Gary Slossberg For LA City Council District 13

Written by Stephen Box, Hollywood Resident and Bike Activist http://SoapBoxLA.blogspot.com

One of the simplest things we can do to support mass transit in our community is to make sure that transit stops are comfortable, clean, safe and aesthetically pleasing. it seems like a no-brainer that if we want people to become transportation solutions by getting out of their cars we’ve got to make the choice attractive and at least competitive in terms of convenience and comfort.

Unfortunately, we’re far off the mark.

The Metro has its focus on getting people from point A to point B. As for the transit stop amenities, the “no-man’s land” approach from the Metro and the local authorities leaves the average mass transit patron feeling like a second class citizen.

The Metro holds that the City is responsible for the streets, the sidewalks and the amenities along the way. The City looks at the wear and tear on the transit heavy streets and asks the Metro for maintenance money and the standoff starts. Meanwhile, transit patrons throughout the City of Los Angeles stand on narrow, filthy sidewalks, looking for little respect.

The Metro holds that the sidewalks are not their responsibility and that the City is responsible for street furniture. The City turns and contracts out with CBSDecaux who then installs bus shelters with advertising, paying the City for the privilege. The money is split so that our City Councilmembers all end up controlling some of this revenue, ideally to be spent within the respective Council District.

CBSDecaux provides everything from the traditional bus shelter shown above to the automated public toilets (APTs) such as the one located at the Santa Monica and Vermont Red Line station. Along the way they put up advertising, on the bus shelters and on two and three sided sidewalk-sized kiosks and billboards.

Missing from this relationship is a simple commitment to supporting mass transit with an overall plan for streetscape beautification, a plan that would improve the aesthetic of the neighborhood, complement the local architecture and streetlife and encourage pedestrians and transit patrons.

The picture above is of a bus shelter on Hollywood Boulevard at Western. It sits on a narrow sidewalk, forcing pedestrians to squeeze past. The sidewalk is sticky, the area smells and the solid wall of the shelter hides the activities on the other side. It’s evident here that the standards for architectural security are non-existent, that the placement of transit stops is not part of a larger commitment to mass transit and that maintenance is low priority.

The sidewalk just beyond this shelter is sinking, leaving two plates that don’t line up. A simple misstep results in a tumble as pedestrians squeeze past the shelter and passengers who are jockeying for their bus.

On the west side of Western, the sidewalk is not just uneven and patched with asphalt, it has a meter hole covered with plywood.

At least mass transit passengers suffer no delusions of equality. It’s painfully apparent that in the grand scheme of things, mass transit is for people who have no choice. It’s evident that it’s a bare-bones service for those who can’t afford a car. A comfortable, walkable environment that is safe and pleasant is not something to be wasted on a public street.

It’s a sad commentary on our community that the most popular streetscapes are fake, created by developers who study Great Streets and then imitate them, drawing people in cars to the Grove, Americana and CityWalk, all so people can walk on faux boulevards. enjoying something they should be able to find in their own neighborhoods; walkable streets.

As for our neighborhood, it’ll change when we work together and demand big sidewalks, clean sidewalks, street furniture and a commitment to making our streets pedestrian oriented.

“See you on the Streets!”

All the locations mentioned below are within two blocks of each other.

There’s a cute Spanish style multiplex up the street from where I live. And it’s boarded up with plywood and a chain link fence. Sort of detracts from the charm.

Charmless Spanish Style employs City’s own Design Standards.

Maybe this sounds like a symptom of a bad economy. But that’s not it. It’s been left this way for 7 years. It’s owned by Ronald McDonald House. They bought it in along with 5 other residential lots up the street in order to build a bigger hotel for guests who bring their sick children to the nearby Children’s Hospital. They built the hotel but left this particular parcel of land to waste away. (RMH is a worthy organization and what I am attempting to demonstrate is in no way belittling the important role they serve to the families of sick children.)

Understandably, the residing neighbor on the North side of this property is not a big fan of the dilapidated building. She takes excellent care of her property. She and husband are constantly painting over gang tags next door and hearing trespassers rustling around inside the units. The residing neighbor on the south side of the property says he hears people in there too from time to time doing, “…God knows what”.

Craftsman copies styles from the City’s nearby Light Yard.

A block away sits another abandoned property; a charming, old craftsman house on Virgil. It’s been abandoned for years. I could see inside before they nailed boards onto the windows and doors. The inside was covered in tags. Another neighborhood council member informed me that it was being used by squatters for prostitution and drugs. Now this house has a 9-foot tall chain link fence that surrounds its perimeter. One of the sides of the fence has a gaping hole.

Almost as unattractive as the City's Light Yard down the street.

A block in the other direction is a vacant double sized lot on a small, residential street. It’s been vacant with a breached chain link fence for the past 7 years. It sits there taunting the children who play in the street because there is no nearby park. Less than a block away from that vacant lot, is the DWP’s light yard which looks similar to a vacant lot only it is less attractive. The city thought that historic route 66, right across the street from a Carnegie Library, in one of the most densely populated areas of Los Angeles would be a great place to store light posts for the rest of the city. Behind a 12 foot high, razor wire fence that is patrolled nightly by a security guard, sits the worst offender of all: the light yard owned by the City of Los Angeles.

Child walks by city light yard on way to school.

Unidentifiable substance behind the fence. Hope it's safe for the children on their way to school.

If we can only hold landlords as accountable as we hold our own city agencies then I suppose things could get worse than they are now. It would be nice to think that property owners care about the community more than they do about their profits but this is not usually the case. But when the city’s own example of how to maintain property is such a hideous eyesore (located smack dab in the middle of 3 elementary schools no less), the standard for what everyone else needs to do to comply has been set. Why shouldn’t gangs and squatters look at this neighborhood and feel right at home. They can literally run recession proof businesses with no overhead and, at the same time blend in with the image the city puts forth in her own properties. Maybe the city’s plan is to attract all the crime to my neighborhood so it is more centralized.

Written by Stephen Box, Hollywood Resident and Bike Activist http://SoapBoxLA.blogspot.com

The most elegant solution to L.A. traffic is simply to pedal to where you need to go. If cycling is not for you, at least give some respect to those who choose to ride. Here’s why: Cyclists are the “indicator species” for a healthy community.

Cyclists favor well-maintained streets free of potholes and debris. They prefer streets with moderate vehicle volumes and speeds, an environment that is likewise safer and more hospitable for drivers and pedestrians.

Surveys in San Francisco found that local businesses benefited from “traffic calming” through their districts, which included accommodations for cyclists.

Finally, an increase in the number of cyclists in a neighborhood – which means more eyes on the street – has a direct relationship to a reduction in crime.

In other words, what’s good for cyclists is good for your community.

As for supporting cyclists, one of the simplest things you can do is to make sure that your neighborhood offers cyclists a place to park their bikes.

The simplest and most effective bike rack is the inverted U which is inexpensive, simple to install, holds two bikes securely, is space efficient and requires no maintenance. They simply need to be located in a highly visible, convenient and well lit area and they will fill up with bikes.

The City’s Department of Transportation offers three excuses for not putting more inverted U racks in our neighborhood.

1) “The City of Los Angeles has no money for bike parking.” Good try but not a good excuse. Funding is available but the City doesn’t apply for Safe Routes to School or Bicycle Transportation Account funding for bicycle parking. Both programs dispense millions of dollars each year and the City of Los Angeles has failed to simply put bicycle parking on their list of priorities.

2) “There isn’t always room for bike parking.” Again, good try but not a good excuse. Our streets are littered with newspaper racks along the red curb no-parking zones, all of which are great spots for the inverted U racks parallel to the curb. A little survey work and I assure you that there is plenty of room for abundant bike parking. Some cities even attach a ring to parking meters so that bikes can be secured but here in Los Angeles, it’s actually illegal to lock a bike to a parking meter.

3) “There isn’t any way to get developers to include bike parking in their projects.” Actually, LA’s municipal code already requires projects over 10K square feet to include bike amenities including bike racks at a minimum of 2% of parking and as close as the handicapped parking but even the City of Los Angeles violates this ordinance in its facilities, demonstrating that the real issue is simply political will.

All of the talk from our leadership about a bikeable city is tested when we look for the bike parking.

If you want to change the character of your community, look around and try to find the bike racks. If you’re shopping, ask the merchant to put bike racks in so that people can ride to the store. If you’re a parent, ask the school administrators to put racks in so the kids can ride to school. If you visit your Councilman at his office, ask for the bike parking and if there is none, ask why not. Most of all, remember that the developers in your community will do what we insist they do.

Parking for cyclists is a little thing but it goes a long way to supporting cycling and in encouraging cyclists.

It’s time to ask our City leadership to set the example by providing bike parking at all city facilities and to follow through on their commitment to enforcing the law by requiring developers to include bike parking in all projects.

“See you on the Streets!”

p.s If you’re interested in more information on bike parking, visit Bicycling Info.

Written by Stephen Box, Hollywood Resident and Bike Activist http://SoapBoxLA.blogspot.com

A writer friend once told me that the simplest cure for writer’s block was to simply “Go for a walk!” I’ve tried  it and it works, especially here in Hollywood. Within a few steps one is guaranteed to find adventure, sometimes good, sometimes bad, but always exciting.

Yesterday was no different as I set out on foot to the Hollywood Farmers’ Market. It was a beautiful day, I ran into old friends, and I discovered the Coffee Cellar which specializes in organic, shade grown, and fair trade certified coffees. I love this neighborhood!

I also took some time to wander around and to ask the simple question “What would make this a more walkable neighborhood?” The streets were full of people walking, riding their bikes, shopping, waiting for the bus, hanging out, parking cars, parking more cars and circling the block looking for parking so they could also park their cars. There were great moments of hope but then there were moments when I was confronted by  one of the “traffic moats” that separate the casual walkers from the committed.

As I stood at Hollywood & Vine and looked up at the W Hotel project I thought back to all of the community planning meetings when the CRA, the LADOT, the Planning Department, the Council office staff and lots of consultants and experts from the Developer’s team presented the plans for the project, a fairly significant and ambitious project!

I remember lots of discussions of traffic mitigation, auto parking, street widening, intersection engineering, signal timing and capacity for motor vehicles. But try as I might, I could not remember any discussion of evaluating the project in terms of walkability.

It’s too bad because the City’s Planning Department has a great tool called the “Walkability Checklist” that helps the community and the developers evaluate a project in terms of its impact on the “walkability” of the immediate neighborhood. I think we should be using it.

Rick Cole, the City Manager of Ventura and one of America’s leading new Urbanists, shook up developers and residents alike when he drew a big circle around Ventura’s downtown and declared it the “walkable zone.” First and foremost, people can walk safely and efficiently within that zone. Other modes are then incorporated but never at the expense of the safety and efficacy of walking as a mode of transportation.

Quoting Greek Essayist Plutarch, Ventura’s General Plan now declares “A city, like a living thing, is a united and continuous whole.”

As for Hollywood, I think we could benefit from that kind of re-orienting or recommitment to the simplest and most basic mode of transportation, walking.

This is not to suggest that other modes aren’t important and essential to a thriving and vital community, In fact, they are, it’s simply a matter of repositioning human powered mobility as the starting point. It’s a commitment to a solution that isn’t based on the typical “either/or” proposals but instead holds for a higher standard that includes all modes as vital and viable and defines a sustainable community as one that works for everybody.

For too long, our City’s leaders have offered us choices based on false dichotomies. Recently during the budget discussions the uproar was over “Would you like to close the libraries or cut back on police?” This was followed by the “loss of access to our parks or reduced fire department” and through it all the LADOT is notorius for offering communities the “Would you like to move cars or would you like to move people?”

As I finished my walk, I was resolute. I want it all! Either/or options are for mediocre communities and I want Los Angeles to be a Great City!

I want streets that work for mass transit, for private autos, for cyclists and yes…even in LA…for pedestrians. I want Great Streets! I want streets that are clean, graffiti free, interesting and vital, filled with wide sidewalks and bike racks, street furniture and trees. I want to be able to cross those streets without having to fear for my life and I want to see lots of wide-eyed, sun-burned tourists carrying dog-eared guide books, all walking up and down the streets of Hollywood and I want to smile, acknowledging their conformation that the streets of Hollywood are truly walkable.

I don’t think this is too much to ask for, after all, this is Hollywood and we are surrounded by the most creative and talented people in the world. All that’s missing is vision and commitment.

Who’s in?

p.s. If you’d like to look at the Walkability Checklist from the City Planning Department, you can download it here.