Metro's Art Leahy holds court with the Transit Coalition

The Metro's CEO, Art Leahy, joined the Transit Coalition for its monthly get-together at Philippe's the Original, sharing double-dips and beers with a capacity crowd made up of transit staff, advocates, politicos, consultants, and press. Most importantly, he shared some insight into his plans for the Metro and his desire to becoming an agent of change at the helm of LA County's transportation system.

Leahy has a folksy charm that disarms his audience, concealing the fact that he is a sharp strategist, a firm negotiator, and a demanding leader who sets standards and expects results. In his fifteen months at the helm of the Metro, staff have discovered quickly that he is results driven and there is a trail of ex-staffers to demonstrate the penalty for failing to respond to the call for change.

One of Leahy's first acts as CEO was to take his management staff to the ticket window at Union Station to allow them to see how hard it was to buy a monthly pass. Packed into the atrium near the One Gateway Metro HQ was a line that wrapped around itself, offering evidence of a Metro administrative disconnect from the Metro passenger experience. That line is no longer found, a small situation that occurred at Union Station, but a solution that resonated throughout the 1400 square mile service area. It also serves as the incident that allows Leahy to state "In word and deed, the Metro cares about our passengers."

Leahy continued the attack on the Metro's status quo, removing all of the artwork at Metro HQ because it all celebrated One Gateway and served as a reflection of the things that the Metro management valued. Themselves! He replaced it with pictures of bus stops, train stations, passengers, and transportation, all as a reminder to the corporate staff that they are "overhead" and that the passenger is the purpose of a transportation system.

As for the "rubber on the road" experience of the passenger, the Metro's Agent of Change acknowledges that driving a bus is simple but points out it's dealing with all of the transactions that is the hard part. Nevertheless, Leahy says he is committed to understanding the operators in order to get them to understand the passengers. To that end he has an advantage, having worked his way through college by driving a bus.

Leahy is not shy about his heritage as a bus operator and, in spite of his UCLA and USC degrees, it is his ability to insist that communication be framed in "language that a bus driver can understand" that is the essence of his call for good simple standards. In fact, as he points out, Metro's strict adherence to a management hiring standard that included college degrees that resulted in a Metro leadership that didn't know how to implement a bus bridge or conduct a relay. All that is due to change as he reinvigorates the Metro leadership with real world experience, not simply college pedigrees.

For all the talk of customer service, behavior that drives results, promoting from within, and service standards that resonate, the news that drew the loudest response from the audience was simple and yet revolutionary. Leahy revealed his plan to actually require Metro Execs to ride the bus and rail. If ever there was a "One of Us!" moment, that was it.

Art Leahy is definitely an agent of change. He moves strategically and his simple actions are designed for maximum impact. The results already demonstrate that the status quo is under attack and the future of the Metro is based on a commitment to customer service and to a transportation system. It's all Leahy talks about, that and his conflicted UCLA/USC lineage.

Art Leahy's commitment to operations is commendable and he details his commitment to connecting the Metrolink, Amtrak, Metro Bus, Metro Rail, and the Municipal operators into a regional transportation system that operates consistently and in sync. From the little details, such as the fact that the Metro polishes bus wheels but leaves trash on the bus, to larger opportunities and commitments such as the Metro Board's 30/10 plan, Leahy is focused and driven. He's also punctual, a behavioral trait that comes naturally to those who ride the train.

He also has room to grow as he embraces the Metro opportunities that lie ahead. As he addresses the Metro's commitment, he repeatedly speaks of the passenger which is only part of the Metro's contract with the public. There are two unaddressed elements that must be addressed if the Metro is to take its place as a comprehensive transportation system.

• The first is the simple fact that the Metro's customers include everybody who contributes financially to the Metro, regardless of whether they ride the bus or the rail. Measure R will raise an estimated $40 Billion from an increase in sales tax which means that anyone who spends money in LA County has a vested interest in the performance of the Metro. Purportedly, the impact of the Metro benefits everybody, whether they are passengers or not. This distinction is an important foundation for a comprehensive transportation system.
• Second, the Metro is one of LA County's largest developers and has 50 Transit Oriented Developments (TOD) on paper with 32 of them in play. This enormous impact on residential and commercial behavior has a tremendous impact on our communities and on the quality of life in those neighborhoods. The Metro's ability to reduce the need to travel within LA County is an opportunity that is missing from the typical transportation discussion. Yet, it is a significant impact that doesn't need its wheels polished or an operator at the wheel.
• Third, while the Metro is busy implementing customer service standards that impact the purchase of monthly passes or a bus operator's greetings, the huge opportunity lies in the need to implement standards for the integration of Transit Oriented Development into a community. While the Metro talks of a complete transportation system, it will not be complete until it includes those who simply live in the area or operate a shop or walk the street or ride a bike. Great public space is part of a commitment to the community and a comprehensive transportation system must address the complete community.

The Transit Coalition meets monthly on the last Tuesday of each month at Philippe's the Original. In addition to Art Leahy, recent guests include John Fenton of the Metrolink and Bruce Shelborne of Metro.

Metro - System Capacity Improvements

One of the most efficient, effective and immediate things the Metro can do to improve capacity is to address Human Infrastructure, the attitudes and behavior of the Metro staff and passengers. For your consideration I offer these four opportunities.

1) Communication - If the public asks enough Metro employees, the variety of answers will be sure to include a yes, a no, a maybe, and a go away. But it will often result in the run-around. This wastes time and speaks to a systemic flaw that should trigger an examination of the larger issue and the opportunity for clarification.

Example: Recent discussions of the 761 which frequently heads over the hill well under capacity but with a full bike rack has generated complaints as cyclists wait multiple rounds in order to ride over the hill. Metro staff, from Jody Litvak to Lynne Goldsmith to the Bus Operators, are unable to agree on the Metro's policy for bikes on-board policy, offering up "No" and "Only on the last run" and "At the Operator's discretion" and "Only with Operator liability" and "It's not my department." Somehow an opportunity to address systemic confusion was missed and the question lingers. Why does the 761 head over the hill, under capacity but without allowing the cyclists who are left behind the opportunity to put their bikes inside at the back? Also, why does the 761 pass up folding bikes when its rack are full? Best of all, why hasn't this series of questions to staff and complaints to customer service triggered an examination of the triple rack opportunity to increase capacity by 50% for cyclists? They work in Long Beach. Any objections have been dismissed by the Long Beach experience and data. Is anyone paying attention to this opportunity to improve capacity?

2) Training - The public can hardly be expected to understand the Metro policies and then behave accordingly if they are so confusing and exist with so many interpretations. The Metro staff implement and enforce different versions of old and new policies with such creative enthusiasm that it simply drives contempt for the system and an "everyone for themselves" behavioral pattern among the passengers.

The Transit Court will be addressing "Bikes on Escalators," a prohibition that defies comprehension in light of the baby carriage and luggage accommodation, yet it seems to be getting revived. Bike on Trains are prohibited during certain hours but Metro staff explain "That prohibition isn't enforced, it's just there in case we need it." Bus Operators tie off their bike racks and call them "broken" so they can ride bike-free on the freeway. Bus Operators enforce prohibitions against bikes-on-board unless the passenger is able to speak clearly and articulate "Metro policy is to allow bikes-on-board at the Operator's discretion and this empty bus has room in the back for my bike so there is no reason to exclude me from this bus." Rail Operators produce old bike policy pamphlets from the early Red Line days, Bus Operators produce new bike policy pamphlets and find restrictions that don't exist, through it all the thing that is most unclear is "What are we going to do with all of these cyclists?"

3) Logic - Bus Operators frequently inform the public that bikes on-board are allowed at a Bus Operator's discretion but that the Bus Operator is responsible for any damages so they will not allow it. This type of information is simply an insult to the public's intelligence. Kerr's Catering Service v. Department of Industrial Relations (1962) established that an employee can not be held liable for damages that are part of the cost of doing business. Wear and tear, broken dishes in the cafeteria, etc. are not the responsibility of the employee and the Metro should be clear on California Labor Law. Most importantly, the Metro should nip this "liability mythology" because it simply frames the passenger as a liability, not as an integral element of a Comprehensive Transportation System.

A well designed environment will yield good behavior. People sit on the stairs because there is no place to sit. This interferes with the movement of passengers and cyclists are less likely to use the stairs but now the escalators are off limits? People congregate in the middle section of the platform because the Purple Line trains them to count on that section, but this behavior means the head and tail are less populated. Every exiting passenger heads to the center of the platform to exit. Design and communicate to spread passengers out. I always wait for the front car because I have a bike and it is the least populated car, but at Union Station, at NoHo and on the Purple Line, it's not clear where to wait for the front of the train.

Benches that draw passengers to the ends of the platform, clear messaging so passengers can behave accordingly, traffic flow so that boarding is more efficient, simple communication and guidance such as "stand to the right, walk to the left" would all go a long way to increasing capacity and enhancing the passenger experience.

4) Oversight - Equipment malfunctions and breakdowns are to be expected but the most recent Union Station escalator incident bears witness to the systemic lack of oversight. When the escalator closest to HQ went out of service last week, the failure of an out-of-service sign with directions to the elevator in the parking lot to appear should be an indicator that Metro staff who use the escalator take a great deal for granted. The fact that the repairs took days to commence, all for a burned out wire, should have generated a sign indicating that repairs were on the way. This simple incident, so close to Metro HQ, should serve as a trigger that would cause Operations to examine the Metro's response to "out-of-service" incidents and generate a policy for communicating, or responding and for analyzing the data. It is my experience that the escalators at some stations are frequently out-of-service but the staff tell me that no data is collected nor reported. How does the Metro improve?

Complaints from the public are often about staff but the larger opportunity is to look for issues that indicate an opportunity to address communication, training, logic, and the larger Metro environment that allows ongoing conflict between passenger expectation and reality. The 761 issues with under capacity buses that could transport cyclists with their bikes on board is an example of complaints that should have generated an examination of the specific line and the more general policy.

5) Collaboration - I have participated in Cyclist/Metro brainstorm sessions, task forces, and roundtables over the last several years and each time I am hopeful that I am investing my time and energy in a process that will yield a meaningful progress in establishing cyclists as an integral element in LA County's Comprehensive Transportation System. In each case, I spend too much time listening to how hard is is for Metro employees to do their job. I've listened to Metro Bus Operators who need me to know how hard it is to control an articulated bus, Metro Trainers who need me to know how many people they are responsible for training and how difficult it is, HQ staff who need me to understand how difficult it is to work in a political environment, Communications staff who need me to understand how difficult it is to simply get color schemes approved, Operations staff who need me to listen to an explanation of their budget constraints, and enough internal drama to turn even the hardiest bicycle advocate away and yet I persist. Metro morale issues are not the cycling communities responsibility and they must be dealt with before we can move forward and collaborate. We understand the realities of the world we live in, no need to impress us with complexities and budgets, we get it.

Let's collaborate. Let's focus on active solutions to real opportunities that will enhance Metro capacity and the passenger's experience.

Real opportunities for real active solutions:

761 - this line often runs under capacity on a vital route for cyclists yet full racks and a "no-bikes-on-board" policy from the operators prevents cyclists from getting home. Communicate the "Bus Operator's discretion" policy, dispel the liability mythology and let's enhance capacity. Bikes on Board! (Locals have racks for two bikes. Larger buses have higher capacity but still only hold two bikes. Double capacity buses should hold four bikes. Why does the arbitrary limit of two cyclists keep coming up?)

Triple Racks - Long Beach uses them, examine the liability data, dispel the mythology and increase capacity for cyclists on buses by 50% in one swift move.

Bikes on Escalators - Remove the restriction or restrict all carriages, carts, luggage and "stuff" but be consistent and communicate clearly. To allow this to slide into Transit Court oversight is absolutely unacceptable.

Bikes on Rail - Remove the time-of-day restrictions from Metro materials and communicate clearly the policy. With 100 languages spoken in our community, many people simply follow the crowd. Communicate clearly and the crowd will move in the right direction.

Bikes on Buses - Communicate clearly, starting with Metro staff, and demonstrate that cyclists are gap connectors, transportation solutions, not simply a burden and a liability.

Collect the Data - Efforts to restrict cyclists (two per rail car, two per bus...) defy the reality of our world. The Red Line on a Saturday morning is full of workforce cyclists headed to their jobs in the Valley. The Orange Line at night is full of workforce cyclists headed home from their jobs in the West Valley. Metro staff must base their decisions on real data and real need, not on "Monday to Friday, 9 to 5" observations.

Integrate Cyclists as Partners - Cyclists are gap connectors and enhance systemic capacity. To simply look at the space a cyclist and a bike take up is a disservice to the impact that cyclists have on the capacity of the system. Many of my Metro trips would not work if I was unable to combine transit with the bike. Cyclists are Transportation Solutions and must be integrated as vital partners, not as an afterthought.

Metro's Hollywood & Vine Station needs a Bike HUB!

The Metro's CEO, Art Leahy, refers to the Hollywood & Vine Metro Station as "a flagship transit HUB, one that should set the standard for the Metro's comprehensive transportation system." Gatehouse Capital refers to its W Hollywood Hotel & Residences Development as "a glamorous venue, one that will seduce you - mind, body and soul." Legacy Partners refers to its 1600 Vine Residential/Retail development as 1600 Vine as "a truly unique living experience full of comfort, urban conveniences, and contemporary amenities in one of Los Angeles’ most renowned locations."

Collectively, Hollywood & Vine is LA's largest Transit Oriented Development and it became a reality after a decade of grappling that saw the Metro, the CRA, the City of LA, the LADOT, the Chamber of Commerce, lawyers, developers, investors, activists, neighborhood councils, artists, merchants, and neighbors all working to protect their interest in one of the most iconic intersections on earth. Now that the dust has cleared, the awesome magnitude of the Hollywood & Vine TOD has become the standard for future Transit Oriented Development projects.

I think that's a problem.

For all of the celebratory ribbon cutting, soft focus photo opps and champagne toasts, the details matter and the Hollywood & Vine TOD is missing some significant details that go a long way to demonstrating a commitment to people who walk, who ride a bike, who simply want to enjoy public space and who believe that a TOD is something more than an interchange, that it is a significant place, one that is made for people.

Missing from the Hollywood & Vine project is a Bike HUB, a community benefit that is provided by the Metro, the CRA, Gatehouse Capital, and Legacy Partners. This simple commitment to supporting cyclists goes a long way to demonstrating a commitment to TOD projects which purportedly serve cyclists, pedestrians, mass transit passengers and the immediate community.

1) The Hollywood & Vine project has overbuilt on its motor vehicle parking requirements, demonstrating a bias that encourages vehicle trips instead of working to reducing congestion by reducing the number of generated vehicle trips.

2) The Hollywood & Vine project has failed to provide the bike parking as required by LA's Municipal Code, a fact that failed to trigger a response from Building & Safety, a department that never invokes any bike parking minimums in spite of the law.

3) The Hollywood & Vine project unfolded over several years and during that time, the community requested a Community Car Share program, a Community Bike Share program, and a Community delivery service but none of the promises turned into reality. 

4) The Hollywood & Vine project received concessions and funding and legal support (eminent domain) based on its claims of a positive impact on the community, the economy, the traffic, and the quality of life as a whole for those who live in Hollywood, those who work in Hollywood and those who visit Hollywood.

5) The Hollywood & Vine project claims to be a Transit Oriented Development, a designation that includes a commitment to cyclists, pedestrians, vibrant street life and a connectivity to the community.

All of this being said, I look at the two-thirds of a billion dollar H'wood & Vine TOD Fortress and I ask "Where's the Bike HUB?"

I propose that the Metro and the CRA and Gatehouse Capital and Legacy Partners get together and immediately implement a Bike HUB program at Hollywood & Vine and I've got the location already selected. (There are actually three great locations, one on Hollywood Blvd., one on Argyle, and this great location on Vine)

Imagine a Bike HUB on Vine Ave., a bike shop for locals where cyclists can work on their bikes as well as store them in a secured environment. The Bike HUB could also offer a Bike Share for locals and a Bike Rental for tourists. In addition, the Bike HUB could serve as a Visitor's Center for tourists who simply need info on the neighborhood. Good for cyclists, good for the residents, good for the tourists, good for business and great for transit, offering Metro passengers a "last mile" option.

There are many iterations of the Bike HUB concept, from city-sponsored and more city-sponsored to artistic eco-storage to on-campus facilities to sophisticated spa facilities with showers, lockers, and masseuse to the bike storage robot, they all offer variations of bike repair support, secure bike storage, bike-share or bike-rentals, education, encouragement, and helpful information on the surrounding community. Los Angeles is surrounded by great examples of bike co-ops including the Bicycle Kitchen, BikeRoWave, the Bike Oven and the Bikery. There is also the Bikestation organization with facilities in Long Beach and Covina and Claremont.

Last week's Urban Land Institute TOD Summit featured politicians, transit operators, bureaucrats, developers, lawyers, planners, and advocates, all clamoring to keep their place at the table as LA's 30/10 plan for putting $40 Billion to work on a dozen mega transit projects picks up steam. There in the mix was Andréa White-Kjoss, President and CEO of the Bikestation, working to remind the Summit attendees to keep things in perspective, that the high altitude funding and planning will only succeed if the vision is kept centered on the experience of the individual, the person who walks or rides a bike or shops at the store or meets friends in the public space.

It is imperative that we set professional standards for active transportation and that we firmly establish "last-mile" elements into any TOD programming. The folks at Bikestation have a strong support track record for providing innovative solutions to unique transit opportunities and Hollywood is the capital of innovation and opportunity.

Now, more than ever, it's important that we set a standard at the Hollywood & Vine TOD, that we firmly establish a standard for a Bike HUB and that we make it a robust success, with the support of professionals such as the folks at Bikestation, with the support of the Metro and the CRA, with the support of Gatehouse and Legacy, and with the support of the community.

What happens in Hollywood will set the course for the future.

Transient Oriented Development (TOD)

The W Hollywood Hotel & Residences, perched atop the Metro's Hollywood & Vine Red Line Station, has simultaneously raised the curtain and lowered the standard, establishing itself as LA's largest Transient Oriented Development (TOD) complete with a public plaza that offers convenient single serving drug sales, discrete nooks for defecation and urination, secure yet public overnight sidewalk accommodations, and a popular valet-adjacent vomitorium. Let there be no mistake, when it comes to the creation of great public space, the W Hollywood turns its back and runs.

The inadvertent pursuit of the Transient Oriented Development (TOD) title over the more highly sought after Transit Oriented Development (TOD) status is just one of the many miscommunications and misunderstandings that have occurred during the long and contentious W Hollywood development process.

Gatehouse Capital and Legacy Partners have spent over a decade developing the land owned by the Metro. Along the way they engaged in a journey that City Council President Eric Garcetti referred to as "sometimes painful, but worth the effort." (wait until he sees the vomitorium!) Jeff Cohen, Chief Operating Officer of Gatehouse, agreed with Garcetti and said the process he went through was "not for the faint of heart."

Hollywood Chamber of Commerce President Leron Gubler rises above the fray and simply states that the W Hollywood was developed with a unique "local focus" in mind and a commitment to alleviating congestion, explaining "That’s why the project is right next to an MTA subway stop."

All of which prompts me to suggest that Eric and Jeff and Leron hop on their bikes and pedal over to the "local focus" Transient Oriented Development known as the W and join me in looking for the bike parking. There are directional signs, three of them, alerting the public to the bike parking. There just isn't any bike parking.

This is a problem for several reasons:

1) Failure to deliver on the TOD promise: This is a $600 million Transit Oriented Development, funded with significant amounts of your (the public's) money on land owned by you (the public). The TOD promise comes with assurances that the project will cater to cyclists and pedestrians and that it will have a positive impact on the community, creating human density and offering opportunities to live, to work, to shop and to socialize, all without having to further congest the streets with private motor vehicles.

2) Lack of Metro oversight and accountability: Evidently the Metro's Bike Planning Department was unaware of the decade long development process that went into bringing the W Hollywood to the ribbon cutting ceremony. Apparently the Metro staff didn't get invited to the ribbon cutting ceremony and were unaware that the project has passed the finish line, leaving behind a public plaza at the Hollywood & Vine Metro Station that is the responsibility of...nobody!

3) Lowers the standard for future TOD projects: This is the largest TOD in Los Angeles and there will be more. Now is the time to raise the bar and to engage in development that is so brilliant that it causes those around the world to covet and envy, not to giggle and mock. When the City Council, the CRA, the Chamber of Commerce, the BID, the Metro, the LADOT, the LAPD, the LASD, and the Federal Government all get together, one would think two things would happen.

* Real leaders would rise to the occasion and create powerful and effective teamwork.
Unfortunately, the public hears nothing but the difficulty of working with so many agencies and authorities. This is a cry for leadership.

* Real innovators would rise to the occasion and create a world class Transit Oriented Development.
Unfortunately, the public hears nothing but the limitations of scale with so many details to be resolved. This is a cry for innovation.

4) Demonstrates a lack of standards: Whether it's the simple process of deciding in advance who sits at the big table and who waits until the ribbon cutting to get a shot at the scraps or whether it's deciding in advance what the design standards are for TOD, this project is a scream for attention. Cyclists and pedestrians are the user group that is to be considered from the beginning of the project conception, not after the project delivery. Simple access and accommodation standards are given to the designers and architects in advance, not squeezed in after construction. Does the Metro and the City of Los Angeles have those standards? If yes, why weren't they implemented? If not, develop and implement them immediately before engaging in any more missteps.

5) When this many authorities working with this much money use "I assumed!" as an operating mantra, it borders on professional negligence. The details matter. They are significant. They are the telltale whisps of smoke that indicate a much larger problem, one that may not surface for some time. But they are significant and one can only wonder, "What else was completely overlooked?"

6) Bike parking should be visible to those who ride by. It should reinforce that this is a rideable community. It should reinforce that cyclists are welcome on the Metro, whether they leave their bikes secured at the stations or take them on the train or bus. It should be visible so that the community's eyes are on the cyclists and their bikes. It should reinforce that bikes are an integral part of the Metro's commitment to a robust and comprehensive Transportation System. It should be part of the basic foundation of accommodation, not an afterthought that comes up when everything else is done.

7) Public Space should encourage good behavior! As we gathered for a site survey, it was apparent that wherever we stood, we were in the way. Great public space isn't just open, it's designed to foster social interaction, yet the benches here are fixed and allow people to sit back to back but not to face each other. Where do people "hang out" and relax? Where do couples or small groups sit and chat? The Metro's Hollywood & Vine open space attracts transients and discourages community. Tough charge, backed up by reality. What looks good on paper doesn't always translate into reality. Environmental architecture is not simply positioning a "rain forest" to the east and specifying bamboo for the planter, it is "designing for good behavior," a standard that applies to all disciplines, from law enforcement to transportation to development to hospitality.

Twelve days ago, I called Lynne Goldsmith, Metro's Bike Planning Manager, to report that the W Hollywood had made it past the ribbon cutting and still the Metro hadn't installed any bike racks. She explained that the Metro has big plans, but that the bike racks wouldn't be installed until later in the year when the Metro "programmed" the small room off to the side of the rest rooms, next to the elevator. I pointed out that the W Hollywood has been in development for a decade and asked how the Metro could justify waiting until after the opening to begin thinking about "Where do the cyclists fit?"

(Goldsmith's promise should be tempered with the knowledge that the Metro's Hollywood & Western Red Line Station also has a room set aside for bike parking. At one time it even had racks stored in it, now gone, and the room is still empty years after the development was built, with your money!)

Goldsmith told me how busy she was and suggested that I call Greg Angelo, Director of New Business Development in the Metro's Real Estate Department. We chatted, he suggested that I talk to Goldsmith. I pointed out that she said she had no authority and had sent me to him. I offered my opinion on the "little room of urine" that was the current plan and pointed out that it violated basic Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) standards. He became a bit argumentative and told me that I can't complain of a deficiency without proposing the solution. I proposed that the new deficiency was a failure to perform and that the solution was for him to join me for a site survey and to take responsibility for doing his job. We were off to a great start.

One of the simplest and snarkiest solutions to the criticisms of the public is to demand that all interaction be solution-oriented. This closes down feedback and deprives people from participating in the "discovery" process that is part of real innovation. The solution may not be present as the problem is experienced but that should not discourage people from yelling "Fire!" when they see a fire. Angelo seems to think that the solution that eluded the Metro for years is my responsibility for identifying during the process of pointing out that the Hollywood & Vermont Red Line Station is lacking Metro oversight and accountability. The new rest rooms have never seen paper supplies. The bike parking signs are up, the bike parking isn't. He didn't know that until I called. I've already earned my keep, he hasn't.

It gets worse.

I get an invitation to a site survey at the Metro's Hollywood & Vine Red Line Station. Then I received an amended invitation moving it out an additional day. No request of availability or convenience, after all, the public is always available to complain, but it's the Metro staff's time that is valuable. Still, I'm pleased that the meeting will take place and I simply adjust my schedule, pleased that Goldsmith and Angelo and others from the Metro will be joining me for a survey of the Metro station.

Tuesday arrives and I lock my bike up to a light pole on the public plaza. I'm joined by Ron Durgin of Sustainable Streets and Enci of illuminateLA, both of whom take a one hour survey of the W Hollywood Hotel &; Residences with me. When we return to the small empty room off to the side of the elevator, we find Lieutenant George Grein, Retired, of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. He has just interrupted a drug deal in the future home of the Metro's safe, secure, and effective Hollywood & Vine bike parking. We are later joined by Sergeant Cliff Yates of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department who is the supervisor for this area of the Metro. Both Grein and Yates concur that isolation and seclusion are bad ideas for bike parking and that the evidence of human waste, transient accommodations, and drug activity would support my contention that the bike parking should be located elsewhere.

Goldsmith and her assistant, Tony Jusay, arrived and seemed to have a hard time letting go of the little room as a bike parking solution without having another option to grab. Since we were still standing in the little room, I offered that there may be many solutions but it is imperative that we agree that the little room was not one of them. At this point, Goldsmith engaged in displacement activity that had her cleaning the broken baby carriage, the floor mat, the newspapers, the barricades, and the debris, all as we watched and wondered how this moved the site survey forward. Jusay was able to get her to return to the discussion.

Ben Cien, Vice President of Construction and Design at Gatehouse arrived and we now had a fairly robust discussion going, all of it focused on the little room of horrors. All that was missing was somebody from the Metro who had the authority to say "Yes!" Apparently Angelo was unable to make the meeting, too busy to even communicate with the group or to offer an alternative meeting time. Too bad because the resulting two hour survey was then an exercise in "Who's in charge?"

Cien explained that he thought "everybody had signed off on the plan to install a little door" and to make the now "open and secluded little room" into an eventually "secured and secluded little room."

The LASD representatives stayed out of the fray, the cycling representatives argued vehemently against bike parking that requires security cameras and security officers, neither of which are in place, in order to be safe. Both Cien and Goldsmith offered arguments that the camera monitoring and the close proximity of the W Hollywood security would make the environment safe. (Hence the drug deal and the human waste and the evidence of overnight accommodations!)

The cyclists walked the larger facility with Cien, a pleasant host who seemed proud of the many W Hollywood elements. He was comfortable in his skin, greeting guests and staff as we walked through the hotel, the back hallways, the sidewalks, and the parking garage. We chatted about the project including the LEED elements and even offered up that if the employees of the W Hollywood were offered Urban Cycling classes, they would be more likely to ride their bikes to work, take advantage of the employee dressing rooms and bike parking. (there were three large bike racks in the employee parking area of the garage but only one bike)

We measured off some public plaza space as options for bike parking, having arrived prepared to actually survey. We offered some criteria for the eventual solution including visible, close to the entrance, secure, protected with a canopy or cove, out of the passageway, and we looked for opportunities. Essentially, the bike parking must work for the casual cyclist who arrives for the first time, no membership card for a "bike room" or other pre-arranged bike parking. Simple racks that a casual visitor would feel comfortable using and that would serve as secure and effective bike parking. It starts there, not with the VIP program that requires registering, a key card, a membership, and a visit to One Gateway.

Goldsmith had prepared for the meeting by packing a large bag of "That's not possible!" and suggestions such as a canopy or moving the planter or doing anything other than using the little room was met with "That's not possible!" Since she can't say yes and she has no plan and she isn't prepared and she hasn't asked, how does she know the answer will be "No!"

I'm not sure how this project turned into such an environment of limitations but somehow Lynne Goldsmith's contribution to the two hour bike parking survey was a series of "No!" responses to suggestions covering bike parking location, style, visibility, canopy, accessibility, and responsibility. Of course, when listening to Goldsmith speak authoritatively on limitations, from political to financial to social to environmental, I remind myself to never take a "No!" answer from somebody who doesn't also have the authority or power to say "Yes!"

The site survey ended with the obligatory confusion and lack of resolution over authority. The LASD typically is responsible for the Metro Station and the plaza area with the developer/property manager responsible for the actual development. Again, the ribbon has been cut and those at the meeting were unclear of who had authority and who maintained the rest rooms and who was in charge.

I'm not sure who is going to step up on this one. It might be County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky who also serves on the Metro Board. Perhaps Metro CEO Art Leahy will decide that the buck stops with him. Maybe Doug Failing, the Metro's Executive Director of Highways and Interim Director of Planning, or perhaps Roger Moliere, the Metro's Chief of Real Property Management & Development, will take a shot at solving the bike parking problem that has caused "paralysis of analysis" within the Metro's Bike Planning department. Angelo is already a no-show and Goldsmith is simply in charge of "No!"

This may seem like a lot of effort, all simply to get some bike racks installed on the public plaza on top of a Metro station at the new W Hollywood TOD but it's much much more.

This is the largest Transit Oriented Development in the City of Los Angeles. The $600 million that is invested in this TOD project came from many sources including you, the public. The Metro's budget comes from you, the public. A standard is being set, not just with the use of public funds, but with the implementation and design of TOD projects of which there will be more. In addition, the Metro is busy, working on the Expo and the Orange Line Extension. The mistakes they make will be repeated unless we work together to raise the bar. The Eastside extension has bike racks installed at Soto and at Mariachi Square. In both cases they need to be reinstalled correctly. That feedback doesn't come from the Metro, it comes from cyclists who care enough to insist on excellence.

Transit Oriented Development is the concept that was sold to the public. The Metro, Gatehouse Capital, Legacy Partners, the CRA, the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Improvement District, the LA Department of Transportation, the LA Police Department, the LA Sheriff's Department, the Federal Government, CalPERS, and Deutsche Bank Berkshire Mortgage all have a piece of this project and it's a shame that we're still standing on the public plaza having a "Who's in charge?" discussion while the work remains incomplete.

For too long, the question "Is there any room left over for the cyclists?" has been the battle cry for the Metro's Bike Planning Department. This is the last time. Who is the person who will say 'Yes!" to bike parking at the Metro's Hollywood & Vine Station.

CityWatchLA - When Rights and Privileges Get Mixed Up the People Lose

CityWatch, Aug 11, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 64

LA’s newly seated City Attorney, Carmen “Nuch” Trutanich, is hosting a City Attorney Neighborhood Forum at City Hall on Thursday and in an effort to demonstrate his unique approach to access, he has divided the public into two groups, those who get “free guest parking” and those who don’t.

It always comes down to the haves and the have-nots.

I won’t be there, of course. I didn’t qualify as one of LA’s “core-elite” and in a city that ranks your influence based on where you park your car, I can only imagine the inferior seating set aside for those who arrive by bicycle, or even worse, on foot or by mass transit. Of course, Nuch could have looked at Enrique Peñalosa’s work in Bogata, Columbia for inspiration on positioning equality in mobility as the foundation for a municipal government, a position that results in a reduction in crime, an increase in efficiency and a positive impact on the local economy, all while contributing to the overall health of the voters who put him in office.

Instead, Nuch continued down the congested road that positions motor vehicle parking space as the commodity that makes the wheels of this city move, the element of privilege that confirms position and power, the gift of public property that doesn’t show up on the audit trail and the City Hall welcome mat that keeps the insiders in and the outsiders out.

This may sound harsh, after all, we live in a city where “Officer, it was the strangest thing, I looked outside and there was a guy walking on my sidewalk!” is a legitimate “Broken Windows” call to the LAPD and ranks right up there with “All units! There are cyclists riding on the street!” as confirmation that there is something seriously wrong with the way LA moves people. At every turn, we reward bad transportation choices and then discourage good behavior, all the while complaining about our transportation system and traffic congestion.

Nuch is not unique in his commitment to the status quo and that’s the point. If he really wanted to come in and shake up City Hall and to communicate that there was a better way to engage the people, he could have simply started with public access based on equality of mobility. Instead he selected “free guest parking” as the battle cry.

How great would it have been if Nuch opened his reign with a commitment to the people of LA that City business would only take place in facilities that are open to those who walk, to those who use mass transit and to those who ride bikes. After all, this commitment is already made to those who arrive in motor vehicles, why not include the rest of the public?

Nuch is not alone in missing this opportunity.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the Patron Saint of Mass Transit, was recently scheduled to meet with the membership of GreenLA, an advocacy group made up of 100 of LA’s most active environmental organizations. The meeting was billed as “GreenLA Membership and the Mayor of LA” in a dialogue on LA’s green issues platform. Apparently transportation wasn’t one of the topics.

In a demonstration of disconnect, the meeting was scheduled to take place on the Westside, in an industrial area south of LAX. The venue is in an area so transit-proof that GreenLA first asked those with cars to offer carpools to other guests, then simply switched the location to a downtown facility, accessible to pedestrians, cyclists and those who use mass transit. Why, it even had accommodations for those who carpooled!

How is it that those who arrive by car are given special consideration on event notices, invitations and flyers, complete with information pointing out parking availability, detailing the location of the parking, noting any special reimbursement or validation details, and reinforcing the old and tired LA mantra, “You are what you drive” while those who employ alternative transportation are expected to figure it on their own.

Councilman Tom LaBonge recently invited Art Leahy, the new CEO of the Metro, to an evening town hall meeting to discuss LA’s Transportation System with the community. LaBonge chose Travel Town in Griffith Park as the venue, apparently unaware that the 96 is the closest bus and it stops running at 6pm. The Metro’s website indicates that there is no bus service from City Hall to Travel Town, it’s simply Metro inaccessible. Is the leadership of LA new to the city or just new to the idea of moving people in modes other than the automobile? The meeting was moved to another location, this time one with no bike racks. Small steps!

The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE) is currently gearing up for the October Neighborhood Council Congress and in an effort to fan the flames of interest, a “save the date” flyer was sent out promising “Great People, Great Food and Free Parking!” No word on alternative transportation, no encouragement to walk, no info on mass transit, no directions to the bike racks. Nothing in that flyer communicates a commitment to equality as the standard for public access.

Our freedom to move is one of our most basic freedoms. In the political arena, access is one of the most basic elements of equality. To get harsh on the status quo of parking may seem...well...harsh.

But consider this, there are seven parking spaces in LA County for every car. The host of a public meeting that doesn’t accommodate those who arrive in single occupant vehicles faces severe criticism.

Council District 2 candidate Chris Essel demonstrated her commitment to the locals in CD2 by sending out an invitation to the “common folks” urging them to drop by her office on Ventura Blvd. The invitation indicates that the location is supported by “ample free parking on Ventura Blvd. in addition to valet parking on site.” No mention is made of buses such as the 150 or the 750, no mention is made of the available bike parking, no encouragement to do anything other than maintain the status quo, all the while complaining about traffic congestion!

Bravo to the CD2 Candidate who seizes this opportunity and fills the leadership vacuum, showing up at the next Candidate Forum on foot or who takes the Metro or who rides their bicycle or who shows up on a horse. Having a candidate show up in anything other that a single occupant motor vehicle would be a refreshing demonstration of a commitment to shaking up the way we move people and would certainly separate the doers from the talkers.

Of course, this may be a difficult leap for many but the least we can ask is that all candidates reinforce their commitment to access equality by noting on all campaign materials the information for peds, transit passengers and cyclists on a “favored nation” status with all motor vehicle parking and valet information for motorists. (By the way, if you’re going to reimburse or validate for parking, give out Metro tokens also!)

LA’s City Clerk has taken the lead on this standard and has established “mass transit accessible” as one of the criteria used for selecting locations for the upcoming Neighborhood Council elections.

Ultimately, if Los Angeles is going to become a Great City, it will be because mobility is positioned and supported as a basic human right. It will be because we work together to create a standard where public access includes the public as a whole, not simply those who arrive in a car. It will be because we define and respect our streets as public space.

“See you on the Streets!”

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net) ◘

CityWatchLA - Metro’s Identity Crisis

CityWatch, July 14, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 56

The Metro is proposing to take LA's cycling community for a ride, one step forward and two steps backward, all in a misguided effort to revise the Metro's bikes-on-rail policy.

Current Metro policy prohibits cyclists from bringing their bikes on rail during peak hours (6:30 am - 8:30 am and 4:30 pm - 6:30 pm) a policy that is rarely enforced or even acknowledged based on the anecdotal presence of bikes on most Metro light rail during these hours.

The Metro is proposing to remove the restriction, a simple action that should be hailed by the cycling community with cheers of "They like us! Right now, they really like us!"

But a quick survey of the eight-page handout for the proposed policy revision revealed the small print, the details, the motivation for the out-of-character "What have we done for the cycling community lately?" posture of the Metro. Under the "enhance safety" bullet point, the Metro addressed safety by slipping in a universal limit on cyclists with a two bikes per rail car limit. This means that the last Red Line train from NoHo in the middle of the night, one that typically has two cars, would be limited to 4 cyclists.

The late night trains are typically light on passengers but heavy on bikes. It also means that during busy times, cyclists would be racing back and forth on the platform with their bikes, counting cyclists and looking for the "light" rail car. Hardly a safety improvement on the platform!

There are a couple of significant issues here, bigger than the simple specifics of where the bikes go and how many fit.

1) Bikes are a form of transportation. Cyclists are able to get around the city and fill Metro service gaps because of their bikes. Metro passengers are able to get farther and to fill service gaps because of their bikes. We should be supporting the potential synergy here, not limiting its efficacy by excluding cyclists with limitations that apply to no other user group.

Mike Cannell, the General Manager for Metro Rail Operations, explained that with the increase in ridership on the Metro Rail, space has become increasingly scarce. Good point. He pointed out that with the success of the Flyaway from the airport, more and more passengers are taking luggage on the Train. Good point. He pointed out that when you add strollers, carts and ... gasp ... one time he saw a guy with a Christmas tree, we're really now all competing for limited and finite space. Good points!

BUT...bicycles are a transportation solution. When the guy can ride his Christmas tree from the train station to his home, it should be in the same category as the bicycle, but until that day, bikes support and enhance the Metro Rail service as a form of complementary, not just alternative, transportation. All else is "stuff" and to limit bicycles to two per car while not limiting strollers, wagons, luggage, and other personal property demonstrates a clear attitude of "What are we gonna do with all of these cyclists?"

Cannell continued by pointing out that the presence of "all of these bikes" was a violation of the fire and penal codes because of the blocked doorways. He was asked if It was the "blocked doorways" that was the violation or if it was "the bikes blocking the doorways" that was the violation. He responded that it was the bikes. When pressed, he repeated that the prohibition was against bikes, not people or luggage or strollers or Christmas Trees, but against bikes.

Cannell's team pointed out that the space on a rail car is finite and a bike takes up space, thereby reducing Rail Car capacity. Cyclists countered, "By riding a bike, cyclists complement the Metro and close service gaps in the system, thereby increasing Transportation System capacity!"

Crickets chirped when the Metro staff was asked if anybody had actually counted cyclists on buses, on rail, and on the streets and if there was any information or data to support this discussion and the proposed policy recommendations.

The Metro doesn't count cyclists because, apparently, cyclists don't count.

2) The Metro has an identity crisis. Anyone who visits the Metro with any regularity is reminded of the old tale of the Elephant surrounded by the blind men. Essentially, six blind men were asked to determine what an elephant looked like by feeling different parts of the elephant's body.

The blind man who feels a leg says "It's like a pillar!" The one who feels the tail says "It's like a rope!" The one who feels the trunk says "It's like a tree branch!" The one who feels the ear says "It's like a hand fan!" The one who feels the belly says "It's like a wall! The one who feels the tusk says "It's like a solid pipe!"

The Metro is the proverbial "elephant." The Train folks exclaim "The Metro is a Rail System supported by bus connectivity."

The Bus Operations folks exclaim "The Metro is a Bus System that saturates the region with connectivity but competes with Rail for operating funds!"

The Training folks exclaim "It's a conflicted environment with everybody in our way!" The Real Estate folks exclaim "It's a development opportunity supported by transit!"

The Parking Lot folks exclaim "Seriously, look around. It's a parking lot supported by transit!" The Outreach folks exclaim "It's an opportunity to engage and to create community!" The Pedestrian folks exclaim "Hey, where's the elephant?"

The Bicycle folks exclaim "Don't anger the elephant!" Through it all, the local municipalities and agencies look at the elephant and see an ATM that's gonna dispense $40 Billion of Measure R money over the next 30 years, all to projects based on the Metro's priorities and oversight.

The Metro, by design, is our Regional Transportation Authority. It's an "elephant" and all of "the blind men" are correct. It's many things, but first and foremost, it is responsible for creating and funding a Transportation System that services all modes, using all methods and moving all people.

Federal funds along with Measure R funds put the Metro in a significant position of power and the character of our regional Transportation System is due to the priorities that are established at the top. The Metro funds everything from freeways to bike lanes to educational materials to the trees that make it more pleasant to walk to the bus stop.

Based on results it is evident that the Metro has meandered in its commitment to creating a Transportation System with a "multi-modal" commitment to moving people.

There is hope that this is going to change. The Metro has a new CEO, Art Leahy, and a new Chairman of the Board, Ara Najarian, both of whom have a reputation for innovation and a commitment to civil service.

Leahy and Najarian now have the opportunity to work together to integrate the many opinions of "the blind men" into a cohesive vision and mission for "the elephant." It's on them to create a real regional Transportation System that is committed to moving all people using all modes and that is committed to improving the quality of life for our communities.

Their first challenge is on the horizon and will come up this Thursday in the Operations Committee when the limit of the number of cyclists comes up for a vote. As Cannell puts it, "This system wasn't built with cyclists in mind."

The Metro now has the opportunity to address that oversight and to integrate cyclists as transportation solutions into a real Transportation System. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net) ◘