Pico/Olympic: Lawsuits begin

A group of Westside businesses filed suit Wednesday to stop Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa from implementing his traffic relief plan for Olympic and Pico boulevards.

The suit by the Greater West Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce alleges that Villaraigosa's plan would increase the number of vehicles on those streets. The result, they say, would be more traffic and smog. They say the proposal should be studied further under state environmental law.

The mayor's project is set to begin March 8. Initially, it involves changing the way traffic signals are synchronized so that traffic on westbound Olympic and eastbound Pico is favored. The idea is to encourage commuters to use the two streets to speed their commute to and from the Westside.

The plan also calls for the removal of on-street parking during rush hour. Business owners say the restriction would harm commerce. Zahirah Washington, one of the attorneys representing the chamber, said her clients would seek an injunction unless the city agreed to postpone or alter the plan.

A spokesman for the mayor called the suit "a meritless attempt to block reasonable traffic improvements" with the "inappropriate" use of environmental laws.

— Steve Hymon

Comments

[cathy]

I think this plan is a bad idea and is just more of this outdated thinking that we need to make things easier and faster for cars.
Light rail or subway should be built down Pico and Olympic as soon as possible. The cars should
have to SLOW DOWN. Forget synchronized signals - you don't want to encourage drivers to go as fast as they can. There should be center islands and diagonal crosswalks at intersections. You cannot have cars speeding along in a commercial/residental area where you have high-density living with lots of pedestrians and bicycles. It is not safe, and it is not pleasant for the people who may be shopping at the local businesses or sitting at outdoor cafes.
What about quality of life? This is more than just how to pack the maximum amount of people into the least space. There should be green areas. After the rail lines are built, some paved areas could be turned into parks.
No one wants to live on the edge of a freeway, whether they are living in single family homes or condos or apartments.
This old-style thinking is why we have urban sprawl, with anyone who can escaping the traffic and
polution by moving to the suburbs, sacrificing their time for a long commute, so their kids can
have play space and a healthier environment.
After you add up all the costs due to car collisions, pollution, loss of work productivity, police enforcement (if there is any) the rail lines will look cheap by comparison. I bet there could still be some single-family homes in the city with the owners commuting by rail.

[RB]

Ahhh Los Angeles.... When someone's not getting their way, they sue. Sounds like a bunch of spoiled brats don't like change. As for Colin's comments, LA drivers have been asked to change their ways since the 80's. You tell me, are they listening?

[Dan W.]

I'm so sick at what NIMBYs have done to this city that it is hard for me to work up a thread of sympathy here.

Because of NIMBYs the Wilshire Blvd. subway got delayed for 20 years, the Expo Line is in danger of falling apart and the Orange Line started as a busway rather than light rail.

I'm almost rooting for the city to win this one just to prove they aren't going to let NIMBYS ruin this city.

Also, if someone lives between the 105 and the Hollywood Hills and in the Southeast San Fernando Valley, they do NOT live in a suburb and are not entitled to a suburban lifestyle just because they want one or because of what their neighborhood was like back when Sam Yorty was Mayor.

That said, Pico and Olympic should not be turned into freeways. And without bus-only lanes initially proposed to improve public transit, this idea is really just a futile attempt to preserve the declining quality of the "car culture".

I see nothing wrong with the 4-2 split in lanes, the light management and the restriping.

For now, let the small businesses keep the parking. However, there is nothing wrong with having one-way streets in an urban environment. Other one-way pairings should be looked at around the city, perhaps Fairfax & LaCienega and/or Melrose & Beverly.

But these people DO NOT live in a suburb and we cannot continue to thwart the common good so that they can live in under the delusion that they do.

White three million more people expected in Los Angeles County by 2030, anyone who want a pure single-family home, single-occupancy automobile, based life north of the 105 need to move to the actual suburbs, or invent a time machine.

[Colin]

I agree with the neighborhood councils and homeowners' associations who are challenging this plan. Villaraigosa is trying to turn neighborhood streets into freeways. This is not acceptable. Jack Weiss keeps saying that the residents in the area should be thinking about the greater good of the larger LA Community. What about the drivers? How about more carpooling to reduce congestion? How about riding a bike now and then instead of driving all the time? Individual drivers aren't being asked to change their behavior and they must if we want to see any real reduction in congestion.