L.A. Bicycle Master Plan Meeting?
Thread started by
ubrayj02 at 01.23.08 - 6:25 pm
The Los Angeles DOT is holding meetings with "the public" regarding a NEW Bicycle Master Plan for the city.
The LADOT site says:
Bicycle Plan
"Check this site for ongoing updates and opportunities to provide input to the City of Los Angeles' new Bicycle Plan. Public meetings are anticipated to begin in January/February 2008."
But It's Jan of 2008 and there is no information posted! WTF?
When will these "public" meetings be held?
You can email Michelle Mowry about this at: Michelle.Mowery@lacity.org
reply
Michelle Mowery is PURE EVIL
EMAIL HER - don't let her off the hook!!
T REX01.23.08 - 7:33 pm
reply
Why all the hatred?
I had note about this emailed me today by a staff member of my City Councilman.
Down below the note was a forwarded message from Michelle saying the site would be updated today 1/23/08. It hasn't be updated yet, but today's still the 23rd. And if it doesn't happen tomorrow, it's a day late. Big deal
Until that update happens, here's the dates of the meetings.
Central/South Los Angeles
Date: Saturday February 16, 2008
Location: Expo Center Swim Stadium-Community Room
Address: 3980 S. Menlo Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90037
Time: 10am-12pm
West Los Angeles
Date: Wednesday February 20, 2008
Location: Felicia Mahood Multi Purpose Center
Address: 11338 Santa Monica Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90037
Time: 6:30pm-8:30pm
Valley Area
Date: Wednesday February 27, 2008
Location: Marvin Braude-San Fernando Constituent Services Center,
Conference Room 1B
Address: 6262 Van Nuys Blvd, Van Nuys, CA 91401
Time: 6:30pm-8:30pm
Harbor Area
Date: Saturday March 1, 2008
Location: Banning's Landing Community Center
Address: 100 E. Water Street, Wilmington, CA 90744
10:00am-12:00pm
chunk01.23.08 - 8:56 pm
reply
The hatred of MM is firmly rooted in her consistent opposition to real change. So, yes, it has little to do with this, but it's fair.
T REX01.23.08 - 9:04 pm
reply
Define real change please...
chunk01.23.08 - 9:05 pm
reply
Real change is like if I give you a dollar and you give me 3 quarters, 2 nickels, a dime and 5 pennies.
Fake change is if you give me back 21 wooden nickels.
T REX01.23.08 - 9:38 pm
reply
speaking of wooden nickels, MASTER PLAN = 1 WOODEN NICKEL <-- THATS HOW VALUABLE THE MASTER PLAN IS.
eddieboyinla01.23.08 - 9:41 pm
reply
OK... but you still haven't given a legit answer. Anything specific and concrete you care to mention?
chunk01.23.08 - 10:42 pm
reply
Mowry presumably is supposed to work on our behalf. Can you mention any specific achievements? If not then she is benign at best.
T REX01.23.08 - 11:03 pm
reply
Awesome! Someone emailed me the .pdf files announcing these meetings.
You can download them here:
http://www.bikeoven.com/logos/final%20meeting%20notice%20signs%20jan%2022%202008.pdf
and
http://www.bikeoven.com/logos/Final%20Press%20Release%20January%2022,%202008.pdf
They are both .pdf files, so you know, be ready to read .pdf files.
About Michelle Mowry ... what can you do if you are the bicycle lady at the Los Angeles DOT? Not much.
She tries, but she's not going to get very far in a department (and a City) that doesn't give two whits for anything that is not automobile centric.
Well, she gets paid to work, and sometimes stuff gets done and sometimes it doesn't. Like those U-shaped bicycle racks they finally installed in L.A. It only took four years to get them out of the warehouse in Van Nuys where they were chilling.
ubrayj0201.23.08 - 11:23 pm
reply
Why not expect more? How is it the racks sat in storage for so long, and then with a little negative attention they get placed? It would seem that Mowry could have done this earlier. Afterall, it is her job, who else should be accountable for such absolute ineffectiveness.
I'm sorry her job is hard, maybe she should quit. She has reputation of political assassination and obstruction.
T REX01.23.08 - 11:52 pm
reply
"Storm the Bastille" - We ride, we participate and we do our best to ensure that the Bicycle Master Plan is a document that is useful, meaningful and full of policies and standards that reflect OUR input.
It is up to us. Join us as we converge from around the city and fight for Bicycle Boulevards, Sharrows, street maintenance standards, wayfinding, street design that makes sense...
http://midnightridazz.com/viewStory.php?storyId=949
SoapBoxLA01.24.08 - 12:53 am
reply
Found this on another Bike site. Its the Bike Path Design and Planning section of the Highway Design Manual.
Just thought i'd share:
Bike Pathway Design
stevo401.24.08 - 6:57 am
reply
How will North East and East L.A. be able to input when there isn't even a dog and pony show meeting scheduled in our area?
Ed Reyes has introduced several pro-bicycling motions in council, and he's shown at a few pro-bicycling planing events - but no meeting in his district? WTF?
I think Reyes' office is going to hear from me about this. His District stands to gain a lot from improving conditions for bicycles, yet it is ignored by the city when it comes time to prep the City's documents for bicycle project related money? That ain't right.
Oh, and a pretty link to info about the Master Plan:
http://www.altaplanning.com/labikeplan/Main.html
ubrayj0201.24.08 - 7:37 am
reply
There are 15 city council districts in Los Angeles and four scheduled meetings.
Why do you feel so slighted?
The closest meeting to me isn't anywhere close to where I live but I'm not complaining but I'll buck up and pedal an extra few miles. I'm just happy to get the opportunity to attend.
The last time I attended one of these, I really felt like the cyclists in attendance were really shooting themselves in the foot.
Some folks talked about the needs for bike lanes, others talked about sharrows while some people took the stand asking for bigger sidewalks and buildings to be pushed back so that bikes could travel easier on the sidewalk.
If a bicycle is deemed a vehicle with equal rights as autos and whatnot then why the need to hassle the city with demands for better sidewalks?
chunk01.24.08 - 11:56 am
reply
Was everybody supposed to get together beforehand and agree on the One True Opinion to express at the meeting?
PC01.24.08 - 12:02 pm
reply
chunk
I call bullshit. How much more submissive in attitude can you get:
1) Michelle Mowry, she has a tough job
2) A city of 3 million only sets up 4 meetings for community outreach to update a major element of it's transportation plan, and that's plenty
3) Cyclists shoot themselves in the foot by asking for sidewalk widening, the cyclists are responsible for their own plight.
Buck up kid, this is representative government - THEY WORK FOR US, and they damn well better do a lot for us.
T REX01.24.08 - 12:06 pm
reply
On December 19, 2007 the LACity Council approved motion 07-3494 and identified District 1 as the "pilot project" area for the BMPlan along with public participation in District 1.
Hence the "Hey, what about District 1?"
12-19-07 - This day's Council session - Reyes Mover 2007/Rosendahl - Motion -
That the Council instruct the Planning Department, in collaboration with LADOT, and in consultation with Council District 1, on the following bicycling and land use policy directives, as part of the new bicycle Plan, a section of the Transportation Element of the General Plan, that is currently being prepared:
1. Identify Council District 1 as a pilot project to implement the bicycle improvements enumerated in the text of the Motion.
2. Plan a public workshop in Council District 1 in early 2008 to gather input from residents, bicyclists, businesses, and all other stakeholders to map out where the above mentioned bicycle improvements would work in their communities. The workshops should be accessible to people of all ethnic backgrounds and abilities.
3. The inclusion of street designations for bicycling within Community Plans.
SoapBoxLA
01.24.08 - 12:09 pm
reply
T Rex-
You're making less sense than apparently I am.
Am I really grating your cheese that bad?
LA proper = 3 million people.
On average 1.6 percent of folks in the US commute by bicycle.
For LA that works out to about 48,000
And out of that number how many people are actively (and by actively I mean not showing up once a month to drink beer and run red lights) trying to make LA a better place to bike?
Maybe 2,000?
Four scheduled meetings is plenty.
Also, I'm very aware that cyclists are responsible for "their own plight" as you said. I'm also aware that riding on the sidewalk is stupid and dangerous and when folks ask for bigger sidewalks, it undermines the folks asking for bike lanes.
I've been regularly commuting by bike since 1994 (since 1999 here in LA) and maybe I'm in the minority but I've never found getting around town by bike to be the terrifying experience a lot of people make it out to be and the various commutes I've had have taken me to all parts of town.
chunk01.24.08 - 12:36 pm
reply
Chunk,
I would suggest that we can never have enough public participation. We lead the nation in gridlock. Our streets are poorly maintained. Our Planning and Land Use policies are in sore need of revision. Our entire paradigm of community is seriously out of whack and the BMP is just the tip of the iceberg.
Engaging the community, educating the community, empowering the community, invigorating the community, simply creating community; these are all great goals and are byproduct of effective outreach and workshops.
Four workshops is the minimum required according to the contract. How long do we accept the minimum from the Departments that serve the City of Los Angeles.
Surely you're not arguing for the minimum? Is it beyond us to raise the standard and fight to make this a better place to walk, to ride, to live?
This is a great opportunity for us to codify a standard that is inspirational. I think we aspire for a better LA. I know I do!
SoapBoxLA01.24.08 - 12:50 pm
reply
btw, The opportunity for education runs both directions.
At a recent community transportation event, a member of the public asked an LADOT Traffic Engineer about "Complete Streets" funding.
The Traffic Engineer was unfamiliar with the concept of "Complete Streets," nevermind the traffic engineering ramifications of a "routine accommodations" approach to our communities.
At another meeting, a Senior Traffic Engineer was presented with the concept of Bike Boxes. He said he'd never heard of such a thing. When he was shown pictures he said "That looks like Europe or something!" In the sense that West Hollywood has a "European flair" that's true but when he learned that the bike boxes are already in use in WeHo he said "We don't take direction from small communities."
Apparently they don't take direction from anyone. We need to change that.
If you care about our communities, now is our chance!
See you on the streets!
SoapBoxLA01.24.08 - 1:13 pm
reply
bicycle riders asking for wider sidewalks????????
sounds like the "master" plan is set up to cause us (bicycle riders) to ask for wider sidewalks. Who knows what these "shakers" are really about??? I DO!!! TO WIT...they drive big cars, they use a lot of florescent lights, (small wonder), Witch is not their choice, but some OTHER DEPARTMENTS dream of reducing thee: Carbon Footprint. we should get funding ourselves, Step up to the plate, identify danger spots, then implement corrective action, all co-signed be our FUCKED UP city of Los Angeles.
I SAT IN A MEETING IN PASADENA TILL 2 AM, (SURE THEY COLLECTED THOSE HOURS ON THEIR PAYCHECK), AND TALKED ABOUT KILLING THE PELATON <---SPELLED RIGHT???...by "no bikes more than 1 abreast ON all pasadena city streets" imagine the electrical usage that night? Don't forget the a/c was on the whole time, FULL BLAST, it was fucking cold!
By the way I KNOW THAT SOME ASSHOLE is going to say that i did a miss quote above, WELL DONT FIGHT ME!!! FIGHT FOR CHANGE, WHEN WE FIGHT, THE MAN IS HAPPY!!
eddieboyinla01.24.08 - 1:25 pm
reply
chunk,
I was sarcastic about cyclists being responsible for their own plight. Lazy engineers, AAA, car lobbyists, and an overzealous car mono culture are responsible for the cyclist's plight.
There are good reasons why widening sidewalks is positive for cyclists. It creates a more walkable environment which will indirectly enhance bikeability. It leaves more room for cyclists to lock their steeds. Finally, it acts as a traffic calming by narrowing the street. Studies show speed of traffic is the most significant factor in determining street safety for bikes AND pedestrians.
Next time I'll put the little sarcasm tags.
T REX01.24.08 - 1:46 pm
reply
It creates a more walkable environment which will indirectly enhance bikeability.
eddieboyinla01.24.08 - 1:49 pm
reply
I'm no traffic engineer but there's really never been a time in my life when I've thought, "Geez, I'd really walk more if only the sidewalks were wider." I think the bigger obstacle to walk ability in LA isn't the sidewalks but the distance between A and B. I actually walk around my neighborhood quite a bit and have never found the lack of sidewalk space to be an issue.
Traffic calming is nice and all but how calm can the traffic be when there's no place for it to go?
Eddieboyinla- I trust you post your messages from your solar powered computer.
By the way, the Peloton at the Rose Bowl is pretty whack and is something that needed regulation. Unfortunately the Pasadena City Council didn't exactly go about regulating it the best way. I rode the Rose Bowl once and that was all it took to make me a firm believer in the Tuesday night crits in Long Beach organized by CBR.
Soapbox- Four meetings might be the minimum but they sound like plenty to me. Is it really worth the time and resources to hold meetings that nobody attends?
chunk01.24.08 - 2:31 pm
reply
Chunk,
If you are unfamiliar with the engineering options for available for traffic calming, as well as the benefits to our communities (walkable streets, safer neighborhoods, revitalized business districts, cleaner air, etc. ie Good for Cyclists, Good for the Community) then perhaps we need MORE workshops, not less, so we can get you and our transportation experts up to speed.
Your position is untenable. You first argue that the public participation was inappropriate and then that there is so little participation that it is insignificant. Arguing for irrelevance is a tough position to defend and I admire your fortitude but not your position.
I, on the other hand, will continue to advocate for full access for the public, complete accountability for our City's leadership and a better LA for all. (I do hope you'll join us!)
See you on the streets!
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
George Bernard Shaw
SoapBoxLA01.24.08 - 4:02 pm
reply
-Your position is untenable. You first argue that the public participation was inappropriate and then that there is so little participation that it is insignificant. Arguing for irrelevance is a tough position to defend and I admire your fortitude but not your position.
If I was the one who originally posted the public participation info for all to see, which was sent to me directly by a staff member of my city councilman, then why argue against it?
That makes no sense.
The only thing I tried arguing for was the notion that four meetings were plenty for the amount of people that would actually attend. One of the earlier posters was upset that there wasn't a meeting planned for his district (Council District 1) and that it was unfair.
All I tried to do was point out that 11 out 15 council districts aren't getting a meeting their own and that we should all do our best to buck up and attend the closest one.
When you consider that there are probably more Scientologists than Cyclists in Los Angeles, you've got to understand that you're in a definite minority.
As the info I posted from CICLE says the national average for bike commuters is only 1.6%.
I'm all for LA becoming an even better place to ride but I really think the storm the Bastille attitude is a bit much. Instead of an us against THE MAN approach, I really believe a "what can we do to help?" approach is a much better way to go.
As cush as I imagine working for the city would be, I honestly can't believe that someone would take a post just to act as an oppressor. Renegade LAPD officers excluded.
chunk01.24.08 - 5:10 pm
reply
chunk,
I think it's naive to believe that people don't play politics who work for the city. Civil servants ARE the political class. I've seen professors block programs which would benefit issues they most care about, simply out of spite for a colleague. That's an academic environment, which is less politicized than city gov't.
Anyhoo, I feel that you're assuming that participation in these meetings is a fixed unalterable quantity. This is not so. If the city makes a effort to reach out to communities it can turn out huge numbers. They don't. Somehow the city does not see it as their role to work with the community. Ridiculous.
For an example of what happens when a city does reach out turn to Santa Monica and the LUCE process. There the city has made an effort to reach the community, and they've turned out about 100 people for each of the four community input meetings. This is in a town with a residential population 1/30th of LAs.
Yes, bikers are a smaller constituency, but the point is that the city can greatly influence participation one way or another with very little expenditure of resources.
I'm done. You're entitled to your opinion and I don't feel any of us are being very persuasive.
STOMP!
T REX01.24.08 - 5:58 pm
reply
Chunk, while you're guessing and using a national average number to estimate how many cyclists we have in LA, San Francisco is doing actual counts (counting cyclists and comparing to other periods of time!) and then using that data to evaluate their performance on transportation, engineering, education, advocacy.
Cycling is up 15% in San Francisco and the City is getting behind it.
LA does traffic counts and only counts CARS. We deserve better.
Chigago decided that it would get bike friendly and by 2004 they had installed
more bike racks than any other US city.
We're supposed to get misty eyed with gratitude when the LADOT busts out the 700 bike racks they've had in storage for two years?
LADOT Bikeways does the work they are pushed to do. They do what we inspect, not what we expect.
We have cyclists returning from vacations who send photos of their adventures and we DO get misty eyed looking at the bike friendly communities. (PC, Borfo, Roadblock) Heck, the Salton Sea crew will probably return with pictures that will inspire bikeways improvements in LA.
We ARE in a position to work with the LADOT to improve our communities but it requires a willingness on the part of the LADOT.
Heck, would it be too much to actually count cyclists when doing traffic studies? Would it be too much to adjust the signal loop detectors so that signals routinely recognize us at intersections? Would it be too much to make street maintenance on popular bike routes a priority?
The LADOT Bikeways department has 11 Engineers and 1 Coordinator. What have we accomplished in the last year?
That's a tough question because LA doesn't even keep records. We don't have stats on bikeways improvements, department goals and accomplishments, let alone accidents and cyclist injuries.
New York throws the numbers down and evaluates the City's performance based on facts - numbers, streets, mileage, cyclists - reality.
LA has a long way to go with a lot of room for improvement.
Working together is a two way street and we're here. It's up to the LADOT (and Planning) on whether we're working with or against.
SoapBoxLA01.24.08 - 9:36 pm
reply
I'm on Mowry's email list since she is adamant about everything "going through her." I have never received and email from her unless she replied to an email I sent.
She sent out the BMP Meetings announcement to a selected group. I was not in the selected group. What does this mean to you chunk? Why would Mowry exclude me and some others, who she very well knows want to participate and who do participate? Why is the community that is the most involved in cycling issues excluded from these meetings?
illuminateLA01.24.08 - 10:40 pm
reply
You know, I was wondering: why does the LADOT get to create this urban planning document?
Who asks a structural engineer to design their entire house? Nobody does that unless they want to live in cargo container with a toilet and a flourescent bulb.
People hire specialists in building design - they hire architects to design their homes.
Why do we have a bunch of engineers designing our roads? We need urban planners doing the designing, and taking public comment, damn it!
Engineers do not go to college to train for holding public hearings. They (obviously) hate being at them, and they do a really shitty job of it.
Planners train to do public hearings, they write and read books on public hearings. They have studied urban design for many years.
We need PLANNING in our roadways - not engineering!
Call in the engineers after the public and planning have told them what we want.
When it come to the Bicycle Plan my response is now: DOT, WTF?!
ubrayj0201.25.08 - 6:29 pm
reply
Excellent point!
The Bicycle Master Plan is actually a PLANNING document and falls under the responsibility of the PLANNING Department.
Somehow, years ago, the LADOT has elbowed in and is in complete control of anything bicycle related.
Even the Bicycle Advisory Committee become subsidiary to the LADOT. It advises the City, not the LADOT but no meeting takes place without DOT staff running the meeting. Hmmmm! The public at work. Not!
There are several City Departments with some degree of authority over the streets, their designations, use, design, maintenance, supervision etc. and it would be great if the "City Family" could work together but more often we see witness turf wars between City Gangs that are quite ruthless. Keep in mind, significant money is at play. That's all it takes.
SoapBoxLA01.25.08 - 6:41 pm
reply
I re-wrote what I posted on my blog, for clarity of concept.
And SoapBoxLA, I (believe) that the Planning Department has uber authority over other departments - unless it has to do with a specific mechanical aspect of things.
The LADOT has this under their dominion due only to precedent, unless someone can show me a written policy or some ordinance to the contrary.
DOT, WTF?!
ubrayj0201.25.08 - 7:07 pm
reply
Great Blog!
You're absolutely right about the dichotomy between Urban Planning and Transportation Planning.
Building communities and moving motor vehicles as fast as possible through our communities are the dueling mandates that leave people trapped in the middle of a DepartMENTAL turf war.
Faster, wider, straighter streets may move more cars but what does it do for our communities.
Anyhoo, I agree that we should be urging Planning to step up, elbow back to their rightful uber position and get busy planning communities.
SoapBoxLA01.25.08 - 9:01 pm
reply
@SoapBox & Ubrayj
Unfortunately most urban planners are just as backwards in their thinking about our urban environment as engineers. Solving the traffic 'problem' has distracted most from close examination of the real conditions of our surroundings. Most are still adhering to antiquated ideas/concepts like the radiant city, city beautiful, garden city, etc.
For some alternative, and in my opinion, realistic examinations of the urban environment I would recommend reading "The Death and Life if Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs.
420LaHaRR01.26.08 - 1:32 am
reply
Damn, LaHarr, I wouldn't have figured you for a Jane Jacobs admirer.
I'm a fan myself, although I'm not sure that she wasn't too hard on the City Beautiful movement: as naĂŻve and patronizing as the idea behind it (to wit, that it was possible and desirable to inculcate civic virtue in the urban poor, who allegedly lacked it, by giving them plenty of gorgeous monumental architecture to look at) may have been, you have to admit that it would have been preferable in some ways to the "let 'em eat strip malls" attitude that ended up prevailing in urban planning.
Corbusier and his fucking Radiant City were certainly deplorable, though. No argument there.
Oh why oh why didn't people follow Gaudà and Hundertwasser instead of Le Corb and the goddamned Bauhäuslern? WHY?
I rode my bicycle today.
PC01.26.08 - 3:45 am
reply
Good call on Jane Jacobs. I especially love her challenge to the voodoo of traditional transpo traffic counts such in the Washington Park debate of old.
"But where will all the traffic go?" A wail that we hear all the time. She argued and she was right, "people will find other ways to get about!"
We have an opportunity with Planning because the Dept. Head, Gail Goldberg and the Commission have both gone on record as committed to DO REAL PLANNING, an acronym for their vision points that we can hang onto as we hold them accountable for really working to create community plans for great places to live, work and ride.
SoapBoxLA01.26.08 - 8:20 am
reply
The Do Real Planning document that I downloaded does not mention bicycles, but it does mention the following:
1 DEMAND a walkable city
...
The planning history of Los Angeles exposes our failure to analyze buildings in context.
Smitten by the automobile, we trivialized our daily role as pedestrian, our need for inviting storefronts, broad sidewalks, plentiful benches, graceful lighting. We must prioritize the human scale of our built structures and street environments. We must insist that each new project visibly knit people together.
I think we have a strong argument to get this planning document for Los Angeles' future out of the hands of the LADOT. It should be planning who we are talking to about this.
I know fighting for that sort of change would undercut our ability to apply for bicycle funds (the Bicycle Plan is used to apply for money for bicycle projects) - but it is a long term fight that I think is worth it.
ubrayj0201.26.08 - 8:49 am
reply
i propose starting the Midnight Walkazz
indigis01.27.08 - 12:14 pm
reply
"I'm walking here! I'm walking here!"
Ratso in Midnight Cowboyzz
SoapBoxLA01.27.08 - 1:17 pm
reply
HEY HOW WAS THE OINE ON TUESDAY?? I COULDNT MAKE IT THERE MAN
DOODLE21302.6.08 - 9:00 pm
reply
HEY HOW WAS THE ONE ON TUESDAY I COULDNT MAKE IT I MADE IT ALL LATE
DOODLE21302.6.08 - 9:00 pm
reply
Doodles, it was a great meeting. But there is another opportunity. There always is!
February 16, hit the Bicycle Master Plan Workshop and then jump on the 2nd annual Watts Happening Ride.
February 20, "Storm the Bastille" and ride to the Westside as we converge on the Bicycle Master Plan Workshop.
SoapBoxLA02.6.08 - 9:25 pm
reply
allright ill be sure to hit up those rides,
DOODLE21302.11.08 - 9:14 am
reply
For what it's worth, the MCW Adopts Recommendations for Local Bicycle Network. Really it's great to see that they are stepping up and taking this stance. I haven't studied it, so don't take my head off! Just putting it out there.
MCW Adopts Recommendations
User1 responding to a
comment by DOODLE213
09.8.09 - 10:50 pm
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
