August 11, 2015
If motorists find traffic on major streets like Sunset Boulevard, Cesar Chavez Avenue and Colorado Boulevard slow going, they won’t see much relief under the Los Angeles Mobility Plan. In fact, the plan, which will help guide transportation and development through 2035, might worsen congestion for cars and trucks, according to city-commissioned environmental reports cited by the L.A. Times. However, the same plan would likely benefit bus riders, cyclists and pedestrians.
The plan, now before the City Council, has identified certain streets to include bus-only lanes, protected bike lanes and more pedestrian safety features and amenities. But the streets won’t get any wider to accommodate the bus and protected lanes, so something will have to give. In many cases, that might mean less lanes for motor vehicles.
Sunset Boulevard through Echo Park and Silver Lake, for example, would have to make room for a protected bike lane as well as bus-only lane during peak travel hours, under the plan. Colorado Boulevard through Eagle Rock and Whittier Boulevard in Boyle Heights would include an all-day, exclusive bus lane.
In some cases, however, bike and bus traffic might be able to travel in the same lane, said city planner Claire Bowin. Also, it’s up to Metro, which operates and funds bus service, to determine whether the designated streets might have enough ridership to support increased service and warrant a bus-only lane.
The City Council is scheduled to vote on the plan today.
* Update: A majority of the City Council voted in favor of the plan, reports the L.A. Times. First District Councilman Gil Cedillo, whose district includes all or part of Cypress Park, Highland Park and Lincoln Heights, was one of two votes against the plan.
Enhanced Traffic Networks from L.A. Mobility Plan
From L.A. Mobility Plan 2035
- Moderate enhancements (yellow): Include bus stop enhancements and increased service, with transit vehicles continuing to operate in mixed traffic.
- Moderate Plus Transit (light orange): Includes an exclusive bus lane during the peak travel period only
- Comprehensive Transit: Include transit vehicles operating in an all-day exclusive bus lane.
Bicycle Enhanced Network | LA Mobility Plan
L.A. Mobility Plan
In the words of Jonathan Maus from bikeportland.org: “In my opinion, putting a label on someone simply for how they move around only makes it easier for them to be marginalized, stereotyped, criticized, dismissed, and so on.”
At various times of the day, I’m a driver, a pedestrian, and a cyclist. And if better options develop, I’m happy to change transportation modes. So this way to pose the problem is unhelpful.
Two other observations: If you travel around, you notice many major cities embracing trains, buses, walking, and cycling. Some people who have a “traditional” LA lifestyle should be observant as they travel, to notice other systems that work better than ours. The rest of the world is not standing still.
Also: there is not enough emphasis on expert analysis of traffic. I’ve attended the small expo sessions where the impact of bike lanes is discussed, and LADOT presents traffic numbers, estimates of delays, etc. I’m sure similar analysis went in to this plan. Too many people are focused on their very intuitive understanding of traffic, which pretty much reduces to “more lanes good”. The problem is more complex, because all those lanes still have to cross one another at intersections, and feed into smaller roads, etc., and there is the additional problem of wide roads attracting unnecessary car traffic, and finding parking for all those cars.
This article also failed to mention that last week Cedillo submitted an amendment to the Plan, which included the removal of all proposed bike lanes in his district, as well as the removal of some existing ones. I love this website – but this article is parroting a pretty bad LA Times article, and failing to add pertinent, east side info.
The implication: I have no identity as a “driver” or a “bus rider”. I want to get from here to there using the best option. A transportation plan is about creating choices and thereby making the system more efficient for some trips. I can walk to the dry cleaner and some local restaurants. I can bike to the grocery store. I can Uber to LAX. All of these have advantages compared to driving.
It will not happen overnight, in fact, some people will never reconsider their decisions. That’s OK, because my bike ride to the grocery store allows someone else to use the parking space I would have taken up.
About our supposedly bad congestion: Ha. I suggest you visit London, Boston, or New York City and note what they are doing about congestion. LA, in general, has not even come close to the level of intervention you see elsewhere. You simply cannot build enough roads for car-only transportation. Look at what has happened to the Westside, or to Venice.
And please don’t listen to anyone that tells you traffic on Colorado has gotten worse due to the bike lanes, they are mistaken. I drive on Colorado all times of the day, and occasionally you do have to (gasp) wait at a light, but it’s rare you need to wait for two lights to get past any given intersection. Any grousing about traffic on Colorado is delusional.
It’d definitely be a boon to small businesses and local residents, if motorists weren’t driving into buildings and running over people every few months. And it’d be much easier to parallel park, if d-bags were discouraged from weaving in and out of traffic at highway speeds, like they do today.
I imagine reducing auto capacity to one lane would only happen if Metro decided to paint rush hour bus-only lanes (like the Dodgers use during game days.) But I doubt that will happen… anyway, people just ignore them a lot of the time, and they rarely work that well because motorists still need to get into and out of them at every intersection.
Sunset/SMB just needs a cut-and-cover subway line… it’s in Metro’s long range plan, but probably won’t be happening in our lifetimes (too many projects ahead of it in the queue; too many idiots in Washigton who think we can fix urban congestion with more freeways.)
For Sunset and Figueroa, there is no way to install bike lanes without losing either parking, or through lanes. Reducing two main thoroughfares to 1 lane in each direction is absolute madness. But that is what happens when politicians capitulate to the vocal minority.
Here In LA… we are making big investments in rail. But we’re still wasting a lot of money on urban freeway expansion. The 405 widening, 5 widening, 710 tunnel boondoggle, misc. on/offramp projects.
That’s 10’s of billions of our tax dollars being spent on local/urban freeways, with very minimal (and short lived) improvement in travel times (rush hour congestion on the 405 is actually worse after they added a lane!)
North Figueroa is another ball of wax… and I believe a road diet would actually be needed in a few stretches to create bike lanes. Then again, that street doesn’t see anywhere near the traffic congestion that Sunset does. I think the traffic study they did when the bike lanes were being proposed there couple years back said the delay would be minimal. But Cedillo put the kibosh on that, so I don’t think you’ll have to worry about it changing anytime soon.
And after: http://bit.ly/1Enjgta
It’s a similar street layout, so I figure the DOT should be able to just swap the bike lanes with the parking, and keep two lanes each way for cars.
at any rate, the bike lane, if it can be accommodated without killing a traffic lane, is a minor issue. it’s the idea of turning Sunset into a two-lane street during rush hour that is madness.
I heard all of this shrill rhetoric when I lived in San Francisco. They closed down many lanes for theoretical bicyclists – and it causes only gridlock during rush hour. You never see a single bike. Serious working people who don’t have time to ride a bike; who don’t have time to comment or even read articles like this are the ones who suffer.
Commuting downtown by bike from the Franklin Hills where I live is great going there but coming back it is all up hill. You would have to be 20 years old and in top shape. Is that what the city planners expect us to be? Is that why they use the annoying euphemism ‘Road Diet’? Fixing something that is not broken is neurotic behavior.
Oh yeah, I’m in my mid 40s.
You folks have lots of excuses for sloth and outright hostility to any notion of making our streets safer for people who aren’t driving in cars. You have no data and rely on convenience-based emotional arguments straight out of the 50s. For example, the difference between 35 mph and 45 mph is literally life and death (google crash survivability rates). But you guys don’t care about the slaughter going on our streets, you just care about going as FAST YOU CAN. GET OUTTA MY WAY!!!!
This is a worldwide cultural paradigm shift. It is unstoppable. Younger people want options and actually give a damn about the planet unlike our own hypocritical boomers and Gen Xers who still base their self-worth on their possessions.
The last 50 years have been an outright disaster for everything except personal convenience and sloth. Obesity, pollution, social inequity (not everyone can afford cars), traffic violence are the byproducts of the social engineering that has gone unchecked since the rail lines were ripped up and freeways built by a population too ignorant to know the damage they were doing.
I mean, people used to think smoking in hospitals was ok. You all remember that right?
Los Angeles is wonderful for active transportation with a great climate and fairly flat terrain. The amount of whining and excuses put forth here is the reason America is becoming a nation of weaklings and unable to compete with a much tougher world full of people who know what actual hardship means.
The staus quo has not worked for close to 30 years now. Traffic is projected to exponentially increase because the population is only going to keep exploding and most people moving here drive cars.
You can cry about illegal aliens, etc but things are only going to get worse and your answer is to uphold the status quo or foolishly try to increase capacity – which never works. You have no answers, no data, no idea what you’re talking about (roads are paid for by motorists! classic ignorance).
I would feel sorry for you but your anger and callous disregard for public safety make it extremely hard. In 10 years you guys are really going to hate living in LA when millions more cars have been added and your stubborn adherence to 1955 nostalgia is coming back to bite you in your collective butts as you sit in endless traffic jams, every day, wishing you had not designed your entire lives around single occupancy cars.
Children throwing tantrums when they are asked to share.
Also, not everyone in LA lives in the hills. Population density is much higher in the flats, where riding a bike is more practical. And not all trips are to/from work (most are under 2 miles.)
This plan is just about giving people more options to move around the city. You can still drive if that’s what you prefer. Others will make their own choices. It’s about leveling the playing field a bit, by making our streets safe and pleasant for walking and cycling, as well as cars and busses (instead of just traffic sewers that only benefit rush hour commuters, at the expense of community mobility, public safety and property values.)
Look at the streets where the city has implemented traffic calming (bike lanes, road diets, etc.) Traffic might be a little worse at rush hour, sure. But small business is booming with more foot traffic, fewer accidents and local investment. That’s what a high-functioning city looks like. Streets are for facilitating movement of people, local commerce, and social interaction. If all you want to do is travel from point A to B at high speeds, take the freeway.
LA city has 6,000 miles of road and lets say for argument sake 500 miles of bike lanes(not true at all the real number is way less). That is 8.3% of the total road miles, a tiny tiny tiny number. Also there are still vehicle traffic lanes where they are bike lanes, no street in LA is for the exclusive use of bikes. So I don’t see why people are so upset about this, unless it is just a small vocal group of folks who fear their absolute power will shrink a tiny bit.