|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 12, 2010 11:27:37 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by erict on Nov 12, 2010 15:15:23 GMT -8
Vermont Ave would be the next one up for a better BRT lane, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2010 9:28:52 GMT -8
Got to love West LA...or not: Source: la.streetsblog.org/2010/11/18/nimbys-in-westwood-threaten-wilshire-brt-project-west-of-beverly-hills/NIMBY’s in Westwood Threaten Wilshire BRT Project West of Beverly Hills by Damien Newton on November 18, 2010 Residents along this stretch of Wilshire want this portion of the BRT project removed. With the support of their County Supervisor and City Councilman, they may get their way. Westsiders like to complain that for years their part of the city has been left out when it comes to transit expansion. Now that Metro is proposing three high-profile transit projects, a rampant strain of NIMBYism is endangering all three in one form or another. The most recent example is the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)project. At yesterday’s meeting of the Metro Board Planning and Programming Committee, County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and Mayoral Appointee Richard Katz grilled staff on whether the one mile stretch of Wilshire Boulevard from Selby Avenue to Comstock Avenue needs to be a part of the project or could be exempted from the project altogether. Currently, the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project, proposes to install rush hour bus lanes in the curb lane of 8.7 miles of Wilshire Boulevard, mostly in the city of Los Angeles. Urging the Board Members on are a group of residents who live along that corridor who have paid for their own traffic study that shows, surprise surprise, that the BRT project would do more harm than good for traffic patterns. What a shocking development, that a study paid for by a community trying to obstruct a project for well over a decade shows that the project does more harm than good. Ultimately, the committee moved the BRT study and Locally Preferred Alternative recommendation to be considered by the full Metro Board at their December 9 meeting. However, they added the caveat that staff come back with more information about the impact of removing the so-called Condo Canyon corridor between Selby and Comstock at the Board Meeting. During the public comment period for the project this summer, the City Councilman for the area, Paul Koretz, wrote a letter asking that this same stretch be exempted from the BRT project because of the “unique character” of this stretch of Wilshire. However, if removing the project was a non-starter with staff, then he was asking that the curb-cuts and street parking in the area be preserved and that the road undergo a diet to make room for the bus-only lanes. No, he didn’t use the words “Road Diet.” You can read his full comments, here. From left, Richard Katz; Mitch Englander, Chief of Staff to Councilman Greig Smith; Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, and Councilman Greig Smith. Photo:My Daily Find. While Koretz clearly didn’t get an elimination of the project in the Condo Canyon, the bump outs and street parking will be preserved if the project moves forward. USC News website Neon Tommy quotes Yaroslavsky questioning the entire project on the basis that car drivers might be mad that buses are wizzing past them while they stew in congestion of their own making, especially in the Condo Canyon section where the rush hour lane configuration will now be narrowed from three lanes to two lanes. “Omniscience is a very heavy burden to bear, but sometimes you just have to open your eyes to see what’s good for everyone,” Yaroslavsky said Wednesday at a meeting of Metro’s planning committee. “What I fear and what the Bus Riders’ Union should fear is that we introduce a project that is dead on arrival, and we become the laughingstock of the region and this board has to retrench. We don’t want to win the battle and lose the war.” You see what happened there? Residents lobbied Koretz’s office to preserve their parking and bulb outs. The Councilman, being pretty good at his job, lobbied for and won the day. Rather than savor that victory, they ran to Yaroslavsky and complained that the narrowed stretch of road would be un-passable and create a bad relationship between bus riders and car drivers so the area should be exempted. Diabolical. The question of whether or not the Bus Rapid Transit project is worth doing in the Comstock to Selby corridor, or anywhere in the city, comes down to whether you believe the staff report and supporting environmental documents. The Source summarized them in their write-up of the staff recommendations, but here are some highlights: Staff estimates that 12 to 17 minutes will be shaved off the trip along the bus lanes and that up to 10 percent of motorists could shift to bus use in coming years. The bus lane, too, should help people using the future Westside Subway Extension reach destinations between rail stations more quickly. Wilshire is the busiest bus corridor in L.A. County. The project is estimated to cost an estimated $31 million with about $23 million coming from a “Very Small Starts” grant from the Federal Transit Administration. The project could be complete by mid-2012. The number of people using curb lanes in private vehicles at this time is at about 1,000 people an hour com compared 1,500 or so on Metro buses (although that includes the soon-to-be-eliminated 920 line). The bus lanes could increase that number to 1,800 an hour, according to Metro staff. So there’s two issues that the Metro Board Members will have to decide when they debate the Wilshire BRT project, including the Condo Canyon corridor, at their December 9th meeting. The first is whether they believe their staff and the people who put together the environmental documents. If they do, the savings in time and the addition of new riders is a huge boon for the Wilshire Corridor. They estimate that the bus lane will actually move more people than a traditional right-lane along the corridor and in that area. If they believe their staff and consultants, then approving the project should be simple. If they find their staff to be either incompetent or untrustworthy, then there is a second issue to consider. Is the overall value, considering the good and bad, worth $8 million. If the project is altered in a way that wasn’t studied, the $23 million of the $31 million that the federal government was willing to pay could vanish. A third question, and a more theoretical one for the Board and the entire Westside, is how much power are they willing to give residents to stop or dilute programs that will reduce traffic on their streets. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 18, 2010 10:39:28 GMT -8
So Yaroslavsky's position is thusly summerized: The bus lane will be too successful at moving people and thus create conflict with car drivers who will be envious of the speed at which the bus is moving.
Umm... isn't that the entire point of BRT? The same reason why Yaroslavsky batted down the NIMBY on Expo and told them to go pound sand?
WTF is wrong with this guy? We give him credit for pushing thru Expo despite irrational NIMBY opposition but here he does a complete flip flop and obstruct the BRT project for the same exact reason he supported Expo?
|
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 18, 2010 10:57:58 GMT -8
Please go to Metro's website for Wilshire BRT and send them a message of support. www.metro.net/projects/wilshire/wilshire-comment-form/This is what I wrote: I want to express my support for the Wilshire BRT project and agree with the findings in the EIR report that this transit project will provide significant improvements to transit time on the Wilshire Corridor. With regards to the Westood section of the project, I support the full implementation of the project between Selby Avenue and Comstock Avenue as out lined in the EIR. The EIR clearly demonstrated a need for the exclusive rush hour bus lane in this stretch of Wilshire and all road users will benefit from improved transit time as a result. Thank you |
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Nov 18, 2010 12:13:02 GMT -8
Hopefully this isn't being designed as a "we can't get the Purple Line to Santa Monica but this'll be just as good" consolation prize.
Like the Orange Line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Nov 18, 2010 12:21:43 GMT -8
So Yaroslavsky's position is thusly summerized: The bus lane will be too successful at moving people and thus create conflict with car drivers who will be envious of the speed at which the bus is moving. This is why the previous Wilshire bus only lanes in West Los Angeles lasted about 30 minutes before the start of the successful lobbying effort to have them repealed. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2010 13:00:22 GMT -8
Hopefully this isn't being designed as a "we can't get the Purple Line to Santa Monica but this'll be just as good" consolation prize. Like the Orange Line. Nope, surprised this is coming from a transit board. We all know that Measure R has restricted the Purple Line to Westwood. In terms of consolation prize, isn't that the Expo Line? The bus only lanes do not even enter Santa Monica, so I don't even see what comparison you are getting at. World-class cities need both bus only lanes and subways/light rail. And a bus only lane on the busiest corridor in the nation makes tons of sense; aside from a subway line. I'm surprised people are thinking that Metro is dumb for putting a bus only lane in an area a subway is coming. It's like we build carpool lanes but yet don't remove an auxiliary lane (which is illegal). Or we add a subway and don't remove a car lane. Having both a subway and bus only lane is about growth, which is needed on the busiest corridor in the nation..Wilshire Boulevard. |
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Nov 18, 2010 17:31:37 GMT -8
Nope, surprised this is coming from a transit board. We all know that Measure R has restricted the Purple Line to Westwood. In terms of consolation prize, isn't that the Expo Line? The bus only lanes do not even enter Santa Monica, so I don't even see what comparison you are getting at. World-class cities need both bus only lanes and subways/light rail. And a bus only lane on the busiest corridor in the nation makes tons of sense; aside from a subway line. I'm surprised people are thinking that Metro is dumb for putting a bus only lane in an area a subway is coming. It's like we build carpool lanes but yet don't remove an auxiliary lane (which is illegal). Or we add a subway and don't remove a car lane. Having both a subway and bus only lane is about growth, which is needed on the busiest corridor in the nation..Wilshire Boulevard. Oh, I'm not disagreeing with the BRT at all. I agree 100% that the more options, the better aloing Wilshire - especially since you have to consider the possibility of overcrowding on the Purple Line. But when the time comes to extend the Purple Line past the hospital campus (which I know is way way WAY off in the future) - I can see someone saying: "What for? We already have a dedicated bus line on Wilshire anyway that goes to the border of Santa Monica. Extending the subway will just be a waste of time and money." |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2010 18:04:36 GMT -8
But when the time comes to extend the Purple Line past the hospital campus (which I know is way way WAY off in the future) - I can see someone saying: "What for? We already have a dedicated bus line on Wilshire anyway that goes to the border of Santa Monica. Extending the subway will just be a waste of time and money." We will have 5 freeway lanes in each direction on the 405 going through the Sepulveda pass.....why can't we add another? We keep adding freeway lanes....nobody says "but we already have 5 lanes". Santa Monica is very pro-subway...they'll push for it. That's not a worry. We need to focus on public transportation improvements...otherwise, we keep spending away money on the single automobile enhancements which do nothing! |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2010 21:44:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Dec 7, 2010 10:17:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Dec 7, 2010 10:25:55 GMT -8
Brentwood originally successfully lobbied to get rid of the original Wilshire bus-only lanes that lasted about 30 seconds.
There is real danger this project will only be east of La Cienega.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Dec 9, 2010 13:58:01 GMT -8
Bus-only lane project passes with exemption granted to Condo Canyon. Via twitter @lastreetsblog: "Bus-only passes with Comstock/Selby removed and no objections. AMAZING. : twitter.com/lastreetsblog |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Dec 9, 2010 17:50:18 GMT -8
This is disappointing
|
|
elray
Junior Member
Posts: 84
|
Post by elray on Dec 11, 2010 15:36:40 GMT -8
Disappointing, but not surprising. We get what we deserve when "we" keep guys like Yaroslavsky in office - he's not all bad, but his what, 40-year reign means he owes everybody in the machine. Not the biggest loss either. The BH segment is more important, in my opinion, and I guess there's reasonable chance that will happen? |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jan 12, 2011 22:03:53 GMT -8
Well...the Wilshire BRT is being disassembled even more. Via twitter: "RT @lastreetsblog #WilshireBRT Rosendahl moves motion to exclude Westside from bus-only lanes. Part of me wants @metrolosangeles to give up on the Westside. To read more on what happened to the Wilshire BRT project (if it will ever happen at this point), read more tweets here: twitter.com/#!/lastreetsblog |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 13, 2011 9:45:07 GMT -8
Well...the Wilshire BRT is being disassembled even more. Via twitter: "RT @lastreetsblog #WilshireBRT Rosendahl moves motion to exclude Westside from bus-only lanes. Part of me wants @metrolosangeles to give up on the Westside. To read more on what happened to the Wilshire BRT project (if it will ever happen at this point), read more tweets here: twitter.com/#!/lastreetsblog Not necessarily. Only the MTA Board can vote to change the project. The LA City Council can only give recommendations similar to how the Beverly Hills City Council can give recommendations only on the Purple Line. They have no authority, although they certainly have some influence. The project should still go forward in total. A public transit project should not have to get approval from every neighborhood and government organization in LA County before moving forward. Nothing is going to get built this way. |
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jan 14, 2011 4:49:02 GMT -8
Metro will probably cancel Line 720 before the first lane will be restriped.
|
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jan 14, 2011 10:01:38 GMT -8
I would end the bus lane just before Beverly Hills and let the Westside sit in it's traffic jams, and then bring the rest of the money to the Eastside (I know, not how things work). Vermont Ave. would be happy to have the bus only lane funding, since the street is half occupied by buses already.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Jan 18, 2011 10:10:34 GMT -8
Vermont should be the next BRT as a Vermont Ave. rail line is considered "Tier 2" in the long-range transportation plan, and a bus-only lane will be very helpful to that corridor in the meantime.
|
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 15, 2011 19:05:33 GMT -8
Can anyone make heads or tails of this KPCC story? www.scpr.org/news/2011/05/15/bus-only-lanes-wilshire-move-toward-approval/?c=69774Bus-only lanes on Wilshire move toward approval1:00 p.m. | KPCC Wire Services
Proposed bus-only lanes along Wilshire Boulevard will move forward, but with some chunks of it removed, if a Metropolitan Transportation Authority committee approves a staff recommendation next week.
Under the plan, parking spaces would be converted to bus-only lanes during rush hours along 9.9 miles of Wilshire Boulevard. But key sections of the cross-town artery, including Beverly Hills, the "condo canyon" area in Westwood, and Santa Monica, would be omitted under the current plan.
Metro staff say the express and local routes along Wilshire are the heaviest-used buses in Los Angeles County, with 80,000 boardings per weekday.
Metro plans to eliminate curbside parking during rush hours, repave and widen curb lanes to better handle heavy buses, and modify traffic signals to favor buses. About $31.5 million has been set aside for the "bus rapid transit" project.
Metro staff has recommended that the MTA board reject a request from the Los Angeles city council to limit the bus-only lanes to the 5.4 miles of Wilshire east of Beverly Hills. Metro staff said the benefits to Brentwood
residents would be outweighed by delays imposed on bus patrons, and snarled Wilshire Boulevard traffic.
The proposed project will go before an MTA board committee next Wednesday. If built, the bus lanes would parallel the Wilshire Boulevard subway, which will not open until at least 2022 under current construction
plans.
For an even more head-scratching reprint, here's the Beverly Hills Patch. I mean "spared"? Really?
Beverly Hills Spared From Metro Bus Project -- A proposal to create bus-only lanes on Wilshire Boulevard would avoid the city.By Marie Cunningham | Email the author | 2:16pm Wilshire Boulevard will lose some of its street parking to bus-only lanes if a Metropolitan Transportation Authority committee approves a staff recommendation next week, but Beverly Hills, Santa Monica and a section of Westwood would be omitted from the plan.
Under the proposal, curbside parking would be converted to bus and right-turn only lanes during weekday rush hour (7-9 a.m. and 4-7 p.m.) along 9.6 miles of the cross-town artery. The MTA also plans to repave and widen curb lanes to better handle buses, and modify traffic signals to favor buses.
Known as the “Bus Rapid Transit” project, the undertaking is set to cost about $31.5 million and will begin at Valencia Street (slightly west of the I-110 Freeway) and end at the Santa Monica city line at Centinela Avenue.
Metro staffers say the express and local routes along Wilshire that would be affected by the project are the heaviest-used buses in Los Angeles County, with 80,000 boardings per weekday.
The proposal will go before an MTA board committee next Wednesday. If built, the bus lanes would parallel the planned Westside Subway Extension, which is slated to run primarily along Wilshire as an extension of Metro’s Purple Line. Under current construction plans, the subway would not be open until at least 2022.
Will you be affected by Wilshire Boulevard construction if curbside parking is converted to bus-only lanes? Do you think the project is a good idea? Tell us in the comments. I sent the author an email explaining that, no, there isn't any parking during rush hour to begin with, so nothing's change on that front. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 15, 2011 23:17:14 GMT -8
These articles are using the fear of "losing rush hour parking" to get people upset about the bus only lane proposal. The power of the single passenger automobile still runs (or ruins?) this city...........
Plus, you are right carter, how is there a loss of rush hour parking ban when rush hour parking is already banned???
|
|
|
|
Post by rayinla on Jun 7, 2011 14:31:17 GMT -8
I see from Bart's TTC letter that the Transportation Committee is meeting on this tomorrow afternoon. I sent out the following emails to all the committee members (a fax would probably be more meaningful but I didn't see any fax numbers listed on the Council webpage.)
[Councilmember]
City of Los Angeles
Re: Council File 11-0695 – Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project
[Councilmember]:
I am writing you regarding Council File 11-0695, the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project. Every weekday, I take Metro Rapid 720 from my home in Councilmember LaBonge’s district to my workplace in Councilmember Rosendahl's district (11800 Wilshire Blvd. in Brentwood). I have a deep, personal interest in this very important transportation project and therefore urge you to vote for Option A, the FULL 8.7 miles of bus lanes.
While the so-called “condo corridor” is not as congested as the rest of Wilshire Blvd., it would be a mischaracterization to call it “free flowing” and it should be included in the project.
Absolutely, the afternoon and evening traffic eastbound on Wilshire west of the 405 is extremely congested (particularly now that the Sunset Blvd bridge over the 405 is being rebuilt). Traffic currently backs up all the way to Bundy and on more than one occasion I have been able to walk to the Veterans Administration rapid stop from Barrington FASTER than the bus. (Currently I often walk past up to six buses stuck in traffic between Westgate and Barrington, a distance of only three blocks.) That said, inclusion of the Brentwood section of the project may make traffic worse for individual drivers but it would dramatically improve the situation for the greater number of passengers on the bus.
I would like to point out that in both of the foregoing circumstances, drivers of individual vehicles have the option of taking alternative routes. I, on the other hand, am stuck with the bus route as it exists.
Best regards.
Yours truly,
Ray Simmons
[address]
|
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jun 8, 2011 13:33:15 GMT -8
Anyone following the committee meeting live?
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jun 8, 2011 14:36:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jun 14, 2011 10:44:15 GMT -8
The fun is starting folks for the Wilshire bus lanes at the LA City Council. Follow all the action on Twitter: twitter.com/lastreetsblog |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jun 14, 2011 12:44:11 GMT -8
Here's the result: LA City Council approves 7.7 miles of bus-only lanes on Wilshire, "urges" completion of Condo Canyon segment. Rosendahl was the lone dissenter. 11-1 approval.
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Jun 14, 2011 12:44:38 GMT -8
After much amending, Alternative A-1, the 7.7 mile Alternative excluding Condo Canyon has been approved by the City Council but they made a strong suggestion that the Metro Board look again at the 8.7 mile Alternative A
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Jun 14, 2011 12:45:07 GMT -8
Jinx
|
|
