Pedestrian View Of Los Angeles

This blog focuses on rail lines in LA country that exist, are under construction or under consideration. The Californian high-speed rail project and southern CA to Vegas project will also be covered. Since most of the relevant developments in the news, rail websites and blogosphere take place on weekdays, this blog will be updated primarily Monday through Friday and occasionally on the weekends. Your comments, criticism and suggestions are encouraged. Miscellaneous stuff will also appear here.

More content as you stroll down on the right side

1. Blog Archive
2.
Blog List and Press Releases
3.
My Blog List
4.
Rail Lines: Existing, Under Construction and Under Consideration
5.
Share It
6.
Search This Blog
7.
Followers
8.
About Me
9.
Feedjit Live Traffic Feed

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Urban Retailers Call For More Transit, Less Parking



Source: http://www.globest.com/news/12_238/newyork/retail/-316347.html



NEW YORK CITY-As retailers continue to weave suburban concepts into the urban fabric, more brands—and big-boxes—are going vertical. But as the pendulum swings in favor of transit-oriented development, the nation’s top retailers agreed that the need for mass transportation is beginning to outweigh the need for traditional parking design, according to speakers during day two of the International Council of Shopping Centers’ 2011 New York National Conference & Deal Making event. The convention closed out at the Sheraton New York and Hilton New York Hotels on Tuesday afternoon, where total attendance exceeded 6,000 each day.
During the general session, much of the discussion revolved around the challenges retailers face, running the gamut from site selection, obtaining local approvals, expansion concerns and store formats. The panelists also addressed the paradigm shift of retailers like wholesale clubs and supermarkets—two concepts borne out of the suburbs—that are finding equal strength in cities, especially near subway and bus lines.
“If we could be close to mass transit, it could be absolutely critical,” said Patrick Smith, vice president of real estate at BJ’s Wholesale Club, an operator of 192 clubs and 107 gas stations across 15 states. Smith explained that despite the bulk-quality of BJs merchandise, more city customers are taking the train to its stores. “More people are using mass transit and some people walk,” he said, noting that its parking garage at Bronx Terminal Market is vastly underutilized. “For a BJ’s customer, you may think that is absolutely ridiculous. We never expected people to use mass transit to shop at a wholesale club.”
The same goes for Michael J. Shanahan, vice president of real estate at Burlington Coat Factory, who said mass transit is “absolutely a requirement” when selecting an urban location. “When we opened at Rego Park I this last September, we are right off the subway stop,” he said, explaining that while the store opening started off slow, momentum began to build as foot traffic increased by the E, M and R trains. “We got the word on the street to get people up to the third floor.”
And while mass transit is reducing the need for the amount of parking, Daniel Shallit, director of real estate for the Northeast Region at the Sports Authority, said parking cannot be totally eliminated from the retail model. “Looking at the Philadelphias of the world or the Bostons or other large urban markets, we still need it,” he said, noting that parking changes would affect store sizes. “The logic is, if you buy a treadmill at a Sports Authority, you can’t take that on a bus or a train. You need a car or you need some way to access a car to get that product home.”
Using New York City as an example, Shallit said its Manhattan locations sell less hard goods (like weights and fitness equipment) and more soft goods (like clothing and shoes) due its ease of transport on a bus or train. “But we still want to be close to mass transit because it builds awareness,” he said. “The more people that see us by commuting know that we are there and that’s really, really important to us.”
Supermarkets are also facing similar issues. Dennis P. Bachman, senior real estate representative for Wakefern Food Corp., said a large food shop could be difficult to do on a typical train or bus. “Cabs have certainly become a much more important factor,” he said. “Typically in a city store, especially if you have a lot of customers who would use mass transit, you would tend to have higher customer counts, greater shopping frequency and a lower average order size, so the per trip spend would be less, which adds some additional complications to the business. Learning to handle those additional customers, staffing levels and things like that, parking is still an important criteria.”
But some food retailers are paring back on parking altogether. G. Lamont Blackstone, principal of Mount Vernon, NY-based GL Blackstone & Associates, LLC, worked on the development and leasing of Harlem’s largest Pathmark store. After battling over the normal requirement of parking spaces versus the constraints of the development plot, Blackstone put in 2.3 cars per 1,000 people, lower than the industry standard of five per 1,000. “We are blessed that we live in a democracy, but sometimes there are inherent tensions between the vetting and the public input requirements, particularly as it relates to land use decisions of urban democracies versus the execution of requirements for urban developers and urban retailers,” he said. “That’s why it is critically important for developers from day one right out the gate that they put the best face forward on their projects in order to minimize the potential issues that will come down the pike.”
And due the large expense parking garages can bring, Larry Rose, principal, RK Realty Advisors, explained that urban retailers must understand their demographics before making an investment. Where parking at Bronx Terminal Market averages at 20% utilization, more shoppers are filling up spaces at Sky View Center in Flushing, Queens, where more residents own a vehicle. “Even though the site is at the end of the 7 line, half the people are driving and are beyond where mass transit is,” he said.
Peter Ripka, partner at Ripco Real Estate, a retail firm serving New York City, Long Island, New Jersey, Westchester County and Lower Connecticut, explained that all forms of transportation play into what makes a site successful or not. Using its Target-anchored Sayville-Patchogue shopping center as an example Ripka said the property is centrally located on a major Long Island thoroughfare, Sunrise Highway. “People can easily come from long distances to those shopping centers, and mass transportation does the same thing in the urban environment,” he said. “People are able to come from a large area, and therefore, parking is not as necessary.”
While public transportation has become the “lifeline” for projects to happen, urban consumers should have choices, said panel moderator Ken Narva, co-founder and managing partner of White Plains, NY-based Street Works. “If you provide 30 teaser parking spaces at grade, that can make a store successful,” he said. "It is the same thing that on-street parking plays, which is the quality of the space, the sense of convenience and the sense of activity.”
But overall, Narva said the future of CRE investment is urban. “We live in an experience culture, and downtown is an experience where people interact with each other, and that experience is very important and is not going away,” he said. “As electronic retailing continues to grow, consumers still need to get out and interface with each other.”

TONIGHT: Manhattan Beach examines trolley plan

Pedestrian View Of LA: As we saw just recently in Pasadena, cities are considering trolley again. In this article, Manhattan Beach is now the latest city to do this. After WW2, many cities moved away from trolleys since they were getting in the way of cars, especially in crowded downtown area. Are we forgetting lessons of the past or is there some new consideration that makes it worthwhile to revisit this transit option? It's also interesting to note that this area had trolleys when the red car was in use.

Source: http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_19479921


Fixed-route trolley plan
Manhattan Beach. The City Council tonight will revisit a proposal to bring a fixed-route trolley system to town. The idea has been analyzed in a feasibility study that was presented to the council in 2010, but staff members have raised several issues that would need to be considered - including a funding source - before moving forward. The meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. at 1400 Highland Ave.

Imagine: Rapid Transit From Sherman Oaks to Lakeview Terrace Metro is considering a Rapidway project running between Ventura Boulevard and Lakeview Terrace, via light rail, streetcar or bus.


Source:  http://shermanoaks.patch.com/articles/imagine-rapid-transit-from-sherman-oaks-to-lakeview-terrace

 The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which received public feedback on a half-dozen ideas to ease traffic along Van Nuys Boulevard, will present a proposed solution in early 2012. The 10.2-mile project, dubbed the Van Nuys Boulevard Rapidway, is part of a plan to improve transit service through the Valley.

Metro held a series of three public meetings in early November to gather public input.The Rapidway project would stretch along Van Nuys Boulevard in Lakeview Terrace south to Ventura Boulevard in Sherman Oaks, one of four corridors in the Valley for which improvements are slated. The others are Reseda, Sepulveda and the Lankershim/San Fernando corridors.
Metro is considering five possible transit solutions:
  • A light rail similar to the Metro Red Line but with overhead electrical power and sets of two cars carrying up to 335 passengers;
  • A bus rapid transit line carrying 100 passengers per bus similar to the Metro Orange line;
  • A streetcar with overhead electrical power similar to Portland, Ore.'s, with cars of 140 passengers each;
  • Improvements such as intersection widening, signal timing and increased bus service;
  • A “No Build” solution that continues existing transit services and projects funded through 2035.
The meetings were the first step to assess what residents and commuters feel will best ease traffic problems. At the Van Nuys meeting, held in the Van Nuys Government Center in early November, many favored light rail, a sentiment echoed by Tony Wilkinson, vice chairman of the Panorama City Neighborhood Council
“Light rail is more favorable for transit-oriented development than a busway,” Wilkinson said. “With light rail, places along the line will have significant economic development.”
Mikie Maloney, who serves on the Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council’s Land Use Committee, was concerned that light rail, streetcars or a busway would reduce parking space, especially in Sherman Oaks, where businesses already struggle with insufficient parking.
“Whatever they build, it will take away lanes from drivers or from parking,” Maloney said. “The street is only so wide.”
Ron Ziff, who chairs the Neighborhood Council's Land Use Committee, expressed similar concerns over reduced parking and added that the real traffic problem is the Sepulveda Pass through which 337,000 cars pour daily on the 405 Freeway or Sepulveda Boulevard.
“There’s a 3 1/2-hour traffic jam every weekday morning,” Ziff said. “We need to fix that first.”
Ziff’s observation is one shared by the Transit Coalition, a Valley-based nonprofit that wants Metro to address Van Nuys and Sepulveda boulevards together.
Bart Reed, the coalition’s executive director, said Wednesday that a more comprehensive solution would involve rail service along Van Nuys Boulevard through a rail tunnel in the Sepulveda Pass, to UCLA.
“My educated guess is they are going to decide on some sort of bus solution [for Van Nuys Boulevard],” Reed said. “Or if they create light rail and heavy rail [along Sepulveda] then you don’t have a one-seat ride.”
Funds for the Van Nuys Boulevard Rapidway project come from Measure R, a half-cent increase on the county sales tax, expected to generate $40 billion for transit projects over its 30-year span. But the $68 million targeted for the Van Nuys Boulevard project will likely cover just the planning and environmental assessment stages. Other funds will have to be identified to complete the project by the 2018 target date.
For more information on the Van Nuys Boulevard Rapidway, go to metro.net/vannuys, email vannuys@metro.net or call 818-276-3233.  

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

New Metro Motion TV show explores attractions along Expo Line

Source: http://thesource.metro.net/2011/12/06/metro-motion-tv-show-explores-attractions-along-expo-line/



With finishing touches being applied to the Exposition light-rail line, the just released winter edition of Metro Motion takes a trip to Exposition Park — one of the first stops on Expo south of downtown L.A. There it discovers a variety of world class museums and attractions. And just in time for Metro Motion, Space Shuttle Endeavour Commander Mark Kelly dropped by to celebrate the arrival next year of Endeavour to the California Science Center, where the shuttle will make its home.

Winter 2011-12 Metro Motion also explores the changing habits of 20 somethings who may be the first generation in recent years to turn away from cars and toward mass transit to help the world’s atmosphere heal itself while they invest in pursuits they see as more interesting than driving.

There’s an interview with artist Sonia Romero, whose beautiful porcelain mosaic mural installation at the Westlake/MacArthur Park Station has been named one of the best public art projects in the United States. Romero talks about her work and explains what inspired her.

Also in the show, Caltrans District 7 Director Mike Miles has plenty to say on the essential unified focus of highway and transit planners and the importance of coordinating the two for the good of regional mobility.

Metro Motion runs quarterly on cable stations throughout Los Angeles County. Check local listings for dates and times in your area.

90 Years Ago Today: Los Angeles Railway Rolls Out “Information Men” Public Service

Source: http://metroprimaryresources.info/90-years-ago-today-los-angeles-railway-rolls-out-information-men-public-service/2062/

Metro Digital Resources Librarian | December 5, 2011

The December 5, 1921 issue of the Los Angeles Railway employee newsmagazine posed the question: “How would you like to be an information man?”

An article titled “Information Men Help L.A., They’ll Tell The World!” appeared in Two Bells.

Ninety years ago, Los Angeles Railway launched the “Information Men” who served as early Los Angeles’ public information officers.

The article reads as follows:

How would you like to be an information man?

Looks like a pretty interesting job judging by the attitude of George Feller in the picture above.

George is one of the five uniformed information bureaus of the Los Angeles Railway.

This additional service for the public came into being a few weeks ago and has been greatly appreciated.

At the depots and at busy corners downtown the information men are asked all sorts of questions about politics, street cars and Ford spark plugs.

An acquaintance stepped up to C.W. Jordan, the answer man at the Santa Fe depot, and casually asked Charlie, “What do you know today?”

If he had waited for Charlie to tell him everything he knew he would be there yet.

The other men who work with the slogan “I’ll tell the world” are F.A. Christy, formerly conductor of Div. Three; W.R. Boyd, former motorman of Division Four and C.D. Blakeman, formerly conductor of Division Four were motormen at Division One.

All are veterans of street car life and their long service makes them thoroughly acquainted with the city and ideal men for the information jobs.

New timelines for Wilshire bus lane project

Source: http://thesource.metro.net/2011/12/05/timelines-for-wilshire-bus-lane-project/

When we last checked in with the Wilshire rush hour bus lane project, the completion date that we posted was 2013. But Danna Gabbard at L.A. Streetsblog had a post Friday saying that the completion date for the project is now 2015.

The project will put 7.7 miles of rush hour bus lanes on portions of Wilshire Boulevard in the city of Los Angeles, from Brentwood to just west of downtown Los Angeles. The idea — and I think it’s a good one — is to speed up bus service on Wilshire, which is Metro’s busiest bus corridor.

Metro helped plan the project with the city and Los Angeles County. The city of Los Angeles is taking the lead on constructing the project, which involves pavement reconstruction, some street widenings along Wilshire and updating the traffic signal system, among other upgrades. From an Oct. 9 city report:

Extensive roadway improvements on Wilshire Boulevard, including curb lane reconstruction and selective street widening, will be done before the bus lanes are installed. Design and engineering is scheduled to be completed by June 2013, followed by construction of roadway
improvements, traffic mitigation measures, Transit Priority System upgrades, and bus lane striping and signage. The project is expected to be completed and operational by June 2015.

A spokesman for the city’s transportation agency told Streetsblog that the city will try to finish the work earlier than 2015. One obvious question this raises: will the bus lanes project be under construction at the same time that construction for the first leg of the Westside Subway Extension is getting underway?

Answer: It remains to be seen. The subway project is on track to have its environmental impact studies approved in early 2012. At that point, we should have a better idea of funding and the construction timeline for the first segment, which is supposed to go to Fairfax.

On an unrelated note, Streetsblog also reported that the new Silver Line station at Union Station – here’s a good rendering — will be completed in 2015. That is incorrect. The ExpressLanes project on the San Bernardino Freeway and El Monte Busway is still scheduled to open in 2013, with the Silver Line station scheduled for a 2014 opening, according to Metro staff.

Metro Expo Line begins testing trains ahead of expected 2012 opening

Source:

Los Angeles County Metro has begun to ramp up testing along the future Exposition Line, a light rail route that will eventually connect downtown L.A. with Culver City.

Most Angelenos know the drill by now. Warning bells sound, red lights flash, safety gates drop and a few seconds later a Metro train passes by. But, starting Sunday, expect to see the occasional train with no passengers, empty except for a couple engineers.

Metro is testing the timing and safety of every train crossing and signal system of the Expo Line. Tests began Sunday but will continue until its eventual opening. Metro has yet to release the opening date, but many expect it to be in early 2012.



Phase one of the Metro Expo Line is 8.6 miles of light rail stretching from downtown to Culver City, with 12 stops in between. The project cost a cool $932 million, but will also serve USC, Exposition Park, the Mid-City communities and the Crenshaw District. Phase two is a further extension from Culver City to Santa Monica.

As tests begin to be a presence on the line, so does Metro's safety campaign. Retired bus and rail operators turned "safety ambassadors" will be placed at various intersections to teach pedestrians about the system. Metro also says that 63,000 safety flyers have been distributed door-to-door within a two block radius of the line.

An additional 60,000 safety flyers will be distributed during the coming months.

Dan Walters: California's high-speed train losing public support

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/06/4102223/dan-walters-californias-high-speed.html


Published: Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 3A

Has California's bullet train project – or pipe dream – finally run off the track? Voters think so.

When the California High-Speed Rail Authority released a much-revised "business plan" for the project that doubled its cost, it won praise in many quarters, including this one, for moving from abject fantasy into at least semi-reality.

The revisions were largely the work of two new rail authority members, Dan Richard and Michael Rossi, whom Gov. Jerry Brown appointed to pull the project back from the verge of political death because of ridership and financing assumptions that were ludicrously unrealistic.

However, the new plan didn't silence opposition among those living along its route. It also continued to draw sharp criticism from the Legislature's budget analyst, and – most importantly – its eye-popping cost eroded an already thin veneer of public support.

That erosion is starkly evident in a new statewide Field Poll that found overwhelming support for resubmitting the project to voters and overwhelming opposition to building it.

More than three-fourths of registered voters said they should be given another chance to vote on the project and, by a 2-1 margin, they want it to be killed.

Or to put it another way, should Brown and the Legislature continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on the bullet train, they would be defying the very clear wishes of those who elected them to office.

Coincidentally, the Field Poll results were distributed to its news media clients Monday just minutes before two state Senate committees began a review of the revised business plan, in which legislators expressed both support for the concept and skepticism that it is financially viable.

The projected cost has now ballooned to nearly $100 billion, but the state has only a $9.95 billion bond issue and a few billion in federal funds to build a test track in the San Joaquin Valley.

The rail authority is hoping that more federal money will allow it to build an initial operational segment and that private investors then will be impressed with its potential and put up the rest of the money.

The Legislative Analyst's Office, however, suggests that even with revision, the plan does not comply with conditions of the bond issue on financing and completion of environmental clearances, and that building the San Joaquin Valley segment is probably not worth its $6 billion cost.

Richard, Rossi and other rail authority officials continued to defend the project as lawmakers peppered them with skeptical questions about the bullet train's prospects and mentioned revelations in The Bee and the San Francisco Chronicle about the authority's lavish spending on contracts to political insiders to positively influence public opinion.

The Field Poll's results would indicate that it was money down a rat hole.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/06/4102223/dan-walters-californias-high-speed.html#ixzz1fm7wZNLl

Monday, December 5, 2011

California high-speed rail authority spends millions to polish image Share

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/04/4098202/california-high-speed-rail-authority.html

By David Siders
dsiders@sacbee.com
Published: Sunday, Dec. 4, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
Last Modified: Sunday, Dec. 4, 2011 - 11:55 am
On his way off the California High-Speed Rail Authority board this year, former state Sen. Quentin Kopp ripped into the authority's controversial $9 million public relations contract with Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide, urging its cancellation.

Everywhere, it seemed – from community meetings in the Central Valley to legislative hearings at the Capitol – the project was clobbered for its management and cost, and its worsening image, Kopp said in a March letter to Roelof van Ark, the rail authority's chief executive officer, was evidence of Ogilvy's "inadequate performance."

But the rail authority's public relations campaign has in recent years included not only its contract with Ogilvy – which is now being unwound – but also millions of dollars more in lucrative, publicly funded outreach contracts embedded in agency engineering contracts.

One of those agreements was with a company owned by a former aide to Kopp, and Kopp himself sought to bill the authority more than $1,100 for one outreach-related breakfast in San Francisco last year. Another contract went to a former assemblyman.

Last fiscal year alone, the authority spent $7.2 million on regional outreach, ranging from organizing public meetings to distributing newsletters and meeting with local officials, according to agency records obtained by The Bee.

The authority said it budgeted about $2.6 million for regional outreach this year, with 20 subcontractors statewide.

The magnitude of the effort and its many layers come to light at a critical point for the project. Officials plan to start construction in the Central Valley next year, but they must win the approval of a skeptical Legislature first. The regional subcontractors, overseen by engineering firms throughout the state, in some cases retained and billed the agency on behalf of subcontractors of their own.

"I guess the interesting question to me is, 'Why do they have to spend so much effort selling this to people if it has such strong support?' " said Sen. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, a critic of the rail effort. "They've got to put up a wall of, you know, peaches and cream, to make it look palatable to the voters."

Public outreach is required by state environmental rules for public review, and it is necessary to communicate the significance of the project, agency officials said.

"I think we're making a pretty decent effort to do the best public outreach that we can," said Lance Simmens, the authority's deputy director for communications and public policy.

In the Merced-to-Fresno corridor, that outreach has included "efforts geared toward the agricultural community," periodic public information meetings, monitoring local media and updating the project mailing list and "email blast program," according to invoices.

In the Palmdale-to-Los Angeles area, it included meetings with elected officials and "key stakeholders." And in the Fresno-to-Bakersfield area, the rail authority relied on the work of former Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines, whose invoices listed his company's professional services contract at $80,000.

Last fiscal year, regional outreach expenses accounted for about 4 percent of total spending under agency engineering contracts, according to the authority. This year, the budgeted amount accounts for about 2 percent of total expenses.

In the Bay Area, an early battleground for the project because of intense local opposition, Denise LaPointe, an aide to Kopp when he was a senator, billed the authority more than $350,000 for outreach work done from September 2009 to June 2011, when her contract ended.

LaPointe created newsletters, worked on a public participation plan and conducted outreach and "stakeholder meetings & briefings." Her total billings included invoices for work done by a sub-subcontractor.

"There's a lot of work that was done," LaPointe said. "Any big project, I actually think there's pretty important public outreach that has to be done."

LaPointe was working for the rail authority and had done work on other transportation projects in California before Kopp joined the board, LaPointe and Kopp said. Kopp said he was not involved in LaPointe's ongoing engagement.

Kopp said LaPointe was influential in promoting the project in the Bay Area, in part because she "knows City Hall in San Francisco inside and out."

Kopp, a longtime proponent of high-speed rail, involved himself in outreach, too, according to invoices, including organizing a breakfast meeting last year in San Francisco to introduce van Ark to 25 elected officials in the area.

"I wanted everybody to meet van Ark, and I wanted him to just get the lay of the land and get the feel." Kopp said.

He sought reimbursement from the rail authority for the cost, more than $1,100. The authority reimbursed him the state maximum for a breakfast, $6.

"I remember asking somebody in the office if I could get reimbursed, and being told, 'No,' " Kopp said, "That, frankly, annoyed me a little. But what the heck, it's called public service."

The authority was more accommodating of paying for Kopp's transportation to and from his home in San Francisco for meetings at the Capitol on two successive days in November 2009. Neumann Limousine, which dispatched a sedan, charged the authority $240 each way.

The rail authority's bid to build a system connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco has enjoyed a resurgence this fall, after Gov. Jerry Brown put his support behind it. Even as officials revised the project's cost estimate to almost $100 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars over 20 years – more than twice the previous estimate – the projection was seen by many observers as a sign of greater credibility within the rail authority.

But LaMalfa and other critics want the Legislature to ask Californians to reconsider the $9 billion bond measure that voters approved in 2008 to finance the project's construction, and its future remains uncertain.

In the agency's outreach effort, Ogilvy announced this summer that it was quitting its contract, saying it was "unable to develop a solid working relationship" with the authority. The authority since then has been seeking a replacement. Simmens said he expects that contract to be awarded soon.



Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/04/4098202/california-high-speed-rail-authority.html#ixzz1fiRTHxZr

The Big Fix The Transportation Planning Rule Every City Should Reform

Source: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2011/12/transportation-planning-law-every-city-should-repeal/636/

Completing a major transit project is never a quick and easy process, but if any place should be able to move one swiftly through to completion, it's San Francisco. In 1973 the city adopted a "transit first" policy that gave planning priority to modes of transportation other than the automobile. As the policy expressly states, decisions related to streets and sidewalks "shall encourage the use of public rights-of-way by pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit."

That's strong support for livability on paper, but in recent years the policy has felt much more like "transit worst" in practice. A 2005 lawsuit postponed implementation of the city's master bike plan for years on the grounds that it failed to consider potential harm to the flow of automobile traffic — an injunction that wasn't lifted until August 2010. The city has considered a bus-rapid transit line along Van Ness Avenue since 2004, but an environmental review on the project wasn't completed until early last month — delayed, in part, by an intense study of the same traffic consideration — and now service isn't expected to begin until at least 2016 [PDF].

The source of the disconnect between San Francisco's transit-first heart and its car-centric hand is an arcane engineering measure called "level of service," or LOS. In brief, LOS suggests that whenever the city wants to change some element of a street — say by adding a bike lane or even just painting a crosswalk — it should calculate the effect that change will have on car traffic. If the change produces too much congestion, then a great deal of time, money, and additional analysis must go toward the project's consideration.

The weight of this hidden hand doesn't fall on San Francisco alone. "Intersection LOS is one of the most widely-used traffic analysis tools in the U.S. and has a profound impact on how street space is allocated in U.S. cities," writes Jason Henderson, geography professor at San Francisco State University, in the November issue of the Journal of Transport Geography. As Henderson argues, it's about time cities addressed the problem, and San Francisco is doing just that. It's currently in the process of drafting a new sustainable transportation metric that will replace LOS and promote livability. Still, the fight is far from over.

"Every city I've ever come across has some use of [LOS]," says Henderson, who has conducted an extensive review of LOS and is writing a book on the politics of mobility in San Francisco. "LOS and the privilege of the car is the incumbent. The way the political process is set up is you have to disprove the incumbent."

• • • • •

LOS may be a rather obscure transportation tool, but it's not a terribly complicated one. The chief function of LOS is to measure the delay each car experiences at a particular intersection. A delay of less than 10 seconds means a street has a "good" traffic flow and earns an LOS grade of "A." As the delay increases the grade moves down the alphabet, report-card style, through an "F" grade, given when the average delay exceeds 80 seconds.

In San Francisco and other California cities, LOS influences transportation or development projects through the state's environmental code, the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA requires public agencies to determine the possible impact of development projects on the environment. It essentially serves as a screening process for a project's influence on things like air pollution, water quality, and of course transportation. One of the points on the CEQA checklist under the transportation section is "level of service."

Let's say someone wants to build a bike lane in the downtown Bay Area. Under CEQA, the sponsor of this project must consider whether the change to the street will result in a downgrade of LOS. In San Francisco, generally speaking, the threshold for LOS acceptability is a grade of "E" — or a delay between 55 and 80 seconds. If our hypothetical bike lane eliminates a car lane, that could create enough congestion for each car's delay to exceed the 80-second mark. That would bump the street's LOS from an "E" to an "F," and the project would fall outside the acceptable CEQA threshold.

Now that doesn't mean the lane can't get built, but it does make the project more difficult. If LOS falls to "F," for instance, the sponsor of the bike lane project must then perform a costly and time-consuming environmental impact report. If that report confirms the LOS failure, the sponsor may have to mitigate or offset the congestion through some other means. The alternative to all this time and money is to abandon the project entirely — and often that's what happens.

"That takes that $20,000 or $40,000 bike lane and suddenly makes it a $200,000 project, and it takes a project that might have taken a month or two to go from design to implementation and it could make it into a 2- or 3-year project," says Andy Thornley, policy director at the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. "In many cases it's not so much that we take the bike lane or the crosswalk all the way through the research and reject it, it's that we don't even go into the environmental review because public agencies don't have the resources to spend the time and the money on these pretty cheap projects. So there is a hugely chilling effect to having to go through all of these hoops."


• • • • •

The influence of LOS comes largely from its inclusion in the Highway Capacity Manual produced by the federal Transportation Research Board. When it was first introduced, several decades ago, the metric harmonized with a broader cultural desire for car travel. Although cities aren't required to abide LOS measures by law, over the years the measure hardened into convention. By the time cities recognized the need for balanced transportation systems, LOS was entrenched in the street engineering canon.

"There was an assumption that there's always going to be driving everywhere, and it's always going to increase, and there needs to be a rational decision-making process to decide where limited transportation dollars should go," says Henderson. "It made sense if you're just assuming there always is going to be driving and in the future there's going to be more cars, and another fuel source, and it's superior to everything else."

There are several quirks about LOS that give it what Henderson calls a "veneer of objectivity." For starters, LOS delay is measured at the peak traffic rush. That reflects the belief that a street's design should be based on its most congested hour or so, rather than configured to handle a wide range of travel modes throughout the day. In addition, the letter grade carries more importance than the numerical delay itself; if a two-second delay nudges a project past an "E" grade, for example, it could be punished more than another project that delays traffic much longer but doesn't drop a letter. And in San Francisco, LOS impact must be determined not just in the present but also decades into the future. A failure 20 years ahead means a failure right now.

There's also a great irony underlying the use of LOS as part of CEQA's environmental impact checklist. It seems self-evident that bike projects are favorable to the environment, but the use of LOS to evaluate them can sometimes imply quite the opposite. The person who filed the 2005 lawsuit against the San Francisco master bike plan, for instance, suggested that because bike lanes raise LOS they also raise congestion and car idling, and thereby cause pollution.

That's not the only contradictory aspect of LOS. Case in point: a developer whose building fails an LOS threshold can mitigate the environmental impact by widening the street, which of course would attract more cars and pollution. So instead of encouraging dense development and lower vehicle mileage — the hallmarks of a transit-first city — San Francisco's use of LOS as part of CEQA actually discourages livable design. In a three-part series on LOS at Streetsblog, one transportation consultant called LOS the "single greatest promoter of sprawl and the single greatest obstacle to transit oriented development" in California.

"In the end compliance with CEQA often causes the transportation system to become even more adverse, more dangerous," says Thornley. "It adds more car trips."

• • • • •

The beacon of hope for livability advocates in San Francisco rests in the flexibility of CEQA review. While CEQA recommends that transportation-related projects consider LOS as an environmental measure, it doesn't mandate a particular metric. Any reasonable measurement of transportation sustainability will do.

That realization has led to a counter-movement against the use of LOS under CEQA by some of the city's transit agencies. In 2003 the San Francisco County Transportation Authority performed a review [PDF] of LOS and concluded that it failed to support the "development of a balanced, multimodal transportation system" — arguing instead that LOS preserved the flow of motor cars at the expense of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian movements. In other words, by upholding LOS, the city was violating its own transit-first policy.

Based on that report, the authority began to investigate alternative transportation impact measures. A 2008 follow-up report recommended replacing LOS with an entirely new measure known as "auto-trips generated," or ATG. Instead of asking how much congestion a project creates, ATG looks at how many new automobile trips it produces. Since bike lanes or bus-rapid transit or the like don't generate any automobile trips, those projects would no longer be subject to a full environmental review. (To be more precise: these projects would be covered by a system-wide environmental review the authority plans to conduct as part of the new metric's implementation.)

In tandem with the ATG measure, the authority also suggested the creation of a new mitigation fee for all projects that generated automobile trips. The fee would go toward a general sustainable transportation fund that would finance transit projects across the city. The upshot would be a faster project approval process, more certainty on the part of project sponsors, and more money for livability efforts. All told, the new idea offers a "higher-level view" of transportation impact, according to the report:

Each new automobile trip added onto San Francisco's transportation system contributes to environmental impacts, especially in terms of pedestrian safety and greenhouse gas emissions. Under the proposed approach, CEQA transportation impact analysis would measure the net new trips generated or induced by proposed projects, rather than changes in automobile delay at intersections. ...

Instead of seeking to preserve system efficiency by expanding capacity for driving, the ATG measure recognizes that constraining the growth in automobile trips on San Francisco streets is critical for maintaining system efficiency on our network of finite automobile capacity.

The proposal has changed in many respects since 2008, says Tilly Chang, the authority's deputy director for planning. For starters, it has shifted from ATG to MTG — or motorized-trips generated. That way a housing development project would be subject to the mitigation fee whether it created auto trips or just caused additional transit delay. Whatever the acronym ends up being, says Chang, the approach remains the same.

"Our way of looking at it is we have a longstanding citywide transit-first policy," she says. "Rather than planning for and identifying minimization of motorist delays, we would be shifting our focus toward transit impact, and making sure that transit performance is maintained."

Currently the authority is performing what's called a "nexus" study that will determine the precise ATG/MTG mitigation fee. That effort will conclude around the start of the new year, says Chang. Then the city's planning commission will hold a hearing about the new metric. Then a complete environmental review will be conducted. Then the planning commission must prepare an official ordinance for adoption. And then, if all goes well, the new metric will be phased in as LOS is phased out.

That's a lot of "thens" between now and then, and probably a couple years. Henderson fears that the established legal precedent of LOS use could lead some livability opponents to file lawsuits once a new metric is adopted. Still, he believes San Francisco can ultimately make the change and serve as an example for other cities — and finally, at long last, fulfill its transit-first stance. Thornley agrees.

"To the extent that a city moves forward and is the precedent setter, I think San Francisco is going to be doing that," he says. "It's very exciting to be at the threshold of finally coming out from under the distortions that auto LOS has presented."
Keywords: San Francisco, Transit, LOS, CEQA, Environment, level of service

Eric Jaffe is a contributing writer to The Atlantic Cities and the author of The King's Best Highway: The Lost History of the Boston Post Road, the Route That Made America. He lives in New York. All posts »

New stats show more readership.


I have been using "FEEDJIT LIVE TRAFFIC FEED" and get totally different numbers from the numbers that "Google Stats" supplies.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

A letter from Councilmember Bill Rosendahl

LET'S HELP THE HOMELESS FOR THE HOLIDAYS

Dear Friends,

As the holidays approach, the weather has grown colder and harsher, and those who are forced to live on the streets need our help.

During the last week, we opened the Emergency Winter Shelter Program, which will provide more than 200 beds for the homeless on the Westside thru mid-March. But the program - and those it serves - sorely needs your help.

Can you help by donating personal items and supplies for the shelters? The items, listed below, can be left at any of my offices between now and December 16.

Toiletries: razors, soap, toothpaste, feminine hygiene products; foot spray; deodorant; combs; hairbrushes; nail clippers; shower shoes.

Clothing: men's underwear; women's underwear; socks; t-shirts; coats; jackets; hats; scarves; gloves; men's pants; women's pants; shoes; adult diapers.

Personal items: backpacks; reading glasses.

Items for shelter: coffee; creamer; sugar; books; magazines; board games.

These items can be dropped off at either of my offices:


Westchester
7166 W Manchester Ave
Los Angeles CA 90045
310-569-8772
Hours: 9a-5p

West LA
1645 Corinth Ave, #201
Los Angeles, CA 90025
310-575-8461
Hours: 9a-5p

City Hall
Room 415, 200 N Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
213-473-7011


Thanking you in advance for demonstrating the 11th District is a community that cares. Together we can make this special season a little warmer for those in need.

Happy Holidays,

Bill

Friday, December 2, 2011

http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/history/la-as-subject/west-hollywood-at-27-how-the-town-of-sherman-became-weho.html

Great article on the history of West Hollywood. Please use link below. Thanks.


http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/history/la-as-subject/west-hollywood-at-27-how-the-town-of-sherman-became-weho.html

Rethinking Streets in Northeast Los Angeles; An new Comprehensive Approach to Transportation Planning

Source: http://la.streetsblog.org/2011/12/02/rethinking-streets-in-northeast-los-angeles-an-new-comprehensive-approach-to-transportation-planning/
(Photos not shown on blog. Please go to original article for photos.)

by James Rojas on December 2, 2011

Nowhere else in LA area are individual street routes as important than in the Northeast. Because of the area’s hills there is no grid. Streets wind their way up hills and cut through valleys creating public space and connecting the community to places beyond.

Photo:Latino Urban Forum/Flickr

Sixteen Occidental College students are rethinking designs for York Boulevard in Highland Park and Colorado Boulevard in Eagle Rock as part of Urban and Environmental Policy Institute transportation class.

I facilitated a workshop to have the students to approach transportation planning from a non-traditional approach. Rather than ask the students the typical question. “How would you improve transportation on Colorado and York Boulevards?” I asked a different question.

Usually, the first question would have created answers such as wider sidewalks, bike lanes, bus service, more parking or faster traffic speeds. These are all great but they fail to understand how people want to use the street as public space.

Instead we took a comprehensive approach to the street design. I asked the students how would they envision these streets in 50 years? From this point we can plan backwards and find create the right mobility and land use patterns for the streets.

By having the students investigate how they envision the role of streets in their lives in 50 years we received creative, innovated, in-depth comprehensive answers.

Photo:Latino Urban Forum/Flickr

The students sat at four tables with a sheet of colored construction paper. On a separate table was a pile of thousands of non-representational, materials. These materials were buttons, plastic parts of toys, Popsicle sticks, pipe cleaners, small fabric flowers and much more

The students were instructed to use the construction paper and materials to build a diorama of their ideal street in 50 years. I told the students that they were no wrong or right answers. The students had twenty minutes to finish this first task.

The students walked over to the table of objects and started searching for the apppropiate materials or in some cases by inspired by the materials. These colorful, tactile, objects triggered the student’s emotional connections to the environment. By seeing, seeking, and touching the objects the student’s emotions increased. This process mimicked how they experienced the city.

Once the participants secured their materials they began building. During this time I asked the students if they needed help and walked around the room. Some of the students wanted to create the right answer from the material covered in the class but the instructor and my self insisted we want their personal preferences on street use.

Photo:Latino Urban Forum/Flickr

After the twenty minutes they were gave a one-minute presentation to the group on their ideal street. They stated their name and explained their model. One minute was good time limit because it allowed for every one to participate and kept the pace of the exercise. The shy students were less intimidated as well.

The students used the models to present their ideas by pointing to objects on the construction paper. The materials used are random to force creative thinking and create an equal/non-judgmental playing field where participants of all backgrounds can create non-traditional spaces and learn from one another.

The connections between objects and what they represented were fascinating to hear as they maneuvered through their models.

Since the students interjected their own personal experiences, memories, and random thoughts of places real and imagined, this became the most interesting part of the process. It was powerful to watch the students explain with so much enthusiasm and conviction about their ideal street.

The student ideas varied. Each participant created his or her streets in his or her own terms. Some designs were ideal based. Some designs are specific, and literal.

Here is the list of the students’ concepts for their ideal street:

Mixed Use/Complete Street
Small Regional Plan
Public Space
TOD/Public Space/Complete Street
Parking Management/Mixed Use
Food on Streets
Better Corridor Design
Times Square/Streets for Entertainment
Better Neighborhood Street
Multi-use Neighborhood
Better Land Use Planning
Social Streets/Ped Friendly
Michigan Ave
Human Scale/Street Cars
Eco-lodge/Nature in the City

Before the models were dismantled which sadden the students, they were documented in photographs. This also led to next exercise where the students were placed in groups of to envision York, Colorado, and Occidental transportation. They students were tasked to bring together their best ideas to these places this was going to be done by each group discuss their ideas. They were given a twenty minutes to complete this activity.

When the time was nearly over everyone gathered around the three tables to hear design solutions for York, Colorado, and Occidental College. Each group introduced the team members and walked us through their solutions. Each location had a different set of physical challenges that each group had to deal with. After each presentation the floor was opened up for questions from other students.

Many of their ideas from the groups seemed to focus on land use patterns and social activies on the streets. They created green zones, mixed-use, and ped/bike friendly streets. They also seemed to create streets that were destinations where you could patronize local businesses, take advantage of a community garden or places to hang out with friends to sit, rest, or linger. Moving quickly through the streets was not a goal of the students, which would be for a transportation planner. The student’s ideas expressed a longing for a sense of community.

When some says they want a “nice street” that can mean many different things. This kind of exercise helps participants use specific adjectives and references which allows the facilitator(s) to understand the needs, desires and habits of individuals who live in a community. In this case, the Occidental College Students envisioned different streets than the Boulevards that currently cross Northeast Los Angeles. Their ides aren’t that different than advocacy efforts underway for North Figueroa Street by a group of community activists and businesses. Residents and students are ready for change, is Los Angeles?

Lawmaker insists California bullet train plan complies with law


Lawmaker insists California bullet train plan complies with law
December 1, 2011 | 2:53 pm
Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/12/galgiani-california-high-speed-train-funding-analysis-.html

California high-speed train
An Assembly member who strongly supports the California high-speed rail project on Thursday criticized a new state report that questions the legality of building the first leg of the 520-mile system in the Central Valley.

Cathleen Galgiani, a Stockton-area Democrat and author of the successful ballot proposition that authorized the bullet train, attacked the Legislative Analyst’s Office, which she called “unqualified to provide a comprehensive analysis of this complex project, which the state has been working on for 15 years.”

The analyst’s office--an arm of the Legislature that researches policy and the use of state funds--issued a report earlier this week. It concluded that the project’s most recent funding plan does not comply with the 2008 voter-approved measure, Proposition 1A, because high-speed trains will not initially run on the first stretch of track to be built next year between Merced and Bakersfield.

Before state bond financing can be requested for the project, the report states, rail officials must identify a segment that can be used by bullet trains. Until more funding can be secured, the high-speed rail agency wants to run conventional Amtrak trains on the initial 130-mile leg.

Defending the legality of the plan, Galgiani said the project will take a blended approach that will first provide slower-speed passenger service between population centers, with high-speed rail service coming later. “Their report is fraught with inaccurate and misleading information, irrational opinions and faulty conclusions,” Galgiani said. “It raises the question of whose agenda they are promoting.”

Galgiani said she is suspicious about the timing of the analyst’s report, noting that it comes after the Central Valley segment was selected over routes in the Bay Area and the Los Angeles Basin. Critics, including some legislators, have said those alternatives are better than the Central Valley.

Galgiani said the most appropriate and qualified body to assess the project is its own peer review panel, which was approved by the Legislature and the voters.

However, during an Assembly hearing earlier this week, Will Kempton, who heads the peer review group, testified that, like the legislative analyst, he and other panelists are concerned about whether the Central Valley segment complies with Proposition 1A.

He also said that the Bay Area and Los Angeles Basin alternatives might be more cost effective than the Central Valley route if the entire high-speed rail system is not built. Kempton added that a better initial investment might be a route between Bakersfield and the San Fernando Valley, which would link two urbanized areas.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

A bullet train to nowhere?

SACRAMENTO
November 29, 2011 10:03pm

• New analysis questions if it will ever be built

• ‘The draft business plan … portrays the project more favorably than may be warranted’

Source: http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=19883

The initial segment of the proposed California high-speed passenger train system – from south of Merced to north of Bakersfield in the Central Valley – may be the only part of the vaunted system that’s ever built, warns a new report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The report says that the flow of federal funds has been stopped by Congress and that “it appears doubtful that substantial additional federal support will be forthcoming anytime soon.”

This makes it “increasingly likely” that the Central Valley segment – too short for high-speed trains – “may be all that is ever built,” the report says.

There remain a number of unanswered technical questions regarding whether the segment may be used to improve the existing San Joaquin Amtrak service, as suggested in the business plan, the report says.

The LAO report also questions fundamentals of the recently released draft business plan.

“Our preliminary review of the economic analysis in the draft business plan is that it may be incomplete and imbalanced, and therefore portrays the project more favorably than may be warranted. For example, the plan does not estimate economic loses from negative impacts to business from right-of-way acquisition and rail construction activities or from increases in urban traffic congestion around train stations,” it says.

It also faults another aspect of the high-speed rail’s draft business plan – how many people would ride the trains and how the cost of the system might compare with the costs of more highway and airport capacity.

“The draft business plan compares the estimated $99 billion to $118 billion cost of constructing high-speed rail with an estimated $170 billion cost of adding equivalent capacity to airports and highways. This comparison is very problematic because $170 billion is not what the state would otherwise spend to address the growth in inter-city transportation demand. The HSRA (High-Speed Rail Authority) estimates that the high-speed train system would have the capacity to carry 116 million passengers per year but their highest forecasted ridership is significantly less than that amount—44 million rides per year (roughly 40 percent less than capacity),” the report says.

The report has been presented to the California Assembly Transportation Committee.

Can Someone Please Loan California $98 Billion So We Can Have Our High-Speed Rail System? Thanks.



Source: http://laist.com/2011/11/30/california_high_speed_rail_system_analysis.php

"Originally, the price tag for the shiny new rail system totaled $43 billion and was slated for completion in 2020. Now, the estimate has exploded to an uncertain $98 billion; the completion date has been postponed just a few years to 2034 (if ever)."


Image caption: Mission Bay - An illustration of a high-speed train northbound along I-5 in adjacent to the existing railroad right-of-way. Image via Facebook.

Californians have had their fingers, toes and eyes crossed for a high-speed rail system that connects NorCal to SoCal, promising a more convenient and efficient means to travel the Golden State without ever preparing for take off. But recent news from the state's legislative analyst indicates that this transportation dream may be merely that - a dream.

The analyst says that the California High-Speed Rail Authority's plan for the $98 billion system does not comply with certain parts of the 2008 ballot measure approved by voters to provide seed money for the project.

Huffington Post says that "Proposition 1A required rail officials to identify all sources of committed funds for a usable segment of the line and to clear all environmental requirements before the $9 billion in bonds could be sold." The Authority's latest proposal aims to install a 130-mile stretch of track from Merced to Bakersfield. Serving as a test track for 220mph (!!!) trains, the stretch could also be used by existing Amtrak routes until the high-speed rail's next segment is completed.

However, the Legislative Analyst's Office issued a report on Tuesday claiming that the Central Valley stretch would not be a stand-alone operating segment of the high-speed rail, as outlined in Proposition 1A.

The analyst's office dropped another bomb on the plan, saying the 130-mile stretch "may be all that is ever built." Citing abating federal funding and speculative financing for many of the rail plans, the report said, "It is highly uncertain if funding to complete the high-speed rail system will ever materialize."

On November 22, the California High-Speed Rail Authority announced in a press release that they signed a cooperative agreement with the Federal Railroad Administration that will provide $928 million in federal funding for the construction of the Central Valley segment. The release says that construction will begin in the fall of 2012 in Fresno.

Originally, the price tag for the shiny new rail system totaled $43 billion and was slated for completion in 2020. Now, the estimate has exploded to an uncertain $98 billion; the completion date has been postponed just a few years to 2034 (if ever).

Aside from the escalating budget, the House so kindly passed a spending bill on November 17 that squashed federal funding for the high-speed rail system. California Watch says Republicans want to focus on funding Amtrak's busy Northeast corridor linking Boston, New York and Washington. Oh, it's on, east coast.

Need a little pick-me-up after that sad trombone? Watch Mad Men talk high-speed trains. "America always makes the right investment."
Contact the author of this article or email tips@laist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

New MTA Project Makes Subway Navigation Easier For Hard Of Hearing

New MTA Project Makes Subway Navigation Easier For Hard Of Hearing

By: Kafi Drexel

Source: http://www.ny1.com/content/ny1_living/health/151567/new-mta-project-makes-subway-navigation-easier-for-hard-of-hearing?CFID=111186&CFTOKEN=22893902

New York City is very noisy, making it difficult for those with hearing problems to get around. But there is a high-tech solution being tested in the subway system that could be a major game changer for those with hearing aids. NY1's Health reporter Kafi Drexel filed the following report.

Directions from a station agent used to be nearly impossible to understand for 17-year-old Arielle Schacter, who has severe hearing loss.

"It would be like I knew sound was happening but it's like a silent movie where everything's going on and you don't understand it, except when someone gives you a little bit of a hint," Arielle says.

That silent world is now becoming audible, with the introduction of a device called the "hearing loop" into more public spaces throughout the city.

In large part due to the work of Arielle's mother, Janice Shachter Lintz, who runs the advocacy group Hearing Access Program, it is in more than 400 subway booths around the city.

"We know there are 36 million people with some form of hearing loss and we know that number is growing," says Lintz.

The technology, known as an induction loop, is already common in some European countries. The loops, placed around the perimeter of a room or window, sends out electromagnetic signals that can jump to a receiver called a telechoil or "t-coil," which is already in most hearing aids or cochlear implants.

When the t-coil is switched on, it picks up only what comes through a microphone or loudspeaker and cancels out the background noise.

The $13.5 million subway hearing loop project is the largest in the country.

"Induction loops were a federal stimulus project. It was a project we were considering and had completely designed, so the project came directly from the federal government," says Marc Bienstock of MTA NYC Transit.

Advocates say the technology is so advanced that the sound can actually come across more clearly than what New Yorkers without any hearing loss might normally hear.

"It's gaining attention now but it's not even new. I seem to recall back 20, 25 years our hearing aids had t-coils on them. You used them for the telephone. Nobody talked about it," says Arlene Romoff of the Hearing Loss Association. "To put this infrastructure in looping systems, where it can actually do some good aside from just hearing on a phone or sitting in a looped room, to finally literally get light shown on this, it's enormous."

LA's subway and train stations were sold as locations for pedestrian malls

The Trouble with Pedestrian Malls
Once popular, these car-free zones are slowly disappearing from the urban landscape.
Tod Newcombe | December 2011

Buffalo’s 25-year-old pedestrian and transit-only mall has a problem: As in so many similar spaces across the country, there just aren’t enough pedestrians. So the city in upstate New York has applied for a federal grant to turn the mall back into a road. Exit people. Enter cars.

Buffalo isn’t the only city to toss in the towel on car-free streets. Sacramento, Calif., which has a shared pedestrian and transit mall that dates back more than 40 years, has recently let cars back onto K Street. In recent years, many mid-sized cities like Eugene, Ore., and Raleigh, N.C., have turned away from pedestrian malls, as have big cities, such as Chicago and Washington, D.C.

America’s first downtown pedestrian mall appeared in Kalamazoo, Mich., in 1959. At their height, more than 200 cities blocked off traffic in prime downtown business districts in hopes that by removing cars and trucks, people would flock to the city and bring life to retail and business districts facing decline.

But many of the pedestrian malls were ill-planned and had little purpose. Because so few people lived downtown, the malls became lifeless after work, attracting crime and loiterers, rather than large crowds. According to some estimates, of all the pedestrian malls that have dotted American cities in past years, fewer than 15 percent remain today.

Not all malls have failed. Denver has a thriving pedestrian mall, as do the smaller cities of Charlottesville, Va., and Burlington, Vt. New York City’s pedestrian mall in Times Square was initially viewed as temporary, but became permanent after it proved popular with pedestrians and successful at cutting Midtown car congestion. Overseas, European cities like Barcelona have had great success with car-free zones.

“I don’t think the idea of separating people from cars in cities is a failed concept,” says Yonah Freemark, who has written extensively about pedestrian malls for various publications. Cities that have growing residential populations in downtown areas as well as hubs of activities can generate the kind of traffic that makes a mall thrive. Cities that lack downtown populations have also found that creating temporary pedestrian places can bring a buzz and excitement that people expect to find when they visit a city. Malls can work, if done the right way, explains Freemark. Just don’t take the cookie-cutter approach to building malls as so many cities have -- with disappointing results.

“Cities that are taking out malls now will rethink their decision 30 years from now,” predicts Freemark. “We have to learn that having cars on all streets is not the right idea for cities.”


This article was printed from:

Jumpstarting the Transit Space Race 2011 Interactive Map

Link:
http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/jumpstarting-the-transit-space-race-2011-interactive-map/#Top



Reconnecting America spent several months in late 2010 with the generous support of the Rockefeller Foundation gathering the most current transit plans available from the 100 largest regions around the country, as well as some known projects from smaller regions. Through this cataloging effort, Reconnecting America found 643 transit projects in 106 regions. Click on a region in the map below to see what projects are in your area. To find more information on each project, visit the linked website or use our project spreadsheet. (Note: These projects were on the books as of December 2010, costs and details for some projects have likely changed)

High-Speed Rail Authority: The Draft 2012 Business Plan and Funding Plan

Link to HRSA's Business and Funding Plan:

http://www.lao.ca.gov/handouts/transportation/2011/HSRA_Business_Funding_plan_11_29_11.pdf