Plan
   not consistent
   with Sustainable City goals

   To honorable members of the City Council, Civic Center Working Group, Planning Commission and city staff:
   A careful reading of the proposed bicycle circulation system in the Civic Center evaluation report from October 14, 2001, by Kaku Associates, reveals plans and values for circulation which are inconsistent with the goals of the city’s Sustainable City Program.
   The biggest part of a sustainability agenda for us in Santa Monica should be to reverse automobile dependency. Cars are the biggest polluters on the planet. One of the new goals proposed in the updating of the Sustainable City Program is to facilitate a cultural change to reduce auto dependency in favor of sustainable and affordable modes of travel. We have developed Santa Monica, as has Los Angeles, on the assumption that automobile use will predominate so it is given almost exclusive priority in the design of streets.
   Los Angeles is reviled the world over for the way it has degraded the environment with cars. We do not need to continue to follow this failed model. In the civic center, Santa Monica has the opportunity to embrace multi-modal transportation solutions being implemented in progressive cities such as Portland, OR, Boulder, CO and Davis, CA.
   Bicycling a legitimate and necessary mode of transport. Bicycling must be legitimized as a mode of transportation and given its share of the road in Santa Monica. The wording in the civic center plan reflects that bicycling is seen as a recreational activity and perhaps an undesirable nuisance to be kept off city streets, not as a legitimate way to commute. Such values are outdated and must change for Santa Monica to approach sustainability.
   There are two types of cyclists: commuter/utilitarian and recreational. Off-road facilities are perfect for those with more leisure time, and for young children, who are sadly missing as bicyclists in Santa Monica because of our paltry, unsafe bike network. Where are our safe routes to school? But commuter/utilitarian trips need direct, convenient routes, which our existing streets provide.
   All roads are bikeways. Commuting cyclists want to get to all the same destinations as people driving cars. Most of the destinations line arterials and collectors, such as in the civic center. These roads must welcome cyclists. And Santa Monica can demonstrate its commitment to sustainability by doing so. But the present wording by Kaku is troubling and shows that either Kaku is stuck in an increasingly outdated, auto-dependent paradigm, or the city is, or both.
   Repeatedly, Kaku describes how bicycle facilities “will not be necessary” on the new streets in the civic center, if a class I off-road path is provided:
“If a Class I bike path through the proposed Palisades Garden Walk were implemented, however, it would not be necessary to provide any dedicated bicycle facilities on the Second Street extension.”
   This class I bike path “would provide a connection between Main Street bike lanes and the Ocean Avenue bike lanes without requiring bike travel on city streets.”
   The document also makes reference to Vicente Terrace, Civic Center Drive and Olympic Drive as not needing bike facilities. This is an incorrect assumption. All of these roads need to accommodate bicycle transportation because they all will have important destinations on them.
   Fourth Street and Pico are also important arterials which SHOULD have on-street bike lanes.
   If you build enough bike lanes, they will come!
In its 1993 National Walking and Bicycling study, the Federal Highway Administration concluded that only two factors were significant in encouraging bicycle use: the strong presence of a university and whether more than 35 percent of the major arterials had bike lanes. They concluded, “It seems fairly clear that cities with few or zero miles of bike lanes are not generating much interest in bicycle commuting.” Those cities above the threshold had ten times the bicycling as those cities below. The study also found bicycle use increased as the proportion of streets equipped with bike lanes increased beyond the 35 percent threshold.
   A significant portion of the population is unable or unwilling to drive automobiles. Reasons range from environmental and health concerns to age or lack of income. Yet, few exercise the right to bicycle because our city streets are so inhospitable.
   Twenty-foot pedestrian walkways are planned on Olympic Drive. Why not set aside right-of-way for bikes on Olympic as well? Riding on the sidewalk is dangerous to bicyclists, as well as to pedestrians. Bike lanes have been shown to encourage bicyclists to ride in the street. Traffic counts show that at sites with bike lanes, 73 percent of all bicyclists rode on the road with traffic. Without bike lanes, only 34 percent rode on the road with traffic, the rest on sidewalks.
   I think class II bike lanes would work on Olympic. Or a class III route if there are lots of signs for cars to share the road with bikes. Perhaps a Netherlands’ style of bike path in parallel with the road, on the other side of parked cars could work if intersections were avoided.
   Roundabouts are far superior to intersections for safety and convenience for all users, and calm the traffic marvelously while keeping the flow moving. (See www.highwaysafety.org for some great information on roundabouts.) I can envision a roundabout where Main intersects Olympic. This configuration would be better for all users than the two T-intersections now planned.
   Honor those who travel in a sustainable manner Bikeway improvements have a role to play in many of our community priorities: quality of life, mobility and sustainability. Bike lanes are consistently among the top amenities that people want to see in their neighborhoods to increase quality of life. Bikeways support social equity by providing affordable mobility. Best of all, it is good for the body and the environment: it’s sustainable.
   I think that Santa Monica should start to honor and reward people in regard to how sustainable their transit mode is. The benefits our city derives from people who walk, bike and use transit should be acknowledged by a commitment to provide them with the best, most convenient access and safe, attractive facilities.
   Barbara Filet
   Cycle Santa Monica!
   a chapter of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition

   Will never
   return

   To the editor:
   Today, my wife and I tried parking in a lot off Santa Monica and Fifth Street. We drove through the lot and couldn’t find a space so we went to exit. We were charged $1.25 for not parking. I will never visit Santa Monica again. I have fond memories of fishing with my grandfather 40 years ago off of Santa Monica Pier. It’s very sad when the foreigners come in and ruin a good city in the name of greed.
   Ken Rosander
   Lancaster