Today’s Headlines

  • De La Vega Under Fire for Moving Senior Managers Around at LADOT (LAT)
  • More on the Crenshaw Line Jobs Programs (Neon Tommy)
  • Response to LAT ? on Idaho Stop Law Yields Thoughtful and Moronic Comments (LAT)
  • Huizar Wants Dense Development in Downtown, Low Rises Need Not Apply (DTLA News)
  • A Tram Down the Center of Van Nuys Boulevard? It’s Possible (Curbed)
  • Does It Seem As Though There Are a Lot of Highway Projects in the Southland? It Should (Patch)
  • 10% Growth Isn’t Good Enough, Council Waives Fees for TV Pilots (Daily News)
  • A History Lesson on 4th Street (KCET)
  • Gov. OKs Plan for CA Hydrogen Fuel Station Network, Funded by Drivers, Not Oil Companies (Merc)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Erik Griswold

    Damien,

    Please don’t repeat Metro’s Ministry of Propaganda’s use of the term “Tram”. What they described was merely light-rail using low-floor cars like San Diego and Portland are now doing. If anything, it just brings yet another vehicle type into the Metro fleet, which could be OK, *if* and only if it is the same as gets used for the DTLA streetcar. Really, Southern California transportation writers need to avoid using the term “Tram” as it was usurped decades ago by the many amusement parks here for their parking and tour shuttle contraptions. Not that a version of those wouldn’t be appropriate for the SFV. At least you could add. capacity without adding drivers, California DMV permitting.

  • Actually tram is the term used in Europe used for these kind of vehicles. But I agree they are not the same as light rail cars — they have boarding in the street like the streetcars of old did.

  • Anonymous

    BRT or LRT down the middle of Van Nuys Blvd would effectively eliminate any possibility of a continuous bikeway where the stations would be located according to engineering drawings that have been advanced for these two alternatives. There aren’t many potential bicycle riders who would be willing to ride in front of cars or buses on a busy street where these stations would be located.

    Its easy to look on a map and simply say that’s where you could put light-rail. Its quite another to try and convince residents on the westside to give up even a square inch of space that is devoted to private cars. Bus only lanes on Wilshire Blvd only during peak hours using parking spaces? Nope, they were adamantly against that. Floating parking on Westwood Blvd to install bike lanes? Absolutely not. Some residents are even against having buses on Westwood Blvd. There is even anxiety on what the car traffic will be like when the Expo Line opens up.

    So, to repeat a question that a engineering consultant at a outreach meeting for this project poised to me, “Where you gonna put it the light-rail on the other side of the hill?” I can see some people looking at a map going “”Why there’s space over here…and here…also here…and here…there’s lot’s of places to put it.