Photo: Waltarr/Flickr

But Bloomekatz reports that lawsuit is the tip of the iceberg:

But there are four other cases pending that could leave the city on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Fixing all of Los Angeles’ sidewalks would be a daunting task: Officials estimate the cost of improving them all would top $1.5 billion. But advocates for the disabled hope they can make a measurable dent in the problem.

The article continues with a series of short quotes from pedestrian advocates, including L.A. Streetsblog Editorial Board Member Deborah Murphy, and disabled pedestrians struggling with the city’s broken network of sidewalks.

Next comes a quote from Council Member Bernard Parks who both criticizes the city for not investing in infrastructure and then excusing not making the investment today based on the city’s budget crisis.

However, Bloomekatz’s research puts lie to that particular claim.  The City of Sacramento dedicates 20% of its pedestrian funds to sidewalk repair.  That level of dedication can make a real impact on the State Capitol, and it could make a real impact here as well.

Los Angeles has a choice to make, it can fix its sidewalks now or it can wait for more court orders.

Photo:CICLE

Following a batch of applications this summer that included a lot more community outreach than in years past, the City of Los Angeles is looking for two transportation planners to work on a city-wide SRTS plan for one year.  The funding for the positions is part of the “bicycle-pedestrian set-aside” from the city’s share of Measure R “Local Return” dollars.  While there has been some grumbling that Measure R funds are meant to go towards Capital Improvements, spending money to improve the city’s woeful SRTS program was supported in committee by L.A. Walks, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition and the Safe Routes to School National Partnership (the Partnership.)

For now, a top priority is finding two people best able to fill the positions at LADOT.  The job applications can be found on the city’s website by clicking here.  The Partnership urges anyone interested in the positions to apply while noting that even with these positions, the Los Angeles is well behind other cities when it comes to dedicating staff for pedestrian improvements.  Even these positions will be somewhat split between bicycle and pedestrian work as bicycle access is a major component of SRTS planning.

Of course, hiring new staff is one step on a journey.  Cyclists well remember the frustration felt when seemingly progressive ideas disappeared from drafts of the Bike Plan before the city settled on a plan that was acceptable to advocates at the eleventh hour.  There’s no reason why a progressive Safe Routes to School Plan wouldn’t involve some advocacy campaign as well.

Last week, SCAG’s Joint Meeting of the Regional Council and Planning Committees met to vote on a proposed long-term plan for the SCAG region which covers Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial counties, passed a measure that nearly tripled the regional investment in bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Walking and driving account for 21% of trips, but 1.3% of funding. To see a county-by-county breakdown or a larger version of this graphic, visit the Safe Routes to School California Blog.

Over thirty people testified in favor of the proposal including representatives of the Safe Routes to Schools California, Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, National Resources Defense Council, and San Bernadino Council of Public Health.   At the Safe Routes to Schools blog site, Jessica Meaney lists some of the more powerful testimonies.

So bicycle and pedestrian planning is on the mark in Greater Los Angeles County.  That’s the good news.  The bad news is the near-tripling of funding is less impressive when put in a larger framework.  SCAG updates its long-term plan every four years.  In 2008, it allocated less than half of one percent to bicycle and pedestrian funding.  This year’s draft plan increases that percentage all the way to 1.3% of the future funds or about $6 billion of a $450 billion spending plan.

The Safe Routes to Schools California explains why even the higher number is alarmingly low:

And given that 21 percent of all trips are conducted via walking or biking (2009 National Household Travel Survey) and 25 percent of all roadway injuries and fatalities in this region affect bicyclist and pedestrians (2008 SWITRS data), we continue to urge SCAG’s Regional Council to invest a significant percentage of resources toward walkable and bikeable communities and neighborhoods.

But even alarmingly low is better than the status quo.  At NRDC’s Switchboard, Amanda Eaken casts a positive light on this modest victory but still calls for a more equitable funding scheme:

We couldn’t agree more.  But is funding a paltry 1.3% enough to do that?  We don’t think so.  Equity, safety and the environment demand more than that.

Fortunately, there’s time to improve the plan. The next milestone is the December 1, 2011 vote of the full Regional Council to release the preferred alternative to the public for review.

Meanwhile, farther south the SANDAG (San Diego Area Governments) has already passed their $214 billion new 40 year plan.  It also increases bicycle and pedestrian funding, transit funding over current levels.  Perhaps most shockingly for a region more associated with sprawl than even Los Angeles, the SANDAG plan dedicates more money for transit expansion than either local road improvements or highway expansion.  Of course, looked at another way, it dedicates 55% to road and highway improvements, 36% to transit improvements, and a meager 1.4% for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Much like the SCAG plan, the SANDAG plan received the mixed support of much of the local transportation reform community.  On one hand, the percentages for transit and people powered transportation are much lower than they should be for an area serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  On the other hand, it’s much better than previous plans which had less than half a percent for bicycle and pedestrian projects and much lower set-asides for transit expansion.

Modest improvements didn’t stop advocates with the Green Party and Cleveland National Forest Foundation from blistering the plan.  Founder Duncan McFetridge.  ”If this is a national and regional model, we’re in bad shape,” said McFetridge in a phone interview.  ”We have a need, a tremendous need, for transit right now.  Today.  This proposal puts funding transit off into so far in to the future that many of us won’t be around anymore.”

McFetrdige isn’t just complaining without offering a solution.  Transit San Diego, a campaign of the CNFF, are the authors of the 50/10 plan which envisions a fifty year transit investment being made in the next decade.  Meanwhile, advocates with groups such as Move San Diego and Walk San Diego have supported the improved plan while pushing for more equitable funding in future plans.

But while San Diego’s plan is already passed, there’s still time to work on improving the SCAG plan.  Eaken mentioned above that the plan won’t be voted on until December 1.  If you want to get involved, Safe Routes to School California invites you to join the Safe Routes to School Southern California Network.  The Network conducts monthly regional meetings and talk about these very types of issues and engage our partners to help with these conversations.  If you’d like to join this network and get info on meetings email jessica@saferoutespartnership.org.  Move L.A. has a similar working group, and you can join the fun there by contacting Beth Steckler: sbsteckler@gmail.com.

It's official. Southland residents are sick of sprawl and massive highway projects. Source: Key Findings from Recent Southern California Survey on Transportation and Land Use Planning

Even as Los Angeles embraces an expanded transit and bicycle program, the rest of Southern California is still pictured as a sprawling wasteland of highways and subdivisions.  However, that’s not what the people that live in the Southland want according to a new survey released by Move L.A., the American Lung Association and the Natural Resources Defense Council.  Instead, Southlanders want the kind of dense mixed use development and short commutes over McMansions and sprawlways.

The survey, completed by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates, shows that voters in the six county region served by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) overwhelmingly support expanding and investing in transit over investing in highways.  Even when voters backed highway spending, there was more support for a “Fix It First” approach than funneling more money into mammoth road expansion projects.

“If Southern California voters were in charge of our transportation plans, the region would look very different,”Amanda Eaken, NRDC’s deputy director of sustainable communities, added. that “Voters understand what so many studies have told us: widening roads will not solve traffic congestion. Instead, designing communities that increase our mobility and freedom — helping us to get out of our cars — is what will ultimately solve the problem.”

The survey was released just days before SCAG is scheduled to vote on the region’s Long Range Transportation Plan this Thursday.  The SCAG Region encompasses six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial, 18 million people and 38,000 square miles.  Organizations such as the three who commissioned this report and the Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership have lobbied SCAG officials and testified at public hearings helping to create a far more progressive transportation plan than SCAG has passed in the past.

Move L.A. has analyzed the plan and offers support for its passage:

While the plan is good and seemingly signals that a new era is dawning in Southern California — one which could result in more housing and transportation choices for residents — the question is whether SCAG’s Regional Council will endorse it

Even so, the citizens of the SCAG region are well ahead of their elected leaders when it comes to a progressive transportation vision.

Many of those 18 million people are tired of the long commutes, tired of the endless highway spending, and anxious for a new way of looking at transportation.  Survey respondents were asked to imagine they were in charge of their region’s transportation budget, and to allocate a hypothetical $100 budget across five spending categories. Their responses indicate they would like to see a significant majority of the region’s transportation dollars allocated to expanding and improving public transportation and providing more bike and pedestrian infrastructure. While voters would allocate about 25 percent of funding to repair and maintain existing roads and highways, they would allocate less than 20 percent of the budget to expanding roads and highways.

Let’s just say that while the SCAG plan is a significant improvement over the current plan.  The 2008 RTP calls for a $1.8 billion investment in bikeways over 30 years while the 2012 draft calls for $6 billion.  However, the 2012 plan is allocating less than half of the 14.1% for bicycle and pedestrian projects that residents would allocate left to their own devices.

“Voters prioritize expanding public transportation as the most effective means of reducing traffic congestion and air pollution,” said Denny Zane, executive director of Move LA. “The findings also show that voters would prefer living in communities that are walkable and mixed-use even if this means living in a smaller home.”

Streetsblog will have an update on the Regional Transportation Plan after its passage on Thursday.

Bernard Parks, where the sidewalks aren't so bad.

While Parks’ plan has been jeered by just about everyone who has heard it, the former LAPD Chief’s plan is at least trying to address the third-world quality of the city’s pedestrian network in some places.  Homeowners were in charge of sidewalk repair in Los Angeles until 1974 when the city received a massive federal grant to take on the problem.  However, over nearly 40 years the grant ran out, and the sidewalks have gotten worse.

Parks outlines the depth of the problem on KPCC’s Pat Morrison Show, via KCET:

“(S)ince the 1970s, the city took responsibility for sidewalks that were broken by trees. Over time, they’ve taken responsibility for all sidewalks. The city has tried over the last 20 years to repair sidewalks. They’ve expended over $100 million over a 10 year period and fixed only 500 miles of sidewalks. And the sidewalks – about 10,000 miles of them – are in worse repair [...] than they were before.”

Wow, it’s hard to believe this is the same guy that was worried that the city wouldn’t be able to spend $3 million a year on pedestrian projects in the summer of 2010.

Regardless of one’s views on Parks’ current proposal, there is no doubt that the city does need to get serious about the dismal state of our sidewalks.  A back of the napkin calculation based on Parks’ numbers above would show a $1.9 billion need.  Even if the city were able to magically take the 405 “Sepulveda Pass Improvement Project”money and reprogram it to sidealk repair it still wouldn’t be enough.

Last year, Parks proposed a “point of sale” plan where the cost of replacing the sidewalk would be included in any housing purchase so that the sidewalks would be repaired, if needed, when a real estate title exchanged hand.  It would take decades, but in about three decades the city would have a “new” series of sidewalks.  I have to admit I scoffed at the idea when it was proposed, but studies by UCLA’s Parking Guru Donald Shoup, who is also a trained economist, shows that a “point of sale” system doesn’t have a negative impact on real estate sales and values.

Of course, the city could always just declare sidewalk repair a high priority and find the funds, local or state, to get the job done.

Have a better idea?  Leave it in the comments section and we’ll be certain to forward your ideas to the City Council Transportation Committee staff.

The walk, from the Healthy El Monte website.

As Streetsblog has learned about and written about the 5 PLACE Grant Communities, one thing has become clear. When you’re talking about smaller areas, and not sprawling metropolis’ such as Los Angeles, it’s the little things that make a big difference. In El Monte, they created a Health and Wellness Plan that centers around providing healthier food choices and creating more safe opportunities for people to be outside.

To demonstrate what El Monte’s streets should look like, the city created a two new walking routes starting and ending at the northeast corner of Arceo Park that encircle the park and part of the surrounding community. The longer 1.1 mile route route heads all the way over to Santa Ana Boulevard where stores, pre-schools and even some small medical facilities exist. The shorter three quarter mile route connects the community to the park and only runs to Gage Avenue.

“When the city was applying for the grant, they picked Arceo Walk because it had the elements that make it walkable,” explains Arpine Shakhbandaryan, the PLACE Coordinator for the City of El Monte. “It had a residential component. It had the retail component. It had a health care component. It had a lot of schools. All within a mile of Arceo Walk. It was a great example of a walk project and how it could be replicated.”

View Arceo Walk in a larger map

Even a simple google map shows Shakhbandaryan’s point. The Arceo Walk travels directly past health food stores, middle schools and other retail places along Santa Anita Avenue on the western end of the longer route. Along the eastern route are a senior center, library, swimming pool and community center…to say nothing of Arceo Park itself.

“We’ve done a similar map for Mountain View Park and Lambert Park and you can’t find the diversity of resources within a mile as we could with Arceo,” finishes Shakhbandaryan.

Anecdotally, city staff reports an uptick in the number of people walking around the park, although hard numbers for the walking route don’t exist yet as the walk has only existed for a couple of years. The walk was also a crucial part of the formation of the El Monte Walking Club, the first “chapter” of which met at Arceo Park and walked the 1.1 mile route. Last week, Streetsblog profiled the walking club, but Healthy California took a similar look at the group last October, when the walking club was based completely around the Arceo Walk.

When I first visited El Monte, my mother, son and I walked the longer Arceo Walk route. We did no advance work other than figuring out where it started to see if we would be able to figure out the route just as an El Monte resident who was visiting the walk for the first time would have to.  The budget for physical projects in the PLACE grant was only $20,000.  But in this case, some signs, some pavement markings, and a public relations campaign created a real place in El Monte.

These directional signs showed us the way, and make it easy to follow the route. There were also sidewalk markings advertising Healthy El Monte, but the pictures didn't come out well.

Heading west from Tyler and Mildred, the first phase of the walk is very residential.

On Santa Ana, things changed rapidly. The traffic increased as retail development dotted the side of the roadway. There wasn't a downtown feel at all, but the road crossings did make us feel safe.

Included in the development was a pharmacy, a series of doctor's offices, and this health center.

On Bodger Street, we were back to a residential feel. One complaint with the walk is that some intersections didn't have curb cuts. Most did, but a handful didn't.

Heading north on Tyler, Arceo Park was on one side and the senior center and other government offices was on the other. When we reached the end, I had taken 1,400 steps. Healthy El Monte's goal for residents is 10,000 steps every day.

Streetsblog’s Healthy El Monte coverage will wrap up next week with a review of the Healthy El Monte Plan.

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

Its difficult to create a safe mid-block pedestrian crossing, but there is always something you can do to make aModel Street Design Manual crossing safer. All images in this story come from

Over the past few months, we’ve checked in on the efforts of five communities in Los Angeles County to create more livable, walkable, bikeable and healthier communities through better transportation planning through the Los Angeles PLACE Grants.  However, Los Angeles County is home to 11 million residents, and less than 750,000 live in PLACE communities.

But that doesn’t mean that the LA County Public Health Department (LACDPH) doesn’t have a plan for the rest of the county.  Partnering with the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, LACDPH awarded a RENEW Grant to create a “Model Street Manual” to help the rest of the county, and anyone else who was interested, begin to think of their streets in a different way.

“It’s time we started designing our streets for people and quality neighborhoods instead of just cars,” explains super-planner Ryan Snyder, the lead consultant for the plan. “We hope the street manual will change the way cities here and across the US design their streets. The manual should be real a game changer.”

The manual starts with an explanation of the difference between traffic control devices, the application of which is controlled by the state, and traffic calming which isn’t.  The state’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices biases streets towards moving traffic makes installing traffic control devices a difficult undertaking.  Making a difference between traffic calming and traffic control is an important legal distinction, because if a municipality deviates from state rules, it could be found at fault in traffic crashes.

For example, stop signs, traffic signals, and flashing beacons are expected to meet minimum thresholds before application. These thresholds include such criteria as number of vehicles, number of pedestrians or other uses, distance to other devices, crash history, and more.

Traffic calming, such as speed humps and bump outs, don’t fall under the same restrictions.  Thus, municipalities are encouraged to adopt a strategy of slowing traffic to increase street safety as one of many practices to make streets safer for all users.

The manual also lists the benefits of adopting a true “complete streets” ideal when completing road projects.  The benefits are many, and this list is probably familiar to many Streetsblog readers, but seeing the list together creates a striking picture.

• The goals of designing living streets are to
• Serve the land uses that are adjacent to the street; mobility is a means, not an end
• Encourage people to travel by walking, bicycling, and transit, and to drive less
• Provide transportation options for people of all ages, physical abilities, and income levels
• Enhance the safety and security of streets, from both a traffic and personal perspective
• Improve peoples’ health
• Create livable neighborhoods
• Reduce the total amount of paved area
• Reduce streetwater runoff into watersheds
• Maximize infiltration and reuse of stormwater
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollution
• Reduce energy consumption
• Promote the economic well-being of both businesses and residents
• Increase civic space and encourage human interaction

While the manual doesn’t give a list of the potential negative impacts of promoting living streets, we’ve prepared a list for comparison purposes.

• People driving cars will find it more difficult to drive dangerously

So how do we get from a traditional street design to one that emphasizes the first list of benefits over automobile speed?

It would take forever to go through all of the individual treatments available to municipalities, but the basics aren’t going to surprise any regular Streetsblog reader.

Sidewalk design in a dense residential area.

One of the main keys, of perhaps greater importance than bike lanes or large sidewalks, is the quality of the road intersections.  A disproportionately large amount of crashes occur at intersections and the design of the intersection can also lead to dangerous intersections throughout the street.  For example, many community activists point to a lack of stop signs and stop lights as the main reason a community is unsafe, but in many intersections, there are better options.  For example, traffic circles (aka roundabouts) is a superior treatment at many residential and other intersections.

Of course, providing a safe way for people to cross at an intersection is also paramount to creating safe streets, crosswalks, bike and pedestrian countdown timers, wayfaring signage and bike boxes (painted areas that give bikes priority at intersections) are all different treatments that provide a safer way for people to mix with cars in addition to a traditional crosswalk and pedestrian light.

Of course, the manual addresses Pedestrian Crossings, Bikeway Design, and Transit Accommodations as important components of creating a complete street.  A series of treatments are proposed that takes space currently dedicated to moving cars to moving people.  Bus bulb outs make it easier to get on the bus and reduces traffic speed in areas where pedestrians and cars mix.  Separated bike lanes gives bicycles their own space on the street.  Sometimes, the most impressive designs are the most basic.  The manual also gives sidewalk design guidelines for areas with different uses and densities, covering everything from office parks, to main street, to a suburban residential area.

My favorite chapter is on “Streetscape Ecosystem.”  A truly Livable Street is all about multiple uses in the public space.  I love the parts about creating furniture, waste cans, public art and shopping areas, the text about storm water runoff and rain water management is equally important.  After all, a Livable Street is a Green Street.

Last but not least is the density and land uses that surround the street.  Just as its important to build a street to match the existing development, its important to plan development to match a street.

Snyder describes the manual as a “game changer,” but its also a challenge.  No longer do communities have the excuse of not understanding smart growth principles or the claim that its “impossible” to change a street’s DNA.    The manual and its team have created a public framework for anyone to use.  The challenge to urban planners and transportation engineers everywhere is whether or not they have the courage to.

(Full Disclaimer: Two of the contributors to the manual, Deborah Murphy and James Rojas, are members of the LA Streetsblog Editorial Board.)

A view of Bodger Street during a visit to Arceo Walk on July 7 of this year.

Martha Sera likes walking.  A former high school track star, Sera regularly goes for mile-long walks with her husband, father and children, ages two and five.  That Sera has found a way to walk for a living is just a bonus.

Sera is one of a handful of organizers for the City of El Monte Walking Club, an innovative attempt by the city to increase the physical activity of its residents.  Participants in the club show up at an assigned location, either a public park or school, stretch and go for a walk.  Upon completion of the mile walk, they receive a ticket that can be turned in for a prize.  Five tickets earns a pedometer; 15 tickets, a t-shirt.

“You should try and take 10,000 steps a day to have a healthy lifestyle,” Sera notes.  According to her pedometer, Sera takes 1,400 steps per mile.

It's ok to tread on me. Messages on the sidewalk encourage people to walk...

When I met Sera, she was sitting under a tree with a sign-in sheet for the first of two walking club meetings last Saturday morning at 8:30 at Arceo Park.  After a brief introduction, the two of us took off on a walk around the park, looking for more club members than the handful who had shown up.  An hour later, we were at Columbia Middle School, less than a half mile away for the second meeting.

Every community that’s taken part in the PLACE program, a 2008 public health grant program sponsored by L.A. County to improve communities’ overall health through better transportation planning,  benefits from unintended consequences.  Creating a walking club for adults wasn’t part of the initial PLACE grant from the City of El Monte, but the hundreds of adults and their children who have taken to walking to improve their health because of the program is an unintended, but happy, consequence of their new transportation vision.

The idea for the club is simple.  El Monte residents have a higher-than-average rate of obesity and asthma, and the easiest solution to these related issues is to increase their activity.  More than two-thirds (66.8%) of adults in El Monte were either obese or overweight in 2007, more than that of adults in LA County (58.1%) and the state as a whole (61.3%.)  Nearly half (47.7%) of El Monte’s children are either obese or overweight.  On top of that, 9.8% of adults in El Monte were diagnosed with asthma compared to 6.5% of adults in Los Angeles County. In that same year, 4.1% of adults and children in both the El Monte Health District and LA County as a whole had been diagnosed with chronic respiratory conditions.

While attendance at the park was sparse this particular weekend, Sera had more success at Columbia Middle School.  More than 60 participants, many of them parents with their children, attended one of the three “meetings” over the course of the week.  Saturdays tend to be more lightly attended, so we had two parent-child combos, both of whom first heard about the program through the school.  At the park, walkers could walk around the park or on the Arceo Walk route (more on that later) that stretches east from the Park to Santa Anita Boulevard and back.  At Columbia, they walk on a track.

The walking club just began its third year last month.  The club runs for nine months and has traditionally centered around the three parks Arceo, Lambert and Mountain View Parks.  This year a new partnership with local school districts has expanded the program to Columbia Middle School and Mira Monte School.  Both are now allowing students and adults to use school grounds on certain days.  At Columbia Middle School, Sera leads stretches and walks every Tuesday and Thursday evening and Saturday morning.

A handful of Saturday walkers at Columbia's track last Saturday.

“I like it here,” Sera says of the track.  ”When we’re at the schools we have more kids.  A lot of parents bring their kids with them.”

On Saturday, there are two kids among the dozen club members at the Columbia track this Saturday morning.  ”Edgar” and his mother “Jenny” are two of the first three people to arrive.  Edgar has asthma and takes part in the walking club to get exercise.  Sera is familiar with his exercise habits noting that last Thursday he was able to run for much of the track, but today he chose to walk next to his mother.

The walking club is a family affair for adults and their parents as well.  Carmen Arambula started her third year in the walking club.  ”Walking helped me a lot, I had high blood pressure,” she began. “My dad too, last year I made him join us for the walks.”

But for many participants, the club provides one of the few ways that people can safely go for a walk.  Sporting an “El Monte Walking Club t-shirt” Adrianna Esquirrel complained that the grocery store is too far away and there aren’t enough sidewalks to walk regularly.  The distance also prevents making daily trips, so when the shopper does go to the store he or she has to bring so many bags that walking home would be difficult.

Over 400 people are on the Healthy El Monte email list that receives updates on the program, but Sera thinks that word of mouth and promotion through the schools has been the most effective way to get the word out.  Half of the people attending Saturday’s event at Columbia Middle School has joined the club in the past month.  All but one had heard about the walk through the Middle School.  The other woman was brought by Esquirrel.

El Monte’s walking club program is sponsored by the Center for Civic Partnerships, California Healthy Cities and Communities.  For more information about the club, visit the Healthy El Monte website.

A pair of students walk home from summer school over the Haddon Bridge.

Safe Routes to School?

Last year, literally hundreds of students had to cross the Haddon Bridg everyday to get to class at San Fernando High School.  Locatee on the north west side of Ritchie Valens Park crossing the pedestrian bridge was literally the worst part of the day as it was both somewhat secluded and a complete eyesoar.  The paint was chipped and non-existent, the side nearest the park was used as an illegal dumping ground for electronic and hazardous household waste, and the other side often featured a gang member either harassing or recruiting the students.

That’s a pretty crappy way to start the school day.

“This area was covered in trash, graffiti covered the walls, the lights were knocked over.”  Max Podemski was the People for Livable Active Communities and the Environment (PLACE) Coordintor for Pacoima Beautiful and oversaw efforts to improve the bridge and create a new vision for the Wash (more on the plan later this week.)

And at least one student who needed the bridge more than others couldn’t access the bridge because of the poorly placed bollards.  Without help of family of friends to lift her wheelchair over the bollards, she had to travel over a mile around the Wash to get to school or visit her grandparents.  They live one mile, and a world, away.

It did sort of look like a bridge that would eat children from a bad horror movie. Photo via Pacoima Beautiful

In an effort to improve the community, and provide a micro-example of what can be done with the Wash, Pacoima Beautiful used $20,000 from its PLACE Grant and a heaping of community involvement to re-imagine the bridge.  To support their efforts, the Pacoima Neighborhood Council donated $5,000 to maintain and clean the bridge and Scotts Miracle Grow donated mulch and soil.

What a difference some paint, some plants, a minor investment in physical improvements and some public will can make.  The gang members are gone, and so are the piles of trash.  The bollards are now in compliance with the American with Disabilities Act and a wheelchair can glide across as easily as a bicycle or skateboard.

“When we talked with the kids, a lot of them thought the bridge was a scary place,” explains Ken Frederick with the Mountains, Recreation and Conservation Authority, a close ally of Pacoima Beautiful on this project.  ”By cleaning it up, you sort of de-mystify it.  If you clean places up you’re going to clean up some of the crime and that element.”

Part of that de-mystification was getting the students from the high school involved from the outset, and keeping them involved until it was completed.  In addition to stakeholder meetings with parents and local homeowners, Pacoima Beautiful led a mini-design charrette in the school to empower students and get their feedback.  It was in these charrettes they first learned the plight of the student confined to her wheelchair and her harrowing commute.  It was also in the charrettes where the students vetoed the idea of painting a mural because it would be seen as a challenge by the local gangs.  Instead, the bridge was painted green, a neutral color not worn by any of the local gangs.

Before above, after below

When the students input was associated into the design, the next step was to actually implement it. A pair of service days (one in the fall and another in the Spring) were planned, one in conjunction with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office.  Pacoima Beaufitul wored hard with the neighborhood council and their youth group (Youth United Towards Environmental Protection) and dozens of students showed up to paint, clean and help haul away the trash.  A flower and plant garden was put where the trash was once dumped and later the bollards were replaced and even some light fixtures went in.

The bridge was clean.  The bridge remains clean.  Its power is broken.

“Yeah, I noticed a difference,” a student who wished to be identified only by his first name of Mark told me.  ”I walked across the bridge everyday last year, and its a different place, a better place, now.”

A second student echoed those thoughts.  ”The first Monday after they painted it, it was new.”

The PLACE Grants were awarded by the L.A. County Public Health Department in 2008 to help communities create transportation and open space plans to get more people to do more things outside to combat the growing obesity trend in America and L.A. County.  29.5% of school age children in Pacoima are obsese, and one in every five has asthma.  While the plan for the Wash is mostly about using the area to create usable open space, its also about change the Wash so that it is no longer a barrier splitting the community.  On that front, this plan was an absolute success that both changed students walks and got the local community to think about the Wash in a different way.

Residents living adjacent to the bridge are perhaps its biggest fans.  ”I love it,” resident Maria Barreda told the Daily News.  Her neighbor on the other side of the pavement connected to the bridge doesn’t speak English, but just gave a thumbs up when I asked about the change in broken Spanish.

“We got the biggest bang for the buck here,” Podemski added.

But perhaps the biggest victory was just helping a young lady get across the bridge, the bridge that was blocked off with traffic bollards designed to keep cars off the bridge.  Without any sort of cue from me, Podemski ended his interview by giving her story a happy ending.

“We’ve had people come and thank us,” Podemski closed.  ”We had a mother thank us because they live on one side and the grandparents lived on the other.  Their daughter was in a wheelchair, and literally didn’t see her grandparents very often because she couldn’t get there.”

, 

For a larger image of the Greenway, and more information about the project, click here.

As part of every Policies for Livable Active Communities and the Environment (PLACE) Grants awarded by L.A. County Department of Public Health in 2008, each community had to complete a sample project that demonstrated the types of street improvements that could spread throughout their city as a result of improved planning.  The City of Culver City completed the Downtown Connector project that provides a Sharrowed street connection between the Downtown and the future Expo Station while linking residents to local schools.  Long Beach spent their money on the Green Sharrowed Lane in Belmont Shore.

Glendale’s project is completed yet, the contractor just got approval to begin construction, but it is similar to the other two projects we’ve reviewed.  The Riverdale-Maple Greenway will connect three parks in Glendale: Pacific Park and School, Maple Park and Community Center and Carr Park.  When completed the Greenway will have 124 new trees along the corridor, repaired and widened sidewalks, wayfinding and promotional signage and bike lanes on Riverdale (the western portion of the Greenway) and Sharrows along the rest of the route on Maple Street, Rock Glen Avenue and Lincoln Avenue.

PLACE Coordinator Colin Bogart explains the thinking behind the project.  ”By making it easier to access the park and the areas around the park, you’re going to get more people in the park and more people walking and biking in the neighborhoods.”

While none of the treatments considered for the Greenway are new to Glendale, this is the first time the city is coordinating a group of different designs and additions to create a special corridor friendly to all road users.  “The idea of consolidating it in one place, and to use all these funding sources to create a corridor, that was the leap,” explains Marc Stirdivant with the city’s Parks Department and one of the authors of the PLACE Grant.

Many of the new trees are already in, and what a difference they make for pedestrians. Image via the Los Angeles County Bike Coalition's special webpage for this project.

From a public health standpoint, PLACE is a public health grant after all, it’s a great low-cost investment to provide bicycle and pedestrian access to parks.  Not only does the project, spanning almost the entire east-west portion of the city, connect neighborhoods but it makes it easier for people to get to their local park without having to get into a car.  This will actually increase the physical activity of adults more than kids, as personal experience has taught me that kids have no trouble exercising at parks, and parents can get into the action mostly by exercising on the way to and from the park.

The project is a strong example of the city’s commitment to creating a walkable and bikable transportation grid.  Only $20,000 of the $320,000 from the PLACE Grant is going to cover the physical projects.  The total cost of the Greenway is roughly $500,000.  Also, the original proposal didn’t include the last two segments of the Greenway that connect to Carr Park in the Northeast corner of the map on Rock Glen and Lincoln.  After Alta Planning and Design reviewed the city’s initial plan, they urged Glendale to consider adding the spur to include the third park, and the city embraced the additional project.

At first, it seemed the main barrier to completing the project would be the intersection of Central and Maple.  The intersection was one of the most dangerous crossings, especially for pedestrians, and required Greenway users (riders and walkers) to make a pair of turns to stay on the Greenway.

“If you were a pedestrian and you wanted to cross here, you were essentially out of luck,” Bogart remarked of the road configuration.

Fixing the intersection was going to be a daunting and expensive task, until city staff noted that there was an improvement project already on the books.  Using federal stimulus funds, the city not only added new crossings to the street, but also a series of bump outs to both slow traffic and decrease the length of the crossing for pedestrians.  In addition, the city put in bike detectors connected to the traffic signal and marked their location on the street to make bike crossings easier.

Gunpowder and I rest at the intersection of Riverdale and Central and admire the new bump out.

Glendale was actually a somewhat controversial selection when the PLACE grants were first announced.  According to the census, the city is white (over 71%), middle class (median household income approaches $70,000) and suburban.  Yet, the Greenway demonstrates not just a commitment to creating livable streets where people can walk and bike where they’re going or just be outside without being harassed by traffic, but also a commitment to equity.

View map on GeoCommons

The above map shows that the corridor skirts along the densest, most diverse part of the city.  The blue line represents the corridor, the darker the red the more dense the area’s housing, and the darker the circle the higher the percentage of residents are minorities.  Whatever one’s views of Glendale, the Greenway serves the most urban part of the city.  South of the Greenway, is the civic center and jobs clusters so the residential portion isn’t as dense as north of the Greenway, but connections to jobs is an important part of a working network.

The Greenway also connects to existing infrastructure.  The map at the top of this article shows existing and planned bike routes that connect to the Greenway and one intersection on Riverdale already has a traffic circle.  Riverdale itself already has bike lanes, but they’re incomplete as they don’t have an “inside stripe.”  Once Riverdale is repaved the lanes will be repainted and completed.

As we noted above, the project isn’t completed yet. We’ll go back to Glendale to ride the Greenway and write a full review when it’s completed.

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

A.B. 529 seeks to counter the trend of rising speed limits throughout California and has sailed through both houses of the legislature. Image:Auto in the Know

While most California cyclists are thrilled that the Senate and Assembly agree that car drivers should give cyclists a three foot berth when speeding past them, the legislative session in Sacramento was mostly positive, but still somewhat mixed.  As the Senate and Assembly prepare to go into recess, here’s where many important pieces of legislation that pertain to traffic safety, and livable and complete streets stand.

On the Governor’s Desk

A.B. 529 – Assembly Bill 529 was introduced to bring California into compliance with federal standards by giving municipalities greater say on setting local speed limits.  The legislation still requires municipalities to set speed limits based on the 85th percentile of drivers, but allows them to “round down” if conditions allow.  In short, if the 85th percentile of drivers is clocked at 44 miles per hour, the city could set the speed limit at 40 m.p.h. in certain conditions.  The bill wasn’t opposed by any special interest groups and had unanimous support in both legislatures.

A.B. 650 – Assemblyman Bob Blumenfeld wrote a powerful op/ed for Streetsblog about the role that transit should spend in the state’s future.  The next step for California would be passing of his legislation, A.B. 650 which will create a panel to propose solutions to improve buses, light rail, and other public transit options throughout California. It was passed by both houses on the legislature, and the League of Conservation Voters has created an action alert to urge the governor to sign the legislation.

A.B. 147 – A.B. 147 is one of those pieces of legislation that few people understand but could have a huge impact.  Basically, the Subdivision Map Act allows municipalities to charge developers fees to defray the cost of building  thoroughfares bridges to serve their project.  A.B. 147 would allow them to include fees for constructing bicycle, transit, pedestrian or traffic calming measures as well.  That could be a lot of new funds for local projects.

S.B. 910 – We’ve covered the status of the “3 Foot Passing Law” earlier this week, but it still awaits the Governor’s signature.  Given his startling veto of S.B. 28 (see below), anything is possible.

Still Moving?

S.B. 791 – Senate President Darrell Steinberg’s legislation that would allow local governments to raise the gas tax with the support of 50+1% of voters is stalled for now.  This is perhaps the most important piece of legislation for transit advocates, but has become a partisan issue as “taxpayers associations” claim the legislation is the same thing as a tax hike.

A.B. 710 - A.B. 710 would drop minimum parking requirements for infill development in “transit intensive areas” down to one car per residential unit or per 1,000 square feet of retail space.  Infill development is defined as any new project that is built on a currently unoccupied space.  The legislation is popular with new urbanists and many transportation reformers, but affordable housing advocates are concerned it could undermine the parking exemptions developers can earn for building affordable housing units.  Bizarrely, the League of Municipalities derailed the bill’s passage in the Senate (it sailed through the Assembly) even though the legislation requires nothing from municipalities and gives them more flexibility.  The bill needs one more vote to pass the Senate, but none is scheduled now.

Dead

S.B. 28 -  Senate Bill 28 would have increased fines for scofflaw drivers caught using their cell phones will driving for first-time violations from $20 to $50 and for subsequent violations from $50 to $100 each.  However, Governor Brown bowed to the unsafe drivers lobby and vetoed the legislation proclaiming that current fines are a sufficient deterrent.  The fine for throwing a hamburger wrapper out of the window is $100.  The fine for driving in a carpool lane illegally is $100.  Neither of those illegal acts are tied to multiple car crashes every year.  I mean, even AAA was on board with passing this increase into law.(H/T to the California Bike Coalition for providing the information on fines.)

A.B. 345 – It’s actually good news that this legislation is stalled, at least for now.  A.B. 345 would have mandated that Caltrans allow a seat at the table to non-motorized transportation users on the powerful  California Traffic Control Devices Committee.  Currently, there are two seats on the committee for citizens, and both are held by unsafe and speeding traffic advocacy groups AAA of Northern California and the Southern California Automobile Club.  However, Catrans adopted the goals of A.B. 345 and made space for walking and bicycling advocates in response to A.B. 345′s introduction.  The legislation is considered inactive.

After the unanimous passage of Safe and Healthy Streets, Bogart celebrates with staff and supporters. All pics via the LACBC's Glendae website.

There’s always a risk when an advocate is hired by a government agency.  Will the advocate “go native” and be an ineffective agent of change?  Will the advocate ever be able to shake his reputation of being “just” an advocate?

When the City of Glendale and the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition submitted a joint application for a Policies for Livable Active Communities and Environments (PLACE) Grant, they decided to go in a different direction then the other PLACE Communities.  While the end product of their grant is the Safe and Healthy Streets Document, perhaps the best case study for other cities is how the city, LACBC and the PLACE Grant Coordinator they both hired all worked together.

The team proposed that the PLACE Coordinator would work for the LACBC as an employee, but would be embedded full-time with city staff.  When Colin Bogart was hired to be the PLACE Coordinator, he worked out of an office in the Glendale Civic Center, not in Downtown Los Angeles in the LACBC offices.

“Even though he was physically removed from the office, it still didn’t feel like he was that far away,” remarked LACBC Executive Director Jennifer Klausner.  “Having a full time employee, dedicated to a particular place that isn’t the headquarters, can be hard for an organization.  But it never felt like he was that far away.”

It was a unique situation, even the grant makers in the L.A. County Public Health Department weren’t sure how it was going to work out.  But, three years later, the experiment was such a success that everyone I spoke with in Glendale to prepare for this series, from advocates, to city staff, all the way up to Mayor Laura Friedman were devastated to see Bogart go back to the LACBC’s Downtown offices when the grant expired on July 1 of this year.  I met with Glendale Mayor Laura Friedman two days before the grant expired and she claimed she was “in denial” that Bogart would be leaving soon.

One thing that made the PLACE Grant such a success in Glendale was that Bogart understood the advantages and limits of his somewhat unique position.  Unlike PLACE Coordinators in other cities, Bogart had direct access to the decision makers in Glendale’s government but could speak to advocates throughout the city as “one of them” and not a member of the city government.

There are several lessons that other cities, and advocacy groups can learn from Glendale, Bogart’s and the LACBC’s experience.  Here are some things to consider if you work for a city or non-profit that’s considering the embedded activist model for their city.

Lesson 1: Go with Someone You Can Trust

Bogart's history with the LACBC made him a natural choice to do outreach in Glendale, including ride organizing. The History Ride, led by Scott Lowe, is just the most recent successful bike ride.

The most important thing an advocate or a city worker is the trust of the people with whom they work.  For the relationship with Bogart and his employers at the LACBC, trust was never an issue.

“Colin had a long history with LACBC before the PLACE grant was ever an issue,” explains Klausner.  ”He served as Board President, has been route master for River Ride for as long as I can remember and has been a longtime volunteer.”

“He is LACBC and LACBC is him.”

The relationship with the staffers and the city took a longer time, but as time went on Bogart found himself becoming more and more a part of City Hall.

“Because I was not really a city employee I had the flexibility to do a lot of things that a city employee couldn’t do, but because of the grant, and because I was embedded in the city departments, I was part of a lot of meetings and discussions that I wouldn’t have had if I weren’t there on a full-time basis,” Bogart explains

Over the course of three years, the trust grew to the point where, as Bogart was readying to move on to the next stage in his career, the City couldn’t picture life without him.

Mayor Friedman said of the PLACE Grant’s ending, “It’s a shame it has to end before we have a chance to implement it (The Safe and Healthy Streets Plan).”

Of course, part of building trust is for people to know you’ve invested emotionally in their community.  The PLACE Grant might be over, but Bogart is still sending out emails updates on the status of Safe and Healthy Streets and other events in Glendale and even recently organized a small series of bicycle/pedestrian counts.

Lesson 2: Embed Has to Be Strategic

Glendale's Mayor, City Staff and City Commissioners visit Long Beach for a bike tour with their PLACE Coordinator, Charlie Gandy.

It’s not enough to gain the trust of all the stakeholders if one doesn’t know what to do with that trust.  In the case of Glendale, the city had been designed for car drivers and cars for decades.  Despite the successful grant application, it wasn’t like the city planned to turn itself into Portland overnight.   The psychic wound of a backlash over an unsuccessful proposal to put bike lanes on Verdugo Avenue over a decade ago are still visible on the faces of city staff and elected leaders when the project was discussed.  But, an even larger issue was that most people, be they decision makers or residents, didn’t believe that there was a demand for bicycling and pedestrian projects.

“The challenge is knowing where the boundaries were, and taking things close to those boundaries and not going over the line,” Bogart explained.  Thus, the initial push for bicycle projects wasn’t for bike lanes, and wasn’t for projects that would cause the removal of infrastructure, but for Shared Lane Markings (Sharrows) that serve as reminders that streets are for all users.  The markings have proven so popular that the city is ready to move forward on a series of bike lane projects.

In addition to the first steps taken with Sharrows and other small projects, Bogart worked to educate staff on what is possible when livable streets planning is embraced.  Field trips to Long Beach and Berkeley with city staff showed what some other mid-sized California cities are doing.  Even when it came to Sharrows, Bogart didn’t rely just on the goodwill and faith city staff had in him, but arranged for staff to see a FHWA presentation on Sharrows.  When it was over, the city was intellectually ready to move forward.

“These guys that work at the City of Glendale are working hard with us too.  If I took too big a step, it could make their jobs harder,” Bogart explained of his strategy.

Bogart also faced the challenge that most advocates only dream of – a political leader who is more progressive than the mainstream and ready to do more projects than perhaps the city is ready for.

“He’s been really great about cluing me in to some of the political realities based on his experiences with other cities,” remarked Friedman.  When the PLACE Grant began, Friedman was a candidate for City Council and has rapidly ascended to the Mayor’s Office.

Lesson 3: Embed Has to Be Available

Bogart teaches basic bike maintenance.

There’s an old axiom that 90% of life is just showing up.  Nowhere is that more true than when you’re the point person trying to bring some sort of change to a government body.  In Bogart’s case, he had to be available to staff, elected officials, residents and his actual employer, the LACBC.  This was a particular challenge because Bogart doesn’t live in Glendale, but in Los Angeles.  However, by all accounts he succeeded spectacularly.

Because of Bogart’s long history with the LACBC, he didn’t have to be in constant contact with his co-workers with the Coalition.  However, any city or non-profit looking to emulate the LACBC-Glendale-Coordinator relationship probably won’t be able to find someone with the experience with the non-profit that Bogart has with LACBC, so a more day-to-day relationship might be necessary.

The most obvious way to make oneself available is to oversee a public process that leads to an involved public.  Elise Kalifayan, a Glendale resident who publishes the local news website The Sunroom Desk, found the public outreach to be impressive.

“My impression was that the entire grant was so well run in Glendale, and the outreach was so comprehensive.  He met with every group he could identify, he met with them as often as possible….that was one reason he got such broad support.”

Kalifayan first met Bogart at a local homeowner’s association meeting where he was presenting on Safe and Healthy Streets for one of the first times back in 2008. She found the presentation so compelling that she involved herself with the process the rest of the way.

In addition to fulfilling the requirement to hold meetings, Bogart programmed bike rides and special events such as Bike Month events.

Marc Stirdivant with the Glendale Parks Department was one of the original staff members who worked with the LACBC to write the original grant and hire Bogart, and he found the programmed bike events to be most impressive.

Culture change also came as a result of the rides.  Ice Cream Rides.  Weekend Rides.  Bike to Work Rides. All of a sudden there were 60 people and they all realized they were concerned about the same things.”

Or, as Friedman put it, “What Colin’s outreach has done was reach out to non-activists and turn them into activists.  They’re people who are interested in commuting issues.”

By working closely with city staff, Bogart eventually became such a fixture that other staff members treated him more as a fellow city worker than a staff member for the LACBC.  Kevin Carter, with the public works engineering department tells the following anecdote.  “We have a tradition that if you’re quoted in the paper (we haven’t gotten to the web yet) you have to bring donuts.”

Bogart continued, “Kevin had to explain to people that ‘no, Colin is supposed to be in the paper, that’s his job’ or I would have went broke on doughnuts.”

But that relationship led to real changes in the city as well.  As Bogart became more a part of the culture in City Hall, other city workers sought him out for project advice.

“City staff would just stop and chat with me with questions or issues. It was tremendously rewarding and pretty useful,” remarked Bogart who was able to give input on a range of projects including bike rack placement, where to place Sharrows and even input on the bump outs that were part of a access project for a Mercedes dealership.

Because he wasn’t actually a city employee, Bogart didn’t have to go through the chain of command to speak to elected officials.  When I first approached Bogart about this series, he was able to immediately call the Mayor’s office to set up the meeting with Friedman, and he told stories of contacting other Council Members with specific issues including Friedman and her most recent predecessor Ara Najarian.

But when you tie all those relationships together, you get the real payday.  Bogart was able to work on both the outside and inside at the same time.  If an issue required inside discussions with city staff, or elected officials, or even a lobbying campaign he was in the best position to make it happen.

Closing Thoughts:

Perhaps the best endorsement of Bogart’s time with the City of Glendale comes from Eric Knutzen, a former LACBC Board Member that was part of the team that met with Stirdivant to create Glendale’s PLACE Grant application.  ”Being a resident of Los Angeles I had hoped to put together a grant that would benefit my neighborhood or another LA neighborhood. But the city of LA planning department wasn’t interested in working with us,” Knutzen said.

“I was delighted that Colin Bogart got the job and am very pleased with what he did during his years in Glendale. The experience was a nice example of how private citizens can pitch in to help local governments, in our lean economic times, get funding for projects that benefit everyone. I just wish that the City of L.A. would do a better job of working with its citizens and securing grant money. They should look to Glendale to see how it’s done!”

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

With gas prices reaching nearly five dollars per gallon and university tuitions on the rise, getting to and around school seems to be the easiest way to make a college student go broke fast. As a college intern spending my summer conducting public health research at UCLA, I am left with little choice when it comes to my commute each day—either spend too much money on gas and parking, or find an alternative, such as biking, walking, or using public transportation.

UCLA has a walking club that programs the annual I <heart> walking week. Photo:UCLA Today

With Los Angeles’ largely sprawled out development patterns, it is not feasible for me to walk places in a timely manner, and public transportation in my neighborhood is infrequent. The built environment of Los Angeles has made any mode of transportation other than utilizing one’s own vehicle very difficult; most daily commuters are left with only one practical alternative: bicycling. So I began biking the 45-minute commute to work each day, happily saving money and getting daily exercise in a zero-emission fashion. Through my daily journey, I began to notice things I would have never otherwise perceived—the intense warmth of the Southern California summer, the aroma of freshly cut grass on nearby lawns I cycle past, and the many bike racks scattered throughout the city, which I never before knew existed.

While cycling on busy roads such as Sunset Boulevard and Beverly Glen is the fastest route to UCLA, it is far too dangerous with hundreds of cars speeding through each hour. Large potholes forced me to circumnavigate my way into traffic, and the lighting under bridges and overpasses was scarce, making me nearly invisible to rapidly approaching cars. While the road ought to be shared equally, without a designated area for cyclists, I felt as though I was intruding on the cars’ road.

This summer, my friend, Debbie Schrimmer, an avid cyclist and student at the University of California Davis reminded me, “bicycling in itself is not inherently dangerous—it’s when cyclists are forced to interact with cars that it becomes dangerous.” So I searched to find more alternatives to avoid traffic. Luckily for me, side streets were easily accessible from my neighborhood that I am now able to get around the bustling boulevards and whizzing cars and make it to UCLA safely, with only a few “almost accidents”.

But what about the countless other students in large cities who have jobs, internships, and attend classes, and who must commute on a daily basis? Those who do not have access to back roads or public transportation are left with only one choice–to use their cars. Stuck in their own “boxes” each day, each single-rider contributing to daily freeway traffic and air pollution, getting limited exercise, and spending preposterous amounts of money on gasoline. Being in a car for several hours each day robs people of precious time to exercise. Physical inactivity is associated with serious health problems such as coronary heart disease, obesity, and diabetes.

Meanwhile in DTLA, USC is known as a bike campus, regardless of the wishes of some administrators. For more USC Bike Pictures click here.

In the United States, Federal Programs such as Safe Routes to Schools are becoming more popular as the epidemic of childhood obesity is on the rise. This program helps to promote safe walking and biking to school for children, encouraging them to exercise on a daily basis, and in turn, enhancing their health. But what about university students? Why are programs like this not in place for young adults that also commute each day, and would enjoy cycling to class and throughout their local city or college town?

On university campuses, biking has many advantages. “Broke” college students can save money on gas, car maintenance, and parking, and experience a jolt of energy in the morning as coffee does without having to spend the money on caffeine and gym memberships. Cycling also creates a friendly campus atmosphere, and allows students to become more engaged in their communities instead of being isolated in their cars.

Walking and biking to school should be an important part of a healthy lifestyle, yet many college students are prevented from doing this in part because of barriers in our built environment. Cycling to university campuses can enhance health, reduce traffic congestion around campuses, and help build a greater sense of community. While barriers to biking to school, such as distance and traffic danger, remain and vary by community, these issues can be combated with enough effort. So why is it that those who are trying to do the right thing by exercising daily, lessening air pollution, and helping to relieve traffic congestion are not being rewarded? To get more people cycling, we need safer bike routes and enforced education to cyclists and drivers on proper road sharing protocol. Ultimately, to reform the way that people behave will require reworking the general attitude towards biking – that is, treating cycling as a viable and equal source of transportation and mobility, rather than merely recreation.

How we design our cities and campuses can be a major barrier to safe cycling. “Rather than squeezing in skinny bike lanes as an afterthought into a crowded road, we should be building segregated, off-street bike paths or sidewalks with designated lanes for pedestrians and cyclists,” says Debbie. Many people use such paths in cities in the United States, like Minneapolis, and many countries in Northern Europe. With incredibly low injury rates recorded in these places, why can’t we do the same for university campuses in the United States? The advantage of college towns and campuses is that they are often self-contained communities; everything is close by, which makes things easily accessible by bicycle. Yet, in order for more students to choose bikes over cars, we must invest in improving cycling infrastructure on our campuses and throughout our communities.

As the new school year is right around the corner, I would love to see an increase in cycling on university campuses and university authorities need to promote cycling and cycling education. Many students may not even realize the breadth of benefits they can gain get from cycling to and from class or throughout their college town. If they were made aware of bicycle management and safety beginning in their freshman year, as is the practice of UC Davis, we could see a significant increase in the number of cyclists on college campuses. As a college student, I have a lot to worry about between getting good grades, managing money, and keeping a good social connection amongst my peers. If simple educational classes on biking and accessible pathways for cyclists were implemented, finding enough time in the day to squeeze in exercise would be one less thing to worry about while jugging the busy life of a college student. I hope that many campuses help promote “Safe Routes to Universities” to enhance the health and well-being of students, communities, and our planet.

Glendale PLACE Grant Coordinator Colin Bogart shows off the new tri-lingual pedestrian safety markings at an intersection adjacent to Glendale City Hall.

This week’s series on the grants from the L.A. County Department of Public Health’s Policies for Livable and Active Communities and Environments (PLACE) Grants focuses on Glendale and their groundbreaking Safe and Healthy Streets Plan.

Glendale’s grant was different than most because it wasn’t the city that was actually awarded the grant, but the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC). The LACBC and the city worked together on the grant application. We’ll discuss the unique collaboration between the LACBC and Glendale tomorrow. On Friday we’ll discuss some of the physical changes that have happened over the last three years and that are currently underway.

Today, we’ll focus on Safe and Healthy Streets, the planning document passed unanimously by the city in June and how their plan sets a new bar for clean and green transportation planning in Los Angeles County.

For their part, the City of Glendale professes confidence and optimism that Safe and Healthy Streets will bring a change to the city’s transportation grid.

“People in Glendale are really frustrated by our record on traffic safety,” provides Mayor Laura Friedman. “It’s a way to get a grip on traffic safety in the city, and it’s probably the most cohesive effort we’ve ever had.”

The Baseline: Glendale knew it had a problem and was open to change.

When she first joined the City Council, Laura Friedman (pictured above) pushed for bike parking at City Hall. Now the City's racks are partially filled everyday by staff with a few spots held for visitors. The LACBC's Jen Klausner calls the racks "beautiful."

By its own admission, Glendale was in desperate need for a new approach to transportation planning. The unintended consequences of a transportation network that emphasized moving cars can be seen in the statistics. In Glendale, approximately 17.4% of adults (age 18+) are obese as are approximately 15.8% of children. An additional 46. 2% of adults and 17.9% of children are overweight. Many of Glendale’s health problems could be solved by a transportation system that emphasizes “people powered” transportation, but for years they weren’t ready to make the change. In 2008, almost 40% of adults in Glendale engage in minimal to no physical activity and 66.4% of adults drive to go on an errand less than one mile from their home.

Street safety for pedestrians and bicyclists is another major issue. Mayor Friedman, admits that Glendale has an “abysmal record of pedestrian safety.” From 2004 through 2009, there were 671 reported motor vehicle collisions involving pedestrians and 275 reported motor vehicle collisions involving bicyclists, according to data provided by the state. Of the pedestrian collisions, the primary collision factor (cause of the crash) was assigned to the motorist in 64% of the collisions; to the pedestrian in 22% of the collisions, and 14% of the collisions reported remain unknown or unclear.

Some residents believe that fear is one of the reasons that more people in Glendale don’t bike. “This is a unique city. We have a huge driving problem here, and the speed and the recklessness is beyond comprehension sometime,” commented Nathalie Winiarski. “We need a huge campaign to battle this.”

So how does Safe and Healthy Streets address those problems? Instead of a traditional transportation planning document, the kind that lists what streets get what treatments, Safe and Healthy Streets proposes a series of policy changes which shift the way the city views transportation, reprioritizes funding allocation that will ultimately lead to a changed city with a progressive transportation plan. Of course, a plan is only as good as the follow-through, but in the short-term Glendale staff and elected leaders seem serious about creating a different Glendale.

Which isn’t to say that Glendale abandoned traditional planning all together. Safe and Healthy Streets identifies the traditional “5 e’s” (education, enforcement, engineering, encouragement, and evaluation) of transportation planning, and then outlines specific policy changes to turn streets designed for cars into streets that are safe for all road users and to promote healthy lifestyles. The Safe and Healthy Streets plan closes with a section on implementation which is somewhat vague. Whether the plan becomes reality depends on the political will of Glendale’s elected leadership, which is currently committed to the vision.

While Safe and Healthy Streets embraces all 5 e’s, where it differs is how it treats engineering programs. Safe and Healthy Streets calls for an overhaul of transportation planning in Glendale so that the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. Even before the plan was passed, this new commitment was embraced by the planning and street services departments.

Engineering

The now-famous Mercedes dealership bump out. Work goes on in the street.

When it comes to the design of Glendale’s streets, the city didn’t wait until the plan was finalized to begin the long project of retrofitting its transportation network to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians.

“We’re happy with the document,” explains LACBC Executive Director Jennifer Klausner. “… we’re also happy with the real on-the-ground changes we saw during our partnership.”

The saga of the efforts of the LACBC’s efforts to get Shared Lane Markings (Sharrows) on streets in Los Angeles is familiar to most regular Streetsblog readers, but for those who are new here is a quick summary. It took over five years, dozens of public meetings, before LADOT finally relented. In Glendale, the third largest city in L.A. County, it took one private meeting. Sharrows are now on five streets in Los Angeles (although 20 more miles of Sharrowed Streets are in the works) and on five streets in Glendale.

The city’s success with Sharrows had another, almost psychic benefit to the city. Every single person I spoke with to prepare for this series brought up an attempt to put bike lanes on Verdugo Avenue over ten years ago that led to such a backlash that city staff literally cringed at its mention. But for Sharrows, the reaction was different. Mayor Friedman commented that “98%” of the feedback she received was positive.

Mike Nilson with City Planning, took it one step further, “Before Sharrows, people looked at bike projects as ‘taking away parking’ or ‘taking away car travel lanes.’” And now the city is ready to move beyond Sharrows and try adding bike lanes again. Plans are in the work for bike lanes as part of the Riverdale-Maple Greenway and a separate project is scheduled for Main Street.

As for the Sharrows, the city plans to continue to use them when bike lanes aren’t appropriate and has even placed them on some streets without car parking, a move that other cities in L.A. County believes violates the federal standard because Sharrows were originally designed to place bicycles in the safest part of the street.  In Glendale, they also serve to remind drivers that streets are for cyclists too.

Safe and Healthy Streets also calls for better crossings at intersections. When Glendale was planning to improve the intersection of Maple and Riverdale, the intersection was due for a new traffic signal, but thanks to the intervention of city staff and LACBC’s Place Coordinator Colin Bogart, the intersection underwent a dramatic change. Bump outs shorten the length of the Riverdale crossing so pedestrians aren’t as daunted and car traffic is slowed by the narrower street. Bike detectors are under the concrete so that cyclists don’t have to hop on and off the sidewalk to press a button or wait for a car to come along to get a green light. Signs direct cyclists how to navigate the difficult turn to stay on the existing bike route and future Greenway.

Another example is that when a Mercedes dealer was fixing the sidewalks in front of the dealership as part of an expansion project, City staff informed the dealership that they had to provide better pedestrian access along the street including bump outs to slow car traffic and provide pedestrians a shorter crossing along the city’s dealership row.

These small changes begin to add up to a changed street life in Glendale. It’s not as though the city has transformed from a car dominated transportation system to Copenhagen, but small changes add up over time. Sharrows, better crossings, traffic calming, these are all things that weren’t a part of Glendale’s plan a couple of years ago, but are all in the mix now whenever a transportation project is considered.

“I do believe the public works department is taking this very seriously,” Friedman says of the change in direction. “When I ask them ‘is this a complete streets project?’ they almost always say yes…That’s a change in policy for the city.”

City staff readily agrees. “The philosophical change is that now giving consideration to the bikes and pedestrians is standard,” provides Kevin Carter with the city’s Public Works and Engineering Department. “Every project that comes through, we’re looking at what can be done for bike and pedestrians.”

The next immediate step is the construction of a series of Greenways to connect Glendale’s three main parks. Construction of the Riverdale-Maple Greenway is part of their PLACE Grant, and is designed not only to connect parks but provide an east-west pedestrian and bicycle connection through a part of the city that is less affluent and has higher percentages of minority residents. Streetsblog will have more on the Greenway on Friday.

The next steps for Glendale are to revise its Master Plan to reflect this new commitment and pass a Complete Streets policy. Both items are currently being worked on by city staff.

In addition to clarifying Glendale’s policy of safe streets for all users, Safe and Healthy Streets also recommends major changes in how the city counts traffic to mirror the commitment to safe streets. Much as we see in Los Angeles and other cities around L.A. County, excluding Long Beach, Glendale traffic engineers decide whether a street is working based on a Level of Service calculation of how many cars the street moves. More progressive cities are embracing the idea that traffic counts should be people counts and the number of pedestrians, bicyclists and people on a bus are just as important as the number of people riding in cars.

The city believes all these changes will lead to more people walking and bicycling for local trips and history with other cities, both in L.A. County and around the world, backs up that claim. Or, put more succinctly the city believes that “If you build it, they will come.”

Enforcement:

Too subtle? Photo: Glendale News Press

In some ways, Glendale has become a state leader in the battle for safe streets. Over the past several years, the Glendale Police Department (GPD) and local Assembly Members have pushed for new legislation that would allow the city greater control over local speed limits. While larger cities have mostly stayed on the sidelines, the City of L.A. passed an ordinance and held a press conference in 2009 but failed to actually show up in Sacramento to lobby or testify in support of the legislation, Glendale has pushed and kept pushing for legislation that would make their streets safer.

Safe and Healthy Streets calls for the GPD to remain a leader in this fight, and calls for better training of officers on the rights of bicyclists and pedestrians. It also calls for a lighter touch when dealing with cyclists, especially younger cyclists, so the Department doesn’t discourage bicycling by cracking down on riders for minor violations. For example, the GPD will seek funding for lights and bike helmets to give to young riders instead of just ticketing them.

But cases over the last two years demonstrate the difficulties of enforcing traffic laws fairly in a world where many drivers routinely violate the law and many parts of the legal code are unclear.

In the days leading up to Easter of 2010, one Glendale officer literally dressed as the Easter Bunny and walked across the intersection of Broadway and Central. Motorists that failed to yield to the bunny were ticketed for their infraction and sent on their way. This outside-the-box thinking led to a lot of free press for the city, in Glendale and beyond, but was ultimately scrapped when City Councilman John Drayman complained. However, it’s an interesting case study in targeted enforcement, and it certainly demolished the argument often heard from drivers who violate pedestrian space. It’s awfully hard to miss a person in a bunny suit.

Would you think of this as a “Business District?” Image: Google Street View

The second story is a lot more tragic, and shows how Glendale law needs a change to protect cyclists. Safe and Healthy Streets explains the problem:

The City of Glendale’s Municipal Code 10.64.025 currently prohibits sidewalk riding in business districts. “No person shall ride or operate a bicycle upon any public sidewalk in any business district within the city except where such sidewalk is officially designated as part of an established bicycle route.” The existing law lends itself to confusion, as there are no specific boundaries in Glendale that outline where a business district begins or ends and most people are not familiar with the default definition of a business district as defined by the vehicle code. It also fails to address the needs of inexperienced or young riders who may wish to ride to a business destination.

California Vehicle Code Section 240 determines if a roadway is in a business or residential district. CVC Section 240 part C reads, “All churches, apartments, hotels, multiple dwelling houses, clubs, and public buildings, other than schools, shall be deemed to be business structures.” This determination means that neighborhoods with multi-family dwellings are considered business districts. This makes the current Glendale Municipal Code even more problematic since it opens sidewalk riders to citation and potential legal problems when riding in such areas.

Thus, when a rider was struck and killed in September of 2008 while riding on the sidewalk. The rider was in a clearly residential area, that is technically a business district under city law, so the slain rider was deemed partially responsible. Changing this law is considered of paramount importance and Safe and Healthy Streets gives several options to do so, including eliminating sidewalk riding completely so that there is no confusion.

While Safe and Healthy Streets provides guidance for the City Council, Mayor and GPD and not hard policy, addressing laws and enforcement issues is not something one sees in a planning report and is an example on how the Safe and Healthy Streets document is an improvement over a traditional Master Plan document.

Encouragement:

From the Safe and Healthy Streets website.

In some ways, the encouragement section reads like a traditional encouragement plan. The city promises to produce bicycle road maps, maps of pedestrian zones, Safe Routes to Schools maps and even mountain biking maps, while promising special events that highlight walking and bicycling. Where Safe and Healthy Streets has excelled isn’t in the planning of these events, but the execution that has happened in recent years.

Glendale doesn’t just have a Bike to Work Day and Bike Week as does its giant neighbor to the south and west, it has a Bike Month that had over 20 free events in 2010. It doesn’t program a Mayor’s ride once a year as part of a press event, it has them regularly (which is easier when you have a mayor that chooses to ride herself), the next one is on September 25. For a mid-sized American city to have a bike calendar similar to Glendale’s is unheard of, with official events on the calendar a couple of times a month year-round.

But Safe and Healthy Streets calls for more special events, so many that the events become less-special and more routine. Why have a “walk and bike to school day” when you can have “Walk to School Wednesdays” or “Car-Free Fridays?” Making these days a regular part of the calendar would require a strong partnership with the school district, but it’s a relatively easy way to combat childhood obesity and studies show that students learn more if they have some exercise before class.
Marc Stirdivant, who worked the LACBC on the initial grant, noted that more came from the rides than new riders, but also a new constituency. “Culture change also came as a result of the rides. Ice Cream Rides. Weekend Rides. Bike to Work Rides. All of a sudden there were 60 people and they all realized they were concerned about the same things.”

Education:

Go to the three minute point to see a PSA made by Glendale Grade Schoolers.

Much of the Safe and Healthy Streets proposed educational campaign is pretty standard fare, but where the plan shows some creativity is that it’s not afraid to grab on to some of the best practices of local municipalities.

In other words, the education component is about more than P.S.A.’s and snap bracelets that encourage cyclists to “ride right.”

For example, when someone gets a traffic ticket driving a car in California, they have the option to go to “Traffic School” to reduce the penalty they receive. Except for a few smaller cities, bicyclists don’t have the same opportunity. Safe and Healthy Streets pushes the city to change that for cyclists in Glendale.
When adopted, Bicyclists that are given tickets for traffic violations would have the option of attending a class on how to safely use a bicycle in traffic in lieu of paying the moving violation fine. Attendance at a Bicycle Traffic School requires a court order granted by the Traffic Court Judge and can only be issued once instead of paying the fine. Cyclists and pedestrians can pay anywhere from $100 to $200 per ticket, depending on the infraction. By attending the bicycle safety class the cyclist can not only save money, but also his or her life by learning essential safety rules. The cost of the program is negligible because the “students” will pay “tuition” to the school to cover expenses.

Safe and Healthy Streets also calls for the city to create bike co-ops similar to the Bicycle Kitchen, Bike Oven, Bikerowave, Valley Bikery and Bici Digna co-ops in the City of L.A. These storefronts serve not just as places where people can learn how to fix their bicycle, but also as social gathering points for cyclists to get together and places to hold bike-themed events.

Evaluation

Volunteer Guillaume Lemoine records a cyclist on Glenoaks at Grandview . Photo:LACBC/SaHS

One of the most important, and oft-overlooked, part of a plan is the evaluation stage and specifically who is going to be doing the evaluating. One of the main short-term recommendations of Safe and Healthy Streets is to create advisory bodies of city staff and residents to review and update the plan and hold the city accountable to implement the plan. Details on the makeup of each body is pending, the City Council will hear a recommendation on how to create the citizens’ committee this month.

Measuring the success of its bicycle and pedestrian program is something new for Glendale. “Before the PLACE Grant, people believed that nobody wanted this,” laughed Stirdivant when I asked about evaluation plans. Now the city is figuring out how to provide for a constituency that it didn’t believe existed three years ago.

However, the document does outline what criteria should be used to monitor the plan’s successes and shortcomings:

• Increasing the mode share of bicyclists in the City of Glendale
• Increasing the number of bicyclists and pedestrians recorded during the annual bicycle/pedestrian count
• Increasing the rate of school children walking or bicycling to school
• Increasing the rate of residents walking or bicycling to work, for errands, and recreation
• Decreasing the mode share of single-occupancy vehicular riders in the City of Glendale
• Coordinating with other programs, such as Safe Routes to School, to include schools as part of the yearly count
• Incorporating a Mode of Travel survey into schools as part of the City’s yearly pedestrian and bicycle count

How Will Glendale Do It?

Of course, the largest issue for any plan, be it a Master Plan or Vision Plan, or a hybrid such as Safe and Healthy Streets, is how the plan will be funded and who will see that it moves from paper to the street.

L to R: Mike Nilsson, Colin Bogart, Councilman Ara Najarian, Marc Stirdivant and Chuck Wike with Mayor Friedman's proclamation that May is Bike Month in Glendale

In some ways, Glendale is hamstrung by what ails every city in North America. The country’s budget crisis has hit Glendale hard with hiring freezes in place so the newly created position of Pedestrian and Bicycle Coordinator will most likely go unfilled for years. The City is looking for grant opportunities to help fund these positions, but so far has come up short. And even as the city embraced Safe and Healthy Streets, the city’s budget for transportation improvements was cut.
While many are enthusiastic about the plan, they’re also worried the funding issue could keep it from becoming a reality. Nathalie Winiarski, a resident of Glendale who worked on Safe and Healthy Streets as a Volunteer, explains. “I do feel the city is behind this. It’s a funding situation. I do believe everyone who I’ve come in contact with is very much in favor of this, but until the money is there we don’t know where it’s going to go.”

Which isn’t to say that funds aren’t available to do some great things. For example, Metro estimates that the City of Glendale will receive as much as $113 million dollars in local return funds from the 2008 county-wide transit sales tax. These funds may be used for a variety of transportation improvements including pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and safety measures. Safe and Healthy Streets recommends that Glendale follow the lead of Los Angeles and dedicate 10% of that return to bicycle and pedestrian projects. L.A. is planning on its set-aside to cover a lot of the city’s Bike Master Plan, and Glendale could do the same for its Master Plan which is still being designed.

Measure R isn’t the only place Glendale is looking for funding. In 2009 the city received a nearly $900,000 grant from Caltrans to improve safe passing at six local schools. One year later, the GPD received over a quarter of a million dollars to better train officers about pedestrian and bicyclist rights.

The City has applied for and received two grants as part of the Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program for two projects. The first, in the amount $376,200, is for traffic safety improvements at the intersection of Honolulu Avenue, Verdugo Road, Montrose Avenue, and Verdugo Boulevard. This project will be completed in 2012. The second project, in the amount of $322,640, will upgrade traffic signal for motorist and pedestrian safety at the intersection of Wilson Avenue, Harvey Drive, and Broadway. This project will also be completed in 2012.

With funding tight, the city is reliant on outside funding sources and grants to make its streets fulfill the promises of Safe and Healthy Streets. There’s a long way to go, but if the City maintains the political will and manages to find the money, Glendale might, one day, be the model of a safe and healthy community.

When two Streetsblog sponsors get together, the world is our oyster. For more on the meeting, read this first hand review at g4do-g4do

Earlier this year, when the designs for South Figueroa’s My Figueroa project were released, Josef Bray-Ali wasn’t happy.  While many advocates celebrated designs that would, if implemented, result in segregated bike paths, transit-only lanes, pedestrian plazas (at a minimum), Bray-Ali saw another major investment in the Downtown and area around L.A. Live. Meanwhile, the portion of Figueroa where he worked and that he loved remained a traffic sewer, with five lanes of concrete and curbside parking blighting the area.

Now, with the city considering bike improvements for North Figueroa, Bray-Ali sees an opportunity to bring My Figueroa to North Figueroa.  Last week, a group of thirty community activists gathered in the Flying Pigeon Bike Shop to create an organization to do just that.  At the Flying Pigeon blog, Bray-Ali notes that the event expanded beyond the usual suspects with local businesses sponsoring the meeting by donating the chairs, tables, food, and other supplies.

“The city sees North Figueroa as a cut through for people that don’t want to drive on the 110,” Bray-Ali explains.  ”As a result, cars cut through the neighborhood without stopping, businesses suffer and the middle-class moves farther away.”

In other words, this is about more than a bike lane.

Bray-Ali’s vision includes bike lanes for certain, but also a road diet, wider sidewalks, better street crossings, all of would feed into the business areas and the transit network that already exists.  The Gold Line stops a few blocks from Bray-Ali’s shop, but the traffic it generates to North Figueroa businesses is scant.

Patch talked to a few people who attended last week’s meeting, and found enthusiasm high.

The above map shows Long Beach broken down geographically by census data and racial diversity. The lighter the dot, the higher the percentage of residents are Caucasian. The Vista Street Bike Boulevard, 3rd and Broadway Segregated Bike Paths and 2nd Street Green Sharrow are in the South Central and Southwest parts of the city, leading to charges that Long Beach’s bike boldness has been about servicing well-to-do caucasian areas and not the rest of the city.

During the past three years, Long Beach has shown a commitment to pushing the envelope when it comes to promoting clean and green transportation options.  However, the purpose of this article and last week’s series is to examine if the city has lived up to its agreement with the L.A. County Public Health Department to fulfill its Policies for Livable and Active Communities and Environment (PLACE) Grant the city was awarded in 2008.

The other four communities that received a PLACE Grant used their funds to bring in experts and planners to create master plans.  Long Beach used most of their grant to hire Charlie Gandy, a leader in the field of transportaion infrastructure and a spokesman that oozes charisma, but by his own admission “isn’t much of a master plan guy.”

As a result, the other four communities provided me with hundreds of pages of documents prepared as part of their grant.  Long Beach provided quite a bit less, although what they did provide is part of a Master Plan update that is planned for later this year.  But for now, Long Beach is in first place among the five cities that received PLACE Grants, but they’re in fifth as far as the planning portion of the grant.

That’s the bad news.  The good news is it appears that based on the information available, Long Beach is on the right track.  In the long-run, the content of the final document is what’s most important, not what month it is passed in.

While Long Beach city staff have worked on updating their mobility element, much of the city’s attention has been drawn to the innovative measures bicycle projects and that’s by design.

“We wanted to show people what was possible,” explains Derek Bunham from the city’s planning department.  ”It can be hard for the public, hard for the decision makers, to see the policy on a large scale.  So we decided to show them what can be done with demonstration projects.”

Many of these pilot projects have been in business districts and the well-to-do community along Vista Street, where the first Bike Boulevard was put in earlier this year.  Four different people commented to me, all on background, that Long Beach was “putting in the most for the people that need it least” with its progressive programming.

Longtime Long Beach resident Alan Allesio was not one of those people.  Alessio refers to the much-praised infrastructure as “kind of a tease” to the rest of the city and “There are certain areas that got a lot, and if you happen to live in that area, then you can really dig what’s going on.  I don’t live in one of those areas.”

For their part, city staff understands their issues and says that better bike projects are on their way for the entire city soon.  “When you build demand, you start with the early adopters, the neighborhoods that get it and want to go first,” Gandy explains.  ”We were funded for fifteen miles of bike boulevards, and we’ve just begun with 1.5 miles.  The rest will happen, and they won’t happen on streets that look like this one.”

In other words, the city is hearing complaints about equity but when the funded projects are completed, the projects that will most likely get done barring something unforeseen happening, then the equity issue will vanish.  Rather than just take city staff at their word, we created this map to test their claims.

You can view the full map at GeoCommons.

The above map breaks Long Beach up in to its different census tracts.  Inside each tract is a small circle which shows what percent of the residents living inside the tract are minorities and how many are Caucasian.  Clicking on the dot will give you that data.  The red, orange and white lines show bike projects that will be completed in the short-term.  Clicking on the line will tell you what street, the length of the project, and whether the project will be a bike lane, bike boulevard, or something else.

The map demonstrates that the city, if it follows through on the short-term and funded projects in the map, that the city will create a network that serves communities of all races and will provide residential connections to the beaches, the Downtown, the new transit plaza and those Bike Business Districts that are proving so popular.

But that’s not to say that existing bicycle infrastructure, even the new ones in the upper-class, mostly Caucasian neighborhoods or business districts are for everyone.

“There’s our indicator species,” Gandy remarked during our bike tour, gesturing to a Latina woman and two tween-age children on beach cruisers heading down Broadway on a trip to the beach.  ”She feels comfortable enough in a separated bike lane to ride in normal clothes, without a helmet.  That trip is probably made in a car without that lane.”  Don’t worry, the kids were wearing bike helmets.

Later on our ride, we followed a family of five, all Latino, and their neighbor from next door, who was riding to the beach path from Pacific Avenue across town.  When we chatted with the family.  In the words of the father, “No way we would have tried this a couple of years ago.  No way.”

Or, as former Long Beach resident and founder of the L.A. County Bike Coaliton Joe Linton put it, “Long Beach is the most bike friendly city in Southern California.  All that new infrastructure is used by everyone, regardless of where they live.”

But while Long Beach has tripled its infrastructure of bicyclists in the last three years, the city has also been working on an update to the circulation element to its Master Plan.  As Bunham put it, “the policy is going to catch up the infrastructure.”

The city has done outreach to create an element that incorporates both traditional and new facilities for cyclists and pedestrians.  While the plan hasn’t been revealed to the public, a twenty-page document entitled “Principles for Active Living and Complete Streets” that outlines the goals that Long Beach’s transportation and circulation element should meet when it comes to the City Council in the fall or early winter.

“If you look at our existing Mobility Element, you see a lot about road widenings about moving cars,” Dunham explains, “Now we want to focus more on people than cars.  Focus on pedestrian, bike ant transit travel  This is such a big shift, we wanted to create a public document that showed the principles so that people can see what we’re talking about.”

“We’re not trying to play a zero sum game, or declare war on the car or anything like that.  We’re trying to link modes together not get rid of one.”

So what does “Principles for Active Living and Complete Streets” promise Long Beach?  It outlines the principles that Long Beach should follow.

• Balance the Needs of all Modes of Travel
• Promote Walking
• Promote Bicycling
• Promote Transit
• Create Dynamic and Context Sensitive Streets
• Protect and Enhance the Environment
• Build Healthy and Active Neighbors
• Create Transit Oriented Development Along Transit Routes
• Ensure Connectivity to Active Routes and Other Modes

“Our big focus has been on shifting short trips,” explains Ira Brown, who is working on the Master Plan update with the planning department. “People would usually take the car to go to the laundromat, go to the store, and that trip can be made on a bike or by foot. We want to help people make that decision.”

Which isn’t to say that there’s nothing for advocates to do in Long Beach.  While the principles and maps released are a great start, there are always things that can go wrong in a couple of months.  When Long Beach does release its Draft Master Plan this fall, Streetsblog will update its Long Beach series.

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

For more information on Long Beach's bicycling efforts, visit Bike Long Beach.

(If you’re not familiar with the infrastructure innovations in Long Beach, you should read this article first.  In 2009, Joe Linton wrote a two part series on Long Beach’s “Leap Towards Livability.”  Today and tomorrow’s stories are both part of our Annenberg School of Journalism Public Health Fellowship and a continuation of that series.)

Sometimes, the politician in Charlie Gandy still comes out.  ”Hi, I’m the bike guy,” he introduced himself to other cyclists, pedestrians, people at cafes or whoever happened to be at hand while I was taking pictures or doing an interview during my visits to Long Beach this summer.

“The bike guy” was hired by the City of Long Beach’s transportation program manager Sumire Gant in early 2009, with funds from a Los Angeles County Public Health Grant known as the Policies for Livable and Active Communities and the Environment (PLACE) Grants that Long Beach won in 2008.  The grants were given to five cities to improve their planning documents to make the connection between promoting active transportation options and the health of the surrounding communities.

To give you an idea how much things are changing, this 2010 Bike Map is considered outdated 14 months after publication. Advocates keep track with their own map on Google.

Most of the grantees used their funds to create long and impressive planning documents.  While Long Beach has produced its own planning documents as part of the grant (more on that tomorrow), the major impact of the city’s grant is the addition of the “bike guy” who sells the city’s bike projects to residents, visitors, reporters and the state and federal officials who fund the projects with a steady demeanor and seeming ease.

“Long Beach is what happens when middle-aged athletes are put in charge,” Gandy joked when asked about the changes the city’s infrastructure was undergoing.

In 2009, the city needed all the athletic help it could get.  Census figures from 2005-2009 show that nearly one quarter of school age children (22.4%) in Long Beach were obese and the number of people commuting by bicycle (.9%), walking (2.7%) or by public transit (7.2%) were in line with the city’s sprawling neighbor to the north.

There are many reasons why using census data to look at transportation usage can be misleading, minorities are under-represented, and the statistics look only at commuting trips and not recreational trips, trips to the store, or church, or the dry cleaners, etc.  But for comparison purposes, Portland’s commuting mode share for active transportation options were much higher for the same period.  12.4% of respondents commuted by transit, 5.1% walked and 5.9% rode their bicycles.

Enter Charlie Gandy, and things began to change.  By October of 2009, Long Beach had moved aggressively on some ground-breaking bicycle projects, high profile traffic calming, and even some road diets.  Writing for Streetsblog, former Long Beach resident Joe Linton, who co-founded the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition two years after moving to Los Angeles in 1998, wrote approvingly about what was already happening in Long Beach.

This is not to say that everything that’s happening is one man’s doing. Gant was responsible for the city’s grant writing for transportation, and she’s brought in an impressive $12 million for active transportation projects. Allan Crawford is the program manager for the bike program, April Economides is working on the Bicycle Friendly Business District Program and Georgria Case is working on the “Share our Streets” Campaign. While Gant may have moved on, her team continues to push the envelope on Long Beach.

But, for better or worse, Charlie Gandy has become the face of Long Beach’s Livability efforts, and it was Gandy who took me for a pair of bike rides throughout the city.

The day before Streetsblog published Linton’s article in 2009, a traffic calming plan in the downtown business district was put into place.  The plan made it easier for pedestrians to cross the street with better crosswalks, dramatically increased the bike parking in the area through a bike corral (where a car parking space is converted to hold 12-14 bicycles) and, by “bumping out” the curb, slowed traffic down and created patio space for the local cafe, aptly named Utopia.

On my follow-up visit to Long Beach, Gandy talked up this bike stunt team from the Bay Area while I talked to the staff at Common Grounds.

Just under two years later, Gandy and I stood in the same corral at the at the corner of 1st Street and Linden Avenue in Downtown Long Beach.  While I readied my camera for a photo op,  Gandy asked a half dozen adult cyclists who were unchaining their bikes if they had ever considered biking to “this part of town” before 2009.  Not a single person raised their hands.  Why?  The group consensus was that before the traffic was slowed down and the bike racks put in, they hadn’t thought of the area as an inviting place to go for a weekend bike ride.

“Look at the difference made by putting a canopy over a sidewalk,” Gandy said gesturing to the fabric extended over the sidewalk.  ”All of this is a curb extension that was put in last year….we reallocated the space and made the real estate much more valuable.  This is one of the best and most popular intersections in the city.”

And what’s good for bikes is often times good for pedestrians.  Gandy struck up a conversation with a mother and father pushing a stroller while I took pictures of the separated bike paths on 3rd Street.  Even though they haven’t ridden a bike in years, they loved the lane.  Why?  Because it got all the bikes off the sidewalk.  ”I used to see bikes on the sidewalk everyday on 3rd.  I haven’t seen one in months,” the father smiled while pushing the stroller.

Brian Ulaszewski is an architect and contributor to the Long Beach Post.  He is also a die-hard pedestrian who loves the changes to bike infrastructure.  ” I am a die-hard pedestrian, and the new bike projects have drastically improved the walking experience, especially in the downtown.  The cycle-tracks in downtown have completely transformed Broadway and Third Street from on and off-ramps to the I-710 Freeway into narrow streets with much calmer traffic that are easy to cross and pleasant to walk along.”

Waiting for a green light on 3rd Street.

The separated bike paths on 3rd and Broadway through Downtown Long Beach are the crown jewel of Long Beach’s bike infrastructure.  With a physical barrier separating the lanes from traffic, the lanes are considered to be the safest type of cycling infrastructure one can place on a street.  The Achilles’ heal of separated bike paths is the intersection crossings, but Long Beach addresses that issue with giving cyclists their own traffic signals so that motorized traffic won’t cross into the lane at intersections until after bicycles have a chance to cross.

Another feature of the lanes is that because they are both on one-way streets, the lanes could be built on the left side of the road.  This reduces interactions with buses, which can be terrifying for novice cyclists even in safe conditions, and reduces interactions with turning automobiles even further.  Even on one-way streets, drivers are more likely to give a second look behind them when turning left than they are turning right.

The separated bike paths are the first of their kind in Southern California, and while hard data isn’t available on usage as the lanes were only opened earlier this year, the city reports zero bike-related crashes in the two miles of separated paths and they have received rave reviews from cyclists around the country.  The buzz has been so good, that Temple City is planning some separated paths of its own, and that city didn’t even have a Bike Plan last year at this time.

But we do have some more firm data on the “Green Sharrow” Lane on 2nd Ave in Belmont Shore.  Usually when a city puts colored paint on the street, they’re doing it in bike lanes, separated or otherwise, to denote their status.  Long Beach added Shared Lane Markings known as “Sharrows” to 2nd Avenue to denote that the road is for all users.  Then they painted the part of the street that is safest for cyclists, in the right hand lane but far enough from the curb so that parked cars and open doors won’t create safety problems, with green paint.

While bike ridership on the street doubled in the first year of the program, data for the second year is coming soon, but cyclists and businesses along the route predict the numbers will be even higher from May 2010 to May 2011.

Despite the gain for non-motorized users, the number of cars on the street hasn’t changed.  Bike ridership has increased to 1,500 bikes per day, but car ridership has held steady at numbers quite a bit higher than that ranging between 35,000 and 40,000 cars per day.

As we pedaled down the street, Gandy gestured at the car traffic surrounding us.  ”Nobody’s being held up on this route because it’s two lanes of traffic.  Right now, a car can pass us in the left lane.  During rush hour traffic is basically stopped.  We’re not holding up anyone.”

When asked about the cost for the project, Gandy informed me that it cost $5,000 to install and another $5,000 to touch up twice.  In Long Beach, the labor costs of a project aren’t included in the total cost because staff hours are a fixed cost and they don’t have to pay overtime to complete bicycle projects.  This is one reason that the city has brought in over $12 million in state, federal, and county grants over those years for active transportation projects.

Looking West on the Vista Bike Boulevard

Another Long Beach first is it’s Vista Street Bike Boulevard.  The city took a residential street, added traffic calming, traffic circles, bump outs, and signage encouraging bicycling. The street runs for one and a half miles, and the boulevard is insanely popular with the residents who love that the number of cars cutting through the street has dropped off dramatically.  The Boulevard is also the first of its kind in L.A. County.

There are two given reasons why Long Beach is able to race ahead when it comes to progressive planning while some other cities tend to stumble along.  The first is a geographic reason.  Because of its location, Long Beach sees less cut through traffic which places less strain on the city.

“Being on the edge of the grid gives us an advantage.  We don’t have all the people coming through our city’s like L.A. does, but our streets are designed to the same standards.  That gives us a lot of space to work with,” Gandy explains.

The second reason comes from building coalitions and how items are explained to the community.  Residents and business along 3rd and Broadway heard about the benefits of calming traffic and increasing business.  As Gandy put it, the diet and separated lanes were about creating an orderly street.  To fight against it would be to take the side of chaos.

In Belmont Shores where the Green Sharrow went down, businesses were shown statistics about how bike riders were more likely to stop and shop than car drivers.

This strategy hasn’t been lost on residents.  Ulaszewski writes, “Pedestrian improvements in Long Beach have been usually a product of an active business association, whether in the Downtown or Belmont Shore, that is able to conduct an assessment itself to partly fund those improvements.”

And on Vista Street, there wasn’t a discussion about increasing the number of bikes on the road, although residents knew that was a near guaranteed outcome, but about how the road would become a safer place to be outside, for kids to walk to school and a cleaner place to be outside.

However, the selection of Vista Street for the Boulevard highlights one of the few complaints I heard while researching this street.  All of these innoavtive projects, and some of the road diets that are happening around the city, are occurring in the most well-to-do and business districts.  ”Giving the best to those who need it least,” one critic who asked not to be named put it.

But neither Gandy nor anyone in the City runs away from that claim.  They claim that the city went to the areas that were clamoring for better streets first, because the demand already existed.  Once these areas proved the success of these innovations, they could move on to other areas of the city.

“When you build demand, you start with the early adopters, the neighborhoods that get it and want to go first,” Gandy explained.  Long Beach is funded for 15 miles of bike boulevards, and the next 13.5 miles of them are in minority and less well-to-do communities.  We’ll examine the rest of their long and short term plans, and see what impact it will have on all of Long Beach’s communities tomorrow.

Starting last July, food trucks were pushed into private lots for Art Walk. Now they won't be allowed at all during the monthly event. Photo:Apple Guy/Flickr

Last month, tragedy struck during the monthly Art Walk in Downtown Los Angeles when a dangerous driver jumped a curb, crashed into a parking meter and killed a seven week old infant.  The tragedy shocked not just the Downtown and Art Walk communities, but the entire city.  Advocates pointed out that when you have a situation where vehicular traffic is mixed with thirty thousand pedestrians in such a short space as the core of Art Walk, between 3rd and 7th on Spring Street.

Responding the to safety issues highlighted by the crash, Council Members Jan Perry and Jose Huizar appointed a task force to look at safety issues.  Immediately following the crash, Art Walk participants, and some gallery owners, called for the streets to be completely closed off to car traffic during the walk.  However, that option wasn’t seriously considered for this month’s walk.  Instead, the task force focused on removing food trucks from the core of the event in an effort to spread out, and even thin out, the walking crowd.

Yesterday the task force and the Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council , already pushed food trucks, already cornered into private lots, out of the core of Art Walk and on to the periphery to the north and south and parallel streets such as Broadway.  The presence of food trucks had nothing to do with the crash that killed the young infant, and if these private lots are used for their original purpose it could make the driver v pedestrian conflict even worse.  However, last month’s tragedy is being used as an excuse to do something many Downtown denizens have wanted for a long time, begin to push back against the festival that temporarily takes over their neighborhood.

This isn’t an art blog, it’s a transportation and street life blog, so let’s avoid debate about the true meaning of Art Walk and focus instead on how to make a major Downtown event work for the people that want to attend, and everyone else.

There are three interests here, and the reason that Art Walk patrons are on the losing end of the debate thus far is that the other two interests are both more entrenched and in this instance are allied.

The first two interests are almost always in conflict.  Pedestrians and drivers have been put in conflict in this area at this time.  Whether it’s because the city and leadership is too car obsessed to handle a pedestrian oriented event of this size, or because Art Walk has outgrown the area in which its situated doesn’t really matter.  What matters is that at this point, because of the size, rowdiness, time of day, or day on the calendar; Art Walk has lost the support of the third interested party.

The other interest is the community surrounding the Walk.  At Blogdowntown, Eric Richardson eloquently makes the case why Art Walk shouldn’t be allowed to take over the area, even for once a month, if its something the community doesn’t want.

Open that space up and the crowds will certainly show up to fill it. No one doubts that there is an appetite for a public party in Los Angeles.

In the process, though, we will be saying that Downtown, or at least the Historic Core, is no place for families and no place for professionals who may need to work on a Friday morning. We will prioritize food trucks and street fairs over the people and businesses who are in this neighborhood seven days a week.

To be short, Art Walk is so large, so unruly, that area residents would prefer the status quo of a car-clogged surface street over a large pedestrian-oriented festival.  For Art Walk to continue to grow and thrive, let’s not even talk about car-free streets, that needs to change.

Not having been to Art Walk since the crowds have swelled to their current numbers so I don’t have any easy answers how to create this change.  Art Walk’s efforts to stop the flow of free wine at the participating art galleries is a good step to make the streets safer, but it doesn’t do much for the Downtown residents who are taking issue with the Walk as it is.  My personal thought is that moving it to a Friday or Saturday night would help, but I’m sure that would create different issues.

How can Art Walk make peace with the Downtown community?  Leave your thoughts in the comments section.

The start of the Downtown Connector at the intersection of National Blvd. and Wesley St. The bicycle friendly street contains Sharrows, signage, narrow roads, and some traffic calming.

Following the decline of the studios in the 1960′s and 1970′s, Culver City had to reinvent itself.  In the 1990′s, the city once commonly referred to as “The Heart of Screenland” undertook an aggressive campaign to revitalize their Downtown area that was mostly successful in attracting businesses and tourists to bolster the city’s economy.  Today, nearly 40,000 people call Culver City home, and it’s widely thought of as a safe place to live and a good place to raise children.

Despite its reputation for embracing New Urbanism (in 2007 the New York Times called the city a “nascent Chelsea”), Culver City had never embraced transportation planning for cyclists and pedestrian.  In fact, when the City approached the L.A. County Public Health Department about a PLACE Grant, it had never had either a bicycling or pedestrian element in its Master Plan.  While critics of the plan, including some of the people that helped create it, complain that the plan isn’t as progressive or specific as it should be, for a city that was literally starting with no foundation or advocacy community, to create change this is a crucial first step.

The lack of a bicycle and pedestrian plan of any sort was a major reason Culver City was awarded the PLACE grant, because in many ways it is a city that is doing well.  Obesity statistics, especially those for grade-school age children are lower than the national average.  In addition, Walk Score, an organization that looks at waklability on a national scale recently ranked Culver City as a “very walkable” community.

As any parent of a toddler can tell you, you have to learn to walk before you can run.  When it comes to planning for people-powered transportation, Culver City is walking, and the fruits of that walk are a brand new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Or, as Ron Durgin, President and Co-Founder of Sustainable Streets and a member of the master plan’s citizen advisory committee, put it, “These are the broad strokes they’re going to need to move forward.”

It’s long been accepted that auto-dependency leads to poor air quality, as pollutants spewing from tailpipes have been blamed for a laundry list of human ills including many lung conditions (such as asthma) and neurological disorders (such as autism.)  However, modern public health experts are looking at the ills of car dependency in a new light, noting that areas with poor sidewalks tend to have higher obesity, that there is a correlation between a drop in children walking and biking to school and an increase in childhood obesity and that cities with more bike lanes have healthier overall populations.  Some research even points to improved mental health for those who take regular walks or bike rides.

With $320,000 in public health money in-hand, the City embarked on a three-year process to create its first Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which serves as both a collection of projects that the city hopes to complete in the next five years and a vision for a Culver City that encourages walking and cycling in a very real way.

“The City of Culver City is extremely grateful to the LA County Department of Public Health’s PLACE program for providing us with grant funding. The County made it possible for us to create the City’s first Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP)’” writes Culver City Mayor Michael O’Leary.  ”The process of developing the BPMP engaged the community like never before in bicycle and pedestrian issues.  The resulting documents will help shape the City for years to come by communicating clear goals and by identifying priorities for improvements in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. We are dedicated to providing educational, encouragement and enforcement efforts in the future.”

Bikes in front of Joxer Daly's Irish Pub on Bike to Work Day. Photo:LACBC

The mayor’s support of walking and cycling extends to his life outside public service.  During Bike to Work Day, the restaurant and bar he owns had a special happy hour for any commuter who arrived on bicycle.

We’ve already discussed how the city’s public process created the “Downtown Connector” project that gave birth to well-marked bike routes to connect the future Expo Station to Downtown Culver City (and east Culver City residents to their schools and parks) and led to the creation of the Culver City Bicycle Coalition.  Now we’ll examine the plan itself.

In addition to five public meetings, Culver City and their project consultants also conducted a series of bicycle and pedestrian counts to inform their project process.  To examine a bicycle and pedestrian plan such as this, there are several things we have to examine.  The first is whether the plan is putting in infrastructure in places that make sense.  Second, we have to look at whether the projects themselves make sense.  Last, because this is a smaller city that is basically surrounded by the mammoth City of Los Angeles, we need to see whether or not their infrastructure plans are in sync with those of their neighbors.

To get a list of what intersections are in top 11 intersections, click here. For a larger copy of this map, click here.

The above map from the city’s newly passed Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan shows all of the existing and proposed bicycle routes in the City of Culver City.  Streetsblog added the numbers to show the top 11 locations for bicycle travel based on the May 2009 bicycle and pedestrian counts the city completed.  As you can see, the city had no bicycle infrastructure of its own before the creation of this plan and the completion of the Regional Connector Project (which Streetsblog covered on Tuesday.)

Culver City claims it can implement the entire plan in the next five years, which would really bring a dramatic change in the city’s infrastructure.  Currently, there are a paltry 4.2 miles of bike infrastructure within the city.  If implemented, the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan would increase the mileage of bike infrastructure nearly ten-fold to just over 41 miles.  Culver City has a firm deadline when they hope to complete plan implementation, November of 2015, five years after passage of the plan.

The only existing infrastructure was a small portion of the Venice Boulevard Bike Lanes, the Ballona Creek Bike Path and a portion of the Culver Boulevard Bike Path, all of which connect to larger infrastructure outside of the city.  Looking at the map, you can see that the proposed bicycle network all connects to each other and eventually the large existing bike lanes and bike paths.  A recent study by urban planner Gian Claudia-Sciara published by the University of California Transportation Center shows that creating complete networks, where cyclists don’t have to leave the network to travel large distances, is a key to encouraging new cyclists thus increasing the amount of exercise a community gets through transportation choices.

The projects also provides a network of local bicycle facilities designed specifically to encourage cycling within the city.  The routes providing connections to Venice Boulevard, the Downtown, or the Bike Paths are really designed for people traveling to and from Culver City, but the internal network is perhaps more important in encouraging new riders, which is a key component of a public health component to transportation planning.

This is where one of the concerns with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan comes into play.  Most of those local connections are designated as either “Bicycle Routes” or “Bicycle Friendly Streets.”  Of the 36.9 miles of infrastructure in the plan, over twenty miles of the infrastructure are either routes (5.6 miles) or “Bicycle Friendly Streets” (14.6 miles).

Most bike facilities are clearly designed.  Bike paths create bikeways that are separate from regular travel lanes and completely remove cars from bicycle traffic.  Bike lanes and Sharrows both use paint to create safe space for bicycles parallel to or in the middle of, mixed use travel lanes.Unlike bike paths.  However, both bicycle routes and “Bicycle Friendly Streets” don’t have a specific treatment.  Bicycle Friendly Streets could be as simple as a route marked with signs or could have a series of traffic calming devices, Sharrows, road signs, directional signs, traffic circles, chicanes, loop detectors, diverters, etc.

In short, nobody is 100% certain what a lot of the plan will look like when it is implemented.  In fact, the term “Bicycle Friendly Street” is not one in common usage with bicycle planners across the country, but is a favorite term of Alta Planning and Design.  Alta Planning is not just the consultants for this plan, and the recently passed plan of the City of Los Angeles and pending plan of the County of Los Angeles.

Fortunately, the plan does give us some hints what a Bicycle Friendly Street will look like.  The recently completed Downtown Connector is designated in the plan as a series of “Bicycle Friendly Streets” and it contained a series of Sharrows, “bike route” signs, directional signs, and even traffic calming at the beginning and end of the Connector.  If every “Bicycle Friendly Street” in the plan is treated as the Regional Connector, Culver City’s road network might be almost unrecognizable in five years.

Secondly, the Plan does give detailed project descriptions for both the 5 “Tier 1″ bicycle and pedestrian projects called for in the plan.  Below is the design of a “Bicycle Friendly Street” on Braddock Drive, a residential street, between Sawtelle Boulevard and Irving Place.  Braddock is the longest residential street in Culver City, and despite it being a popular route for students, is also used as a cut through when Washington Place is crowded.

The bicycle plan for Braddock calls for a lot more than just signage, and would encourage bicycle riding by discouraging all but local traffic through the area with the curb extension and by improving crossings for cyclists.  Two of the top mental barriers to new cyclists riding bicycles on the streets.  But while the plan contains details for the Braddock Bicycle Friendly Street and four other bicycle projects, the minimum that is required to meet the Bicycle Friendly Street designation is road signs marking the street as a bike route.

A new series of bicycle and pedestrian counts were completed in May.  While final results haven’t been released yet (Streetsblog will provide coverage when they do) city staff confirmed that even before much of the new infrastructure has been put in, the city has seen a modest rise in bicycling in the past two years.  Sustainable Streets’ Durgin jokes that as more cyclists take to the street, and more infrastructure is placed on those streets, “next time around we’ll really grind them” and create a more sustainable plan.

Anecdotal evidence also points to more people, both cut through commuters and residents, walking and bicycling on the street.  ”In general its improving, we’re seeing more and more cyclists on a daily basis.  We’ve always had a steady flow of commuters, from the east and the south, but now we’re starting to see more Culver City residents riding on a regular basis,” reports Jim Shanman, a founding member of the Culver City Bicycle Coalition.

To get a list of what intersections are in top 11 intersections, click here. For a larger copy of this map, click here.

The pedestrian portion of the plan received a lot less scrutiny and staff time than the bicycling plan.  Part of that is that bicycle projects are by their nature less controversial because they don’t have to address conflict issues at the level the bicycle plans do.  It is also partly due to the fact that with or without a long-term pedestrian plan, Culver City is a decent place to take a walk.  Scott Wyant, a member of the city’s planning commission and of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan joked that “We were often referred to as the Bike Committee.”

As with the map of planned bicycle improvements, Streetsblog has placed the top eleven places where pedestrian counts were taken during the May 2009 counts.  There is a lot of overlap with the most popular places to find pedestrians and cyclists, and in places where new infrastructure is proposed.  Scientific studies have shown that many of the same barriers that discourage bicycling also discourage walking such as high traffic volumes, noise and unsafe street crossings.

Thus, we see two maps that call for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure on the same streets.  As with the bike map, there are really two maps above, one is designed to provide routes for people to move about the city, and another is designed to improve neighborhood access to schools, parks and job centers.

However, the plan has similarly vague language to describe what will actually be done to improve conditions on these “pedestrian corridors” that will make up the new pedestrian friendly Culver City.  But as with the bicycle projects, the plan does give detailed layout on 5 “Tier 1″ pedestrian projects.  Here are the planned improvements for Braddock Drive.

On Braddock and the other five Tier 1 projects, the focus is on the areas where pedestrians and other road users are most likely to get into conflict: at intersections.  This makes sense because this is where pedestrians are most physically vulnerable and the place where mental barriers to walking can be created by the real or perceived physical danger.

Wyant was most interested in joining the advisory committee because he was concerned that pedestrian issues would be overlooked in the plan, but when the final plan was unveiled, he expressed full support for it.  ”I’m happy with this plan.  It’s a good plan that can do a lot for the city,” Wyant continued that the makeup of the staff at Alta Planning, city staff and the Advisory Committee had a lot to do with why he feels the plan will work.  ”We had good people making the plan who worked in good faith.  In the end the plan was as good as the people.”

While cycling advocates, and a lesser extent pedestrian advocates, are very supportive of the Master Plan, there are some complaints that when it is compared to some of the more progressive cities in the Southland, such as Santa Monica, Long Beach, and Pasadena.

Dino Parks, a member of the Plan’s Citizen Advisory Committee and of the Culver City Bicycle Coalition, explains.  ”In some ways, the projects are low-hanging fruits.”  “In no places are they talking about widening roadways or taking away a traffic lane to make space for bikes.”

In short, the city is willing to begin to make more space for bicycles and pedestrians, but not to take the step of removing car capacity outside of some traffic calming on local streets.  Even in the City of Los Angeles, known world-wide as the car-culture capital of America, the Bike Plan calls for removing some mixed-use travel lanes.

On the advisory committee, Parks had pushed for a radical reconfiguration of Washington Boulevard that would have doubtless made things safer for cyclists and may have gotten more people to bike on the congested east-west alternative to Venice Boulevard.  However, the plan was, “much to hot to touch.”

Other complaints are that the city wasn’t willing to push the limits on what infrastructure was possible.  Forget cycle tracks, or separated bike lanes as they’re more commonly called, Culver City wouldn’t consider signage that reads “Bicycles allowed full use of the road” because they aren’t part of the approved signage in the state of California.  ”Full use” signs are popular in Northern California and are used locally in Hermosa Beach.  Similarly, the city wouldn’t consider placing Sharrows on streets that don’t have certain parking patterns to meet federal standards.  Those standards are changing, and Glendale is already placing Sharrows on streets without curbside parking; but Culver City won’t consider any infrastructure that hasn’t been approved at the state and national level.

But even as he criticizes the plan for not being as progressive as he would like, Parks readily concedes that the plan is a big step forward for the city.  “If all of those projects are implemented, it would contribute to a more bicycle friendly city and could be the nexus to encourage more people to ride and walk.”

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan enjoyed strong support on the Culver City Council.  Rivera points out that support for the plan goes back years.  ”The City Council authorized going for the PLACE Grant unanimously.  They were very supportive from the very beginning and ultimately they approved the plan unanimously with no changes.  They saw the need for it, and they wanted to see improvement in these areas.”

However, because the plan doesn’t call for the removal of any travel lanes, and doesn’t give details for many of the proposed projects, there could still be political battles over the implementation of the plan.

In March, just four months after the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was passed by the city, Councilman Scott Malsin proposed to weaken the plan with a motion that would have watered down the plan by removing bike lane designations for parts of Washington Boulevard and allow the Council to change the plan for any reason if a plan proves unpopular.  Of course, a City Council can always amend a portion of the city’s planning documents, but passing such a motion sends a strong message to potential funders that the City isn’t as serious about the plan as they could be.  The motion was eventually pulled from consideration, but it exemplifies some of the battles that could be coming.

Meanwhile, city staff is working to bring in the grant dollars needed to make the plan a reality.  While there is a top ten project list in the plan, staff looking at different options to try and get project-specific funding to begin changing the DNA of its streets.  For example, in June the city successfully won a $500,000 grant from the Baldwin Hills Conservancy to fix the dangerous intersection of Hetzler Road and Jefferson Boulevard.  Jefferson and Hetzler was not a top intersection, either in terms of existing usage by cyclists and pedestrians or project priority.  But the funds existed, and staff recognized a need so they pursued those funds.

The Culver City Bicycle Coalition supports the city’s efforts to chase funds where available rather than to singularly focus on the “Tier 1″ projects.  ”We recognize the city isn’t going down a checklist from one through ten to get those projects done,” explains Shanman.  ”As long as the progress is steady and continual, we’ll be happy.”

The city has also had success pursuing funding for a $450,000 Safe Routes to Schools grant for Linwood E. Howe Elementary School, the elementary school at the northwest end of the recently-completed Downtown Connector.   The city is also pursuing a $500,000 grant for a city-wide childhood education campaign aimed at encouraging safe and healthy options for students to walk and bicycle to school.

Click on the image to see a poster put out by citizens opposed to a Safe Routes to Schools plan for Culver Middle School.

Originally the educational grant was paired with a grant that would have improved infrastructure for Culver Middle School on the west side of the city.  However, a vocal group of opponents lobbied the City Council, and the proposal was paired down to just include the educational program.  While the Culver City Bicycle Coalition lobbied hard for Culver Middle School safety plan, city leadership wasn’t ready to engage in the political battle necessary to push an application against local push back.

But even though advocates were disappointed that the full grant application didn’t move forward, they are happy the city is moving forward with quality applications.  ”We never got our Safe Routes to Schools grants funded before.  If we earn this grant, it would be almost $1 million in two years,” offers Sahli-Wells.  City staff confirms that a future Safe Routes to Schools Grant for Culver Middle School could be back completed for a fall grant application cycle.

In summary, it’s fair to say that Culver City isn’t about to supplant Long Beach as the bicycling capital of Los Angeles County, but that it’s come a long way in a short amount of time.  Combining the funded Safe Routes to Schools project by Linwood E. Howe Elementary School, with the improvements planned for the Jefferson/Hetzler intersection and surrounding area funded by the Baldwin Hills Conservancy, and the Regional Connector the bicycle infrastructure for the city will increase by 50% from the existing conditions when the PLACE Grant was awarded in 2008.

It might not be running yet, but Culver City is walking towards a sustainable future.  If it manages to fund and complete this plan in five years, the “Heart of Screenland” will also be home to a sustainable transportation grid.

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

While I support the goal of reducing vehicle trips, this bill would impose a new mandate on small business at a time of economic uncertainty.

Governor Brown tosses up an airball. Photo: Office of the Governor via KQED

There’s only one problem with this statement.  SB 582 doesn’t require anything of small business without the action of local government bodies known as Municipal Planning Organizations or Air Quality Districts (MPO’s and AQD’s) and the mandate they could require would barely cost businesses anything.  A coalition of environmental, transportation reform and public health groups supported the legislation as well as some large employers including Facebook and Genetech.

“We’re disappointed that Governor Brown vetoed this bill, which would have saved money for California employers and employees, while improving our air quality,” writes Rebecca Saltzman, a Program Associate with the California League of Conservation Voters.

So what would SB 582 have actually done?  It would have given MPO’s and AQD’s the ability to require businesses with 20 full-time employees (or in some cases 50 depending the transit options and air quality of the area) to provide commuter benefits to employees who commute to and from work without their car.  Despite the Governor’s rhetoric, there was a near-cost-free options to meet this requirement.

• Give employees the option to pay for their transit, vanpooling or bicycling expenses with pre-tax dollars, as currently allowed by federal law;
• Offer employees a transit or vanpool subsidy up to $75 per month;
• Provide employees with a free shuttle or vanpool operated by or for the employer.

The first option basically has employers deduct an amount up to $75 from employees pay checks and provide them with a separate check for that amount to cover commuting expenses.  This allows transit and bike commuters to have a tax-free, or tax reduced if their monthly transit ticket is more than $75. 

In a letter to supporters, Bay Area based reform group TransForm noted that, “Commuter benefits typically reduce taxes for employers, too, so this is a win for everyone.”   By reducing the taxable salary of employees, employers would reduce their taxes and could save more than the costs of administering a commuter benefits program.

The good news is that individual municipalities already have the power to require commuter benefits programs.  Both Los Angeles and San Francisco have their own requirements and program already in place.  The bad news is that providing these cost-free benefits has become an oddly partisan issue in Sacramento.

But it wasn’t always that way.  SB 582 was first introduced by Riverside County Republican State Senator Bill Emmerson who guided the bill through the Senate with largely bi-partisan support.  Then, after the bill easily cleared an Assembly Committee, opposition to the legislation was registered by the California Chamber of Commerce and California Taxpayers Association.  Their opposition caused Emmerson to drop his support of the legislation (all mentions of the bill have been scrubbed from his website).  Sponsorship was then transferred to Bay Area Democrat Leland Yee.

For more details on the partisanization of this bill, visit the League of Conservation Voter’s Blogsite.

But one setback doesn’t mean that supporters of SB 582 have given up the fight.  ”CLCV and our partners will continue to work to pass legislation that incentivizes and improves access to alternative means of transportation, like AB 650. That bill would establish a task force that will examine the current state of public transit, identify what is needed to make the system meet projected demand, map out associated costs, and – most importantly – determine how to consistently fund public transport to serve our state’s needs,” writes Saltzman.

Streetsblog will have more coverage of AB 650 next week.