California Public Utilities Commission gave the green light to proceed with construction of Phase II of the Expo Line.  CPUC was widely expected to delay their decision on whether or not the rail/road crossings for Phase II were safe enough and that they wouldn’t cause excess pollution by creating traffic delay.  In a surprise move, CPUC unanimously approved the crossings after Commissioner Timothy Alan Simon removed a “hold” he had placed on the crossing vote.

Even though CPUC is supposed to look at projects on their merit and not consider politics, both opponents and supporters of the Expo Line were lobbying the Commissioners.  The Transit Coalition published a draft letter urging Commissioners to ignore letters by opponents.  At the same time, the Expo Construction Authority itself sponsored a letter writing campaign urging the commission to approve the crossings.

A coalition of community leaders calling themselves Neighbors for Smart Rail were urging the Commission to hold off on an approval vote until they’re appeal of the Expo Phase II environmental documents could be heard.  Their lobbying effort fell short. Read more…

For those just joining the discussion, a group of activists in West Los Angeles has been working with the office of Los Angeles Dist. 11 Councilman Bill Rosendahl since April to re-open Bundy Triangle Park. This rare swath of green space in dense West LA sits at the intersection of Bundy Drive, Santa Monica Boulevard and Ohio Avenue.

The inviting spot, however, has been fenced off since the 1990s thanks to a shortsighted move that sought to place a band-aid on the perceived problem of the neighborhood’s homeless residents. Consequently, the thousands of Angelenos that pass by the park every day on transit, bike and foot are bereft of a calm shaded green space.

In a city so glaringly lacking in vibrant public space — and short on funds to create new ones — Bundy Triangle Park remains the lowest of low-hanging fruit. While there is strong support for re-opening the park — from the city of Los Angeles as well as from neighborhood groups — the process has been slow going.

There’s good news, however, on both the political and the design front. First, landscape architecture firm AHBE has generously drawn up five conceptual renderings for what a re-opened Bundy Triangle Park could look like.

Read more…

The Expo Construction Authority is anxious to stop history from repeating itself.

When clearances for the first phase of the Expo Line appeared all but certain, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), a regulatory agency which regulates privately owned public utilities in the state of California, including electric power, telecommunications, natural gas and water companies, threw them a curve ball.  The last government body to look over the environmental documents for Phase I, CPUC ordered substantial new reviews of two rail crossings which led to an additional rail station at Farmdale Avenue near Dorsey High School and a pedestrian bridge elsewhere.  The new studies were championed by the Fix Expo campaign which compiled a large technical comments document and produced hundreds of letters of concern.

“The Westside of Los Angeles has waited too long for the arrival of mass transit and the community wants an alternative to the gridlock and congestion of the I-10 freeway,” writes Gabriela Collins of the Expo Construction Authority.   “CPUC approval of the Resolution on November 10, 2011 is an important step in keeping this project on track.”

As Expo Phase II heads towards its date with CPUC on November 10, the Expo Construction Authority has set up a website for people to easily send comments to the Commission.  Comments are due on Friday of this week, but supporters of the project won’t have to comb through the environmental documents themselves, the Expo Construction Authority has already written the support letter outlining the clearances that the rail crossings have already earned and the outreach that Expo has done on Phase II.  You can read the letter and submit it to CPUC if you wish by clicking here.

For it’s part, the Authority believes that Expo Phase II deserves quick apporval from CPUC.   Read more…

When Jonathan Weiss emailed me two weeks ago announcing that Sharrows placeholders appeared on Motor Avenue, I didn’t think too much of it. After all, stencils marking a place for bike racks have been on the ground next to my Big Blue Bus stop for almost five months.

However, apparently LADOT contractors were working overtime again, because yesterday morning Weiss grabbed the above pictures while out on a Sunday morning Constitutional. He was greeted by these views cycling Southbound on Motor Avenue.  New Sharrows have already been spotted on Arden Ave.,  Fountain Avenue, Yucca Street and Vine Street in the Mid-/K-/Downtown areas.  If you see more Sharrows on the street, drop us a line and let us know.

As promised, Neighbors for Smart Rail (NFSR) is appealing the decision of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Thomas McKnew to dismiss their lawsuit alleging that the Expo Construction Authority violated state environmental law when doing their studies of the future light rail lines route.  The appeal was filed nearly two weeks ago, on September 15, to the California Court of Appeals

“NFSR is looking to prevent West L.A. gridlock by protecting access to the 10 freeway through West L.A.,” writes president Terri Tippett in a press statement.  ”Trains blocking Overland and Westwood 24 times per hour will have a devastating impact on the existing area traffic, and all evidence shows that Expo didn’t properly study it.”

At first glance, their legal filings don’t appear to be much different in substance than the arguments McKnew rejected earlier this year so NFSR isn’t arguing anything new, just that McKnew erred in ordering the case dismissed last year.   Their main point is that the recently decided  Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association v. City of Sunnyvale City Council shows that traffic studies should examine the impact a new project will have on current conditions, not on conditions at the end of the “life of the project.”   In Sunnyvale, a state superior court ruled that the city’s environmental review of a road extension violated state law because it based it’s review on traffic projections for 2020 instead of current conditions. Read more…