Topanga Canyon Speedway

It must be tough to buy a gift for LA's Department of Transportation. Caltrans tried but the gift was rejected. At the very least, the LADOT could have just accepted it and then rewrapped it and regifted but instead they just straight up said "No!" It's enough to make one wonder if Caltrans will be sending gifts to the LADOT anytime in the near future.

At issue are the bike lanes that Caltrans funded and engineered and wrapped up with a bow and tried to have delivered to the City of Los Angeles.

Topanga Canyon Boulevard runs through Woodland Hills in the West Valley and is also known as California State Highway 27. It belongs to the State of California and Caltrans is responsible for it but, as is the custom, defers to the local authority with regard to improvements and integration into the local transportation system.

Doug Failing, Director of Caltrans District 7 which includes Los Angeles County and Ventura County, was the featured speaker at a Great Streets Forum held last year in Woodland Hills. Hundreds of people turned out for inspiring presentations and discussions of Great Streets and how they are designed, the features that make them great, the designations that bring them to fruition.

A member of the audience who lives close to Mulholland Drive asked what it would take to make Topanga Canyon Boulevard a Great Street. Mr. Failing responded by describing a street with open setbacks, wide sidewalks, parkway separation, bike lanes, traffic lanes and a median strip with shade trees and greenery, all delivered in a way that integrates with the activity of the local community as the boulevard weaves through the west valley. The room erupted in applause. Pat Smith, the Urban Planner who has been working with the Warner Center Specific Plan was there and when she takes notes, she simply draws what she hears. The person sitting next to her watched her sketch the "reimagined" Topanga Canyon Boulevard and said quietly "I'm going to Art School!"

Caltrans embarked on a local improvement campaign and, as guided by the City of Los Angeles Bike Plan, an element of the Transportation Plan which in turn is part of the General Plan, generated the money and the engineering for Bike Lanes on Topanga Canyon Boulevard. The Bike Plan calls for bike lanes on Topanga Canyon from Mulholland Drive to CA State Highway 118, a distance of about 9 miles. That's a fairly significant bikeways improvement and a significant connector in a densely populated area.


The LADOT's traffic engineer in charge of the west end of the San Fernando Valley is Ken Firoozmand, a legend in Valley Bikeways Improvements who has been in the news lately for interupting the development of the Reseda Boulevard Bike Lanes. Again, the Bike Plan called for bike lanes on Reseda but as the local LADOT authority, Firoozmand overruled and determined that the area would benefit from peak-hour parking instead of the bike lanes. A report was generated that indicated the bike lanes were not going to happen and the cycling community stormed the local Neighborhood Council, wrote letters, made phone calls and Allan Willis, LADOT's Principal Transportation Engineer for Valley Traffic Operations dismissed the whole brouhaha as "trash talk." Councilman Zine dismissed the concerns of cyclists as based on rumor. Councilman Smith was simply silent. Then the "Report" turned up and the Bike Lanes were back in play.

As the cycling community engaged in an end-zone victory dance, the LADOT was apparently in the clubhouse toasting Firoozmand and Willis, giggling at the gullibility of the cycling community, and plotting the next evisceration of LA's moth eaten Bike Plan, due to be replaced with a newer "Infeasible" Bike Plan sometime between last year and never.

Ken Firoozmand is from LADOT Operations. He has authority over the streets in the West Valley. Bikeways is part of LADOT Funding. They simply don't have the heat to make the Bike Plan come to life. This is evidenced by the simple fact that when push comes to shove, bikeways improvements disappear from the landscape. The consultant engaged by the City of LA to develop LA's new Bike Plan opened the process by describing the need for a Bike Plan as "a funding requirement." The Bike Plan wasn't presented as a tool for changing the world, simply as a device needed to qualify for grants. She then went on to specify the 17 points of compliance that were necessary from a funding perspective. But all of the funding in the world doesn't translate into bikeways improvements if the Engineers in charge believe in pushing motor vehicles at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists. The city picked up $1.25 million of Bicycle Transportation Account funds for the Fletcher Bridge bike lanes (0.25 miles of bike lanes!) The money did not result in bike lanes on the Fletcher Bridge. (The Department of DIY gave it a shot but they were removed!)

My simple question to the LADOT is this, if you're not going to use those Topanga Canyon Boulevard bike lanes, can I have them? I'd like to put them to work and it seems a shame to have them go to waste! I can think of so many great places to place 9 miles of bike lanes.

"See you on the Streets!"

CityWatchLA - LADOT on Speed: Don’t Need Public’s Help

CityWatch, Dec 9, 2008
Vol 6 Issue 99

Just when you thought it was safe to cross the street, the LADOT is back in front of the Transportation Commission, asking for speed limit increases on five streets segments in the West Valley.

The proposed speed limit increases are for sections of Mulholland Drive, Corbin Avenue, Saticoy Street, White Oak Avenue and Fallbrook Avenue. These five proposals are part of approximately two dozen speed limit increase proposals that the LADOT is working through the system. At issue is the State mandate that restricts radar enforcement of speed limits to streets that have speed limits that are set based on the 85% percentile criteria, meaning that traffic is evaluated and speeds measured and the speed limit is set so that 85% of the motorists are traveling legally. As Alan Willis, Senior Transportation Engineer for the LADOT explains, "Drivers vote on the speed limit with their gas pedal."

Meanwhile, residents have voiced their opinion in emails, online, at neighborhood council meetings and on the evening news. In the last three months, this process for evaluating and raising the speed limits has become a hot topic for debate.

One resident wrote of the Mulholland proposal "I also object to any thought of any speed increase limit on Mulholland Drive or Topanga Canyon Blvd. This is a Disaster Zone...instead of speed warnings there should be signs showing a skull and crossbones, highlighting the high incidence of horrible crashes that occur here day after day, week after week, and year after year. The sound of police and ambulance sirens is horrifying for all of us in the general vicinity of this most unfortunate intersection....the sound of the collisions at all hours of the day and night is terrifying...and nothing is done to make this place a safer zone for drivers or pedestrians!"

Another protested "With the amount of small children in our subdivision, and young families, WE ARE AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. To increase the speed limit is ASKING FOR DEATH TO OCCUR- PERIOD!!! while another complained "My Tampa Estates neighborhood has been asking the city for help with speeding in our neighborhood for years (literally). And now they want to increase the speed limits? Our neighborhood is off the side streets from Corbin, and when the Orange Line backs up traffic, cars use our street as an Indy 500 detour. Not exactly safe for the young families and seniors living in our area."

The LADOT, in a demonstration of its "soft" skills, sent a letter to the community explaining that "the establishment of speed limits can be an emotional issue." Apparently, working on speed limit proposals for a year while leaving the community out of the process, ignoring the public when they protest and failing to pursue the full spectrum of traffic calming techniques available to transportation professionals evokes an "emotional" response from the community.

The letter, in a subtle dismissal of the "emotional" concerns of the community, proceeds with an explanation that "a rational, objective and defensible determination is necessary to maintain public confidence in the process." Public confidence?

Chip Yost of KTLA covered the issue and pointed out that the current process for surveying streets and setting speed limits leaves something to be desired, hardly the system that inspires the "public confidence in the process" that the LADOT espouses.

Councilman Dennis Zine has responded to the brouhaha over speed limit increases with a City Council resolution calling for a process that would "allow local traffic engineers and transportation authorities to develop and make use of more tools for traffic calming and enforcement."

Transportation Commissioner D. Malcolm Carson has responded to the protests of the community by meeting with the LADOT and the LAPD to establish more rigorous standards for evaluation and for communication.

Meanwhile, the LADOT has these five speed limit increase proposals on the Consent Agenda of the Transportation Commission for the THIRD time, demonstrating a tenaciousness that might be better applied to projects that actually come with community support.

The Transportation Commission meets on Thursday, December 11, at 10:00 am in room 1070 of City Hall.

If you have any comments on the proposed speed limit proposals, email them to me and I'll carry them in and present them during public comment.

"See you on the Streets!"

Under the Radar!

KTLA covered the debate over the proposed speed limit increases in Woodland Hills and took an interesting approach which was to point out the folly of the current paradigm of speed limit enforcement.

I met Chip Yost up on Wells Drive so he could look at the lovely, quiet residential neighborhood that becomes a raceway when it's used as a cut-through during rush hour. Complaints about the speeding motorists led to an LADOT speed limit survey (during off-peak hours and with unobstructed flow of traffic) which resulted in a recommendation to increase the speed limit to match the prevailing speed of traffic.

The LAPD concurred, the Council office concurred and the City Attorney prepared an ordinance raising the speed limit.

Wells Drive was one of a half dozen West Valley speed limit increases on the Transportation Commission agenda for October 23 but at the last minute the agenda was revised and the items were pulled. (I had emailed the LADOT on October 21 requesting information on the 6 proposals...coincidence?)

The speed limit proposals were re-agendized for the November 13 Transportation Commission meeting. Before the Commission could act, LADOT's John Fisher and the LAPD's Officer Williams stood together and asked that the Wells Drive proposal be pulled from consideration. (KTLA had filmed Wells Drive on November 10...coincidence?)

Both Chip and I requested from the LADOT a list of surveyed roads. Chip's list doesn't have Wells Drive listed on it. Curious! In fact there are a lot of streets that aren't listed. Fisher reports that there are 700 streets for which speed zone surveys are maintained. Why is Chip's list missing over a 100 streets?

Anyway...Chip's report indicates that Councilman Zine of the 3rd District "supports changing state laws, and today introduced a motion at city council supporting a review of how to improve the way speed limits are determined."

If this is true, then something good may come out of all of this brouhaha. Until then...

"See you on the Streets!"