Before diving into a number of conceptual plans for Priority 1 bikeways, this month’s Bicycle Plan Implementation Team (BPIT) meeting featured some healthy discussions about environmental review processes. Prior BPIT discussions on this subject can be reviewed via our past posts on bikeways projects and environmental review. Wendy Lockwood, an environmental consultant, was on hand at the meeting to explain the City’s strategy for implementing bikeways projects via the Bike Plan, including some delving into what qualifies as a significant impact in the City. Here are some of the takeaways:
- A mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was submitted for the 2010 Bike Plan
- Projects which do not cause significant impacts as defined in the City’s traffic guidelines (or any other significant environmental impacts, for that matter) and which have independent utility (more on this later) can move forward
- A number of other bikeways projects, which might have the potential to cause significant impacts (usually as defined by the City’s traffic guidelines), require additional environmental review to proceed
- In certain cases, bikeway corridors that do have a significant impact on some segments may have others segments that do not. If these segments have independent utility, these projects can proceed.
After the fold, we’ll discuss the idea of independent utility in more detail and then proceed to a number of updates on projects that staff have been working on.
Independent Utility
The concept of independent utility was discussed during the BPIT meeting. Independent utility is basically a term used to describe individual projects that are capable of standing on their own. For example, DOT is currently pursuing the addition of 0.6 miles of new bike lanes on Cahuenga Blvd. as part of a bike route from Hancock Park to the Hollywood Bowl. While the previously identified Cahuenga bike lanes project will require further study and review, DOT staff have identified a segment that will not pose significant impacts and has independent utility as part of the larger Hancock Park to the Hollywood Bowl bike route it will complete. DOT and City Planning are working diligently to identify such opportunities as they arise. If you have any ideas, please let us know!
City Center North & Hollywood to Alhambra Conceptual Designs
DOT Bikeways engineers presented conceptual designs for three streets in City Center North and three streets that together will connect Hollywood to the City of Alhambra. Here is a brief overview of the concepts. Look out early next week for more details on each of these individual concepts. We look forward to your comments/ suggestions for how you’d like these exciting projects to be designed.
Figueroa St. (7th St. to Sunset Blvd/Cesar E. Chavez Avenue)
DOT Staff presented concepts that included a south-bound (S/B) contra-flow bicycle lane (cycle track) on the west side of the street and a complimentary northbound (N/B) bicycle lane on the east side of the street for Figueroa between 7th and 3rd Street. Design challenges along Figueroa that DOT staff are analyzing include bus only lanes, on-street parking, one-way to two-way street configurations, narrow underpasses, and ramps to the 110 freeway.
Main St. (Venice Blvd/16th St. to Cesar E. Chavez Avenue)
Another downtown concept presented was Main Street from Venice to Cesar Chavez (2.2 miles). This project could require the removal of on-street parking and/or a vehicle travel lane, depending on the particular segment of the project. A protected bike facility is being considered between 9th and Cesar Chavez, with options ranging from either a bike lane adjacent to the curb or between parking and the thru-lane.
Spring St. (9th St. to Cesar E. Chavez Avenue)
A 1.5 mile segment of Spring St. from 9th St. to Cesar E. Chavez Avenue was also presented during the BPIT meeting. This project would necessitate the installation of “queue jumpers” at transitions between one-way and two-way street configurations. Queue jumpers would be a separate phase for bicycles so that they can move ahead of car traffic to transition from the left side to the right side of the street, and vice versa. The removal of parking and/or vehicle travel lanes may also be required for this project.
Hollywood to Alhambra
Sunset Blvd / Cesar E Chavez Ave. (Douglas St. to Mission Rd.)
The segment from Douglas to Elysian Park would require the removal of street parking on one side. From Elysian Park to Grand, the west-bound peak hour lanes and parking on both sides would have to removed or remove both peak hour lanes and retain parking on one side. From Grand to Broadway, either parking or peak- hour lanes (or one some combination of the two) would have to be removed. Also, double left turn lanes would become single left turn lanes along this segment. Finally, the segment from North Broadway to Mission Rd. would necessitate the removal of one travel lane in one direction in order to fit in bike lanes.
Mission Road ( Cesar Chavez Ave. to Soto St./ Huntington Dr.)
This project would require the removal of some parking and would generally preserve two lanes of traffic in each direction, or maintain parking but reduce to single lane operation for certain sections depending upon roadway width.
Huntington Dr. (Soto St./Mission Rd. to Alhambra City Limit)
The take away from this project was that no vehicle travel lane reduction or parking removal would be necessary. Bike lanes would be inserted through travel lane width reductions, subject to final verification.
[…] from this month’s BPIT meeting. LADOT updates what bike projects are on the boards, including a road diet and bike lanes along the […]
Id love to see pics of these areas, or these streets highlighted on a map… Im interested to see how they all connect. Apart from the Cahuenga Pass, is the bike plan focusing on downtown LA to begin? This 7th street will be the first in October? How EXCITING!!
Hi Jennifer! Thanks for your comments! There will be some new posts this week that will highlight some of the projects presented at the last BPIT meeting in more detail. The bike plan is rolling out city wide, and we are focusing on projects that are on BPITs top 10 list and projects that do not require further environmental review.
A bike lane in Skid Row would be great! We have a lot of bike riders over here…
see blog entry about this please DOT people!
Thanks for sharing the link Katherine! Off the top of my head, 7th street had a bike lane planned to go through Skid Row, among other projects. I’ll check further tomorrow.
7th St. would be a good choice. We have 2 schools off 7th-Inner City Arts & the School on Wheels! Also-5th, 6th or 7th all connect to the Arts DIstrict, so one could ride across town over there easily then over the bridge to Boyle Heights if they so desired.
On what type of infrastructure would most potential cyclists want to ride? A University of British Columbia survey has the number one choice as an exclusive path for bikes and the fifth place choice is a on-street facility along a traffic calmed residential street. Out of sixteen choices–bike lanes on major city streets next to parked cars– came in at number 11.
Click to access OpinionSurveyBrochure.pdf
Another UBC survey indicates that people cycling will travel several blocks out of their way for better bike infrastructure.
Click to access OpinionSurveyBrochure.pdf
A survey in Copenhagen indicates that increased car traffic leads incidentally to cyclists feeling more at risk.
Click to access Road%20safety%20and%20percieved%20risk%20of%20cycle%20tracks%20and%20lanes%20in%20Copenhagen.pdf
A Montreal study indicates that two and a half more people ride the cycle tracks compared to nearby streets.
http://www.ehjournal.net/content/8/1/47
It’s quite clear that to get the most amount of people cycling you have to give them a subjective sense of safety through traffic calming or some sort of perceived barrier between the bicycles and the motorized vehicles. Given adequate amount of resources, we should always choose to put some sort of barrier and or traffic calming to get more people to cycle, even if it takes more time to do so.
Forcing cyclists to move over a lane in busy and fast moving traffic to accomodate a right turn only lane is a sure way to decrease the amount of biking. This also will increase the potential conflicts with the lane change and having to travel between two fast moving lanes of traffic. I will no longer use Lankershim Blvd as a means of travel to the Orange Line if a bike lane is put in the middle of the lanes on Lankershim Blvd at the Vineland Ave intersection. Putting myself in between two fast moving lanes of traffic is simply an increase in hazard that I am not willing to take. The focus should be on increased safety and comfort for the bicyclist and not simply following what a manual states.
I am also not impressed with the insular state of the traffic engineers. Could someone name one engineering change that has been made due to the feedback of bicyclists in this city? There certainly was a change to Wilbur Ave due to the complaints of motorists and it did not increase safety for anyone on that street.
Dennis,
The engineers have certainly been taking BPIT comments to heart, though it sometimes sounds like they don’t. The BPIT is just the first in a long line of groups that get to look at, and comment on, proposed projects. The comments of the BPIT help us to improve and refine design to get more approvals down the line.
Here’s the link I failed to display for he University of British Columbia survey of how far peope will ride out of their way for better bicycle infrastructure.
Click to access RouteDensity.pdf
I also meant to say that the Montreal study of six two-way cycle tracks shows that two and a half times more people ride them over comparable streets nearby.
[…] First introduced at the June BPIT (Bike Plan Implementation Team) meeting, LADOT took the comments of BPIT attendees and refined the conceptual design and the approach of the bike lane presentation for the DLANC Planning & Land Use Committee. The BPIT, in getting first crack at all new bike projects, helps LADOT to both refine and improve our design and our approach when bringing projects before Neighborhood Councils and community groups. LADOT will continue to inform involved parties about projects as we go through the environmental clearance required to install these projects. The idea is to have built a strong constituency of support in the community for projects by the time the approval process is complete, removing all barriers to implementation at once. […]
[…] https://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/bpit-notes-6711-conceptual-designs-for-figueroa-main-s… […]
[…] the June BPIT meeting, DOT engineers presented conceptual designs for three projects in Downtown Los Angeles: Figueroa […]