Juan Matute

When UCLA started it's annual Complete Streets Conference in February of 2011, discussing topics like parklets, bike plan and implementation, seemed more like an academic exercise a description Los Angeles two years later.  Now in it's third year, the conference continues to deliver innovative ideas, but also takes some time to reflect on local implementation.   The first panel, "From Vision to Implementation: How cities are moving from pilots to programs," captures the complete street's movement's evolution from academia and planning charrettes to the city's streets.

Riding on Pearl Street a few weeks ago, I noticed preparations for a new bicycle parking lot.   This past Saturday, before Santa Monica College students returned for the spring, I had a chance to check out the new bicycle parking.  I was surprised to see not only bike parking, but other parking and amenities for those who travel to Santa Monica College without a car.

Municipal bond rates are at historic lows.  A memo by two respected faculty members at the UCLA Anderson Forecast (available at Streetsblog, for some reason link to city website is broken) suggests the city take advantage of these low rates to fund a $3 billion program to resurface, rehabilitate, and reconstruct city streets. This same logic extends to any local investment activity - because rates are low, it’s a good time to build or repair anything the city will need in the future. Street repair is an especially good choice for a city experiencing an historically high unemployment rate because a higher proportion of street investment goes into labor and wages than for other investments, a subway tunnel for instance.

With Carmageddon once again looming over Los Angeles, we have another opportunity to reflect on the 405 freeway: what does it mean and what do we want from it? 

(A letter from Donald Shoup on AB 904 to the American Planning Association can be found after the jump. - DN)

(Update: I received a question on why we published the name and address of the angry homeowner, questioning whether or not he qualifies as fare game to be signaled out by name.  I chatted with a friend of mine who doesn't have a stake or opinion in the issue of how UCLA decides when to keep its transit stops open.  He advised me that it wasn't illegal, but that we should have contacted him for a quote if we were going to feature him so prominently.  It was my call to leave his name in so any blame/fallout should fall on me, not Juan.   I just removed his name, address and references to his employment from the story and comments.- DN)