Backlash Safety Foe Files Lawsuit Against Westside Streetscape Plans

"Westside L.A. Neighbors Network" may be neither "Westside L.A." nor "neighbors" but they are suing the city of Los Angeles. Logo via WLANN website
"Westside L.A. Neighbors Network" may be neither "Westside L.A." nor "neighbors" but they are suing the city of Los Angeles. Logo via WLANN website

In late June, a newly formed non-profit filed a lawsuit challenging a streetscape improvement plan for West Los Angeles.

The group calls itself “Westside L.A. Neighbors Network.” The WLANN website, lawsuit, and lawsuit press release do not actually name “L.A. Neighbors” plural, but only include one person’s name: the group’s president Selena Inouye. According to her articles at CityWatch and The Argonaut, Inouye is a retired social worker and chief grassroots organizer for Restore Venice Boulevard, the Keep L.A. Moving-backed group fighting the Mar Vista Great Streets improvements on Venice Boulevard.

If WLANN is anything like its parent organization Keep L.A. Moving, then it may not be “L.A. Neighbors” at all, but spiteful outsiders living in other South Bay cities who are pushing to keep L.A. City streets reserved for their unfettered driving access. Keep L.A. Moving is based in the city of Manhattan Beach, where its leaders push for quieter streets while suing to keep L.A. City streets deadly. Keep L.A. Moving sued to undo Playa Del Rey safety improvements, then declined to back down from the lawsuit after the improvements were undone.

WLANN’s lawsuit challenges two recent updates to city plans: the Coastal Transportation Corridor Specific Plan and the West L.A. Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan. These plans were originally adopted in 1985 and 1997, and are being updated to remove outdated infeasible projects and to include more multi-modal projects. The city’s project website has extensive details on these updates, including an extensive documents page.

The streetscape plan includes multimodal upgrades to five Westside street segments. Map via city plan
The streetscape plan includes multimodal upgrades to five Westside street segments. Map via city plan

The Coastal Transportation Corridor Specific Plan was updated to include a Livable Boulevards Streetscape Plan which specifies improvements for five street segments:

  • Pico Boulevard – from Centinela Avenue to the 405 Freeway (“Pico Green”)
  • Pico Boulevard – from the 405 Freeway to Patricia Ave (“Pico Patricia”)
  • Motor Avenue – from the 10 Freeway to Venice Blvd
  • Centinela Avenue – from Washington Blvd to Jefferson Blvd
  • Venice Boulevard – from Lincoln Blvd to Inglewood Boulevard

WLANN’s press release contends that the streetscape plan would extend the Venice Boulevard Great Streets road diet and would bring road diets to Pico, Motor, and Centinela. Folks who advocate for safer, more walkable, more bike-able streets would welcome needed road diet improvements to these corridors, but WLANN is lying. There are no road diets planned for these streets. No road diets. The streetscape plan will make these streets somewhat safer and better for walking and bicycling, but without removing any car lanes.

The plan does include some non-road-diet upgrades to existing bike lanes on Motor and Venice. According to the plan’s cross-section diagrams, the existing conventional bike lanes on these streets will be converted into protected bike lanes, though without reducing existing car lanes.

Streetscape plan cross-section for Motor Avenue - from plan document
Streetscape plan cross-section for Motor Avenue would improve bike lanes without removing existing car lanes – from plan document
Streetscape plan cross-section for Venice Blvd - from plan document
Streetscape plan cross-section for Venice Blvd would improve bike lanes without removing existing car lanes – from plan document

The update to the West L.A. Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (WLA TIMP) would establish that expanded Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) fees on new development pay for the above streetscape improvements. In the past, the TIA fee had been paid by only a limited subset of new developments, basically industrial and commercial development. The WLA TIMP update would expands the TIA fee to a broader range of new development, including residential.

These plan updates have been in process for a couple of years, including various community outreach meetings and various hearings at the City Planning Commission, the Board of Public Works, and the City Council.

The streetscape plan was approved by the Board of Public Works in May.

In June, the L.A. City Council approved the WLA TIMP plan outline. The City Attorney will now draft the outline into an ordinance which will return for council approval.

The city completed the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required Environmental Impact Report (EIR) determining that the plans essentially does not adversely impact the environment, and hence would be granted a categorical exemption. The City Planning Commission approved the EIR and exemption. The full City Council is expected to approve the environmental studies when approving the final ordinance language.

The WLANN lawsuit alleges that the city did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in approving these plan updates.

(Editor’s note : Leadership with Keep L.A. Moving, Westside Neighbors and Restore Venice Blvd emailed and commented to complain about the above article. In an email, WLANN President Inouye wrote that RVB “is a now a project of the newly formed” WLANN and that  RVB “is not backed by” KLAM and that WLANN “is not a ‘child’ organization of” KLAM.  In a comment, Keep L.A. Moving’s John Russo, who is an administrator of RVB’s Facebook page, states that KLAM “supports” WLANN and “supports” and “work[s] with” RVB but has “not backed” WLANN. Without access to Joe’s notes while he is on a much deserved vacation, I don’t want to speculate on his meaning. It’s certainly clear that the leadership of Keep L.A. Moving have  helped Restore Venice Blvd. with their setup and research, I haven’t been able to find further formal connections between the three organizations. I have not changed the text of the story. – DN)

  • JTRusso


    If you’re going to be a journalist you really should check your facts and interview the people you talk about.

    While we support WLANN and wish them luck in fighting back against Garcetti’s ridiculous plans, KeepLAMoving is not affiliated with WLANN in any official way.

  • senorroboto

    Wow how did you guys build a sentient neighborhood? AI really coming along.

  • Ben Phelps

    Man these people SUUUUCK

  • Ben Phelps

    Yes. Adding trees and protected bike lanes (without even removing car lanes) is so nefarious. Keep fighting the good fight.

  • Steak

    John, it’s been fascinating to watch you act more and more like an NRA-funded politician as the months pass by. You have gotten very good at telling lies. Restore Venice isn’t “backed” by KLAM? Funny how Facebook listed you as the creator of the groups FB page. You can pretend you are “backed” by “thousands” as you prop up “homegrown” replicas of KLAM in other communities. Anyway, thanks for making sure that people who drive SUVs alone long distances through LA have a voice (and lawyers, too!). —Peter Flax

  • Jason

    Seriously. This isn’t even a fucking road diet! Most of the space is coming from shuffling around how bike lane space is used.

  • Jason

    The only listed POC for WLANN is the same POC listed for Restore Venice: Selena Inouye. I eagerly await evidence that these groups have membership outside of Selena Inouye.

  • JTRusso

    Peter, I’ve missed you! A mention from Peter Flax always makes me smile. As usual you are mistaken, I’m not “backing” Restore Venice nor am I the creator of any of their Facebook pages or web sites. You and Joe should really should check your facts…but then again I’ve read what you guys write so I shouldn’t be surprised that the facts don’t matter.

    I was an administrator for the Restore Venice Facebook group, and I do work with them from time to time…not the creator, supreme leader or financial backer.

  • jcwconsult

    “Road Diets” are often the weapon of the car haters that believe commuters, visitors, shoppers, tourists and commercial traffic should be choked down to the point of gridlock on “their streets”. Like it or not, we have a society that depends on the freedom of movement of people and vehicles to support our economy. The car haters don’t care about the economy, so long as “their streets” flow far fewer vehicles at unsustainable low speeds for the amount of throughput needed to support the economy. With luck the groups fighting the “Road Diets” to choke off main arteries will succeed in stopping them.
    James C. Walker, National Motorists Association

  • Joe Linton

    We’re eagerly awaiting those scintillating tax returns… let us know when you make ’em public.

  • John Russo

    Joe, you’ll be able to get them the same way I get Streetsblog’s, So Cal Steeets Initiative’ and Open Plans.

    But they are not nearly as interesting as yours, unfortunately we don’t have any NYC billionaires funding our activism…just our neighbors.


Great Streets and CM Bonin Continue Outreach on Venice Boulevard

Last year, it seemed as though Councilmember Joe Buscaino (CD-15, South Bay and San Pedro) and Councilmember Mike Bonin (CD-11, Westside) were the only two City Council offices that were truly engaged and passionate about Mayor Garcetti’s Great Streets Initiative. A year later, there are small improvements in San Pedro, protected bike lanes on Reseda Boulevard, and […]

SBLA’s Livable 2016 Year In Preview

Happy new year to all those loyal Streetsblog Los Angeles readers, especially the ones who have donated to keep SBLA strong. It is not too late for the rest of you to donate – click here. Prediction is difficult, especially about the future and about travel forecasting. But there are a few big changes on […]

Not Your Parents’ LADOT

One of the nice things about shopping for food and eating in France is that the quality is assured by rigorous government regulation. While some boulangeries are better than others, in general, consumers can find a good quality baguette in any bakery. Refreshingly, the same might be said about the Westside Urban Forum‘s (WUF) monthly […]