Tag Archives: transportation

Summertime Blues

You may think summer is just around the corner, but I have proof to the contrary:

I-80, Donner, California June 1, 2011

I-80, Donner, California June 1, 2011

Time Travel: Long, long ago and not so far away, the streets were as diverse as the communities they knitted together

In most parts of the industrialized world, the streets have been surrendered to motorized vehicles. Many municipalities in the United States make half-hearted efforts to support bicycles as transportation by providing bike lanes to nowhere and hanging signs admonishing the SUVs to “Share the Road” and a few — downtown San Francisco; Boulder — do considerably more, but nowhere have they gone as far as Flanders and the Netherlands at integrating pedestrians and non-powered vehicles into the traffic mix. The Dutch even have a name for it: A woonerf is a street that is not closed to cars and buses but one where pedestrians and cyclists have legal priority over motorists.
Here’s how urban streets used to look:


As these wonderful movies show (the San Francisco trolley ride is from 1906), when automobiles first arrived on the scene they joined pedestrians, bicycles, horses, buggies and wagons, trolleys and buses in the busy streets. Not only was this mix of uses more pleasant, there is evidence (visit Linda Baker’s Salon article for background) that it was also safer than the current surrender of the streets to motorized carnage.

Further reading: Why don’t we do it in the road? A new school of traffic design says we should get rid of stop signs and red lights and let cars, bikes and people mingle together. It sounds insane, but it works by Linda Baker (Salon 2004-06-20)

Facilities: Baggage, Indeed

One of the truly pleasurable SoCal travel experiences is flying in to and out of Long Beach Airport. With it’s WPA-ish terminal — actually, it predates the New Deal by a decade — and lack of such refinements as miles-long passageways and cramped loading funnels, boarding and deplaning are swift and enjoyable.

On foggy nights, climbing up the back stairs to steerage on JetBlue’s red-eye to New York or Florida, LGB Baggageyou feel like Louie and Rick on the tarmac in Casablanca.

So it’s dismaying to learn from a report in the Times that “[b]usiness leaders, led by the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce and JetBlue, want a modernized airport terminal of up to 133,000 square feet that offers more amenities.” ["Airport Has Baggage," The Los Angeles Times]

This is about money, natch. The business leaders in question argue that the city has failed to take advantage of business opportunities, such as concessions — not enough that there is a restaurant, a fast-food outlet, a gourmet coffee kiosk, and a gift shop — and is thus missing out on tax revenue. They also are trying to make an argument for the project out of the fact that fewer than 1% of the facility’s 3 million annual passengers stayed overnight last year, though its hard to see why more flights would make anyone look with greater favor on the prospect of hanging around Long Beach.

According to the Times’ Nancy Wride, foes of a proposed expansion of the “cozy” terminal worry it will lead to pressure to lift the city’s limit on flights, currently maxed out at 41 (compared to the OC’s 130 and LAX’s 900), and lead to violations of legal noise limits. It’s not hard to sympathize with people who hope their neighborhood won’t turn into Inglewood.

Proponents of the project want to increase the capacity of the Art Deco facility by adding an annex of up to 133,000 square feet. According to Wride, the existing building, which provides about 58,000 square feet of passenger area including 23,750 square feet of temporary wooden space that resembles a ferry terminal, is a historic landmark, which means even its color can’t be changed without the approval of several commissions. And architectural review boards and landmark commissions almost never say yes to anything.

Facing a city council that seems disinclined to support the full extent of the Chamber/JetBlue proposal, the developers are threatening a referendum, an end run around representative government that will not only cut elected officials out of the process but also eliminate the unpleasantness of an environmental review to determine how much the project will degrade the quality of life in Long Beach and vicinity by adding to the noise, traffic congestion, and dirty air.

Even though it is off the beaten track for most Los Angeles and Orange Country travelers, the airport has boosted JetBlue by providing cheap and easy parking, short lines, painless baggage handling, and quick boarding and deplaning. Will people from Beverly Hills and Irvine continue to make the trek to Long Beach to get the same endless corridors, parking sharking and other niceties already much closer to hand at LAX and John Wayne? Compare your recent two-a-half hour ordeal in Southwest’s LAX abattoir with the comfort of being dropped at the door in Long Beach.

If you ask me, Long Beach would be better off leaving the airport more or less as is. Some revenue could be generated by improving the ground floor amenities — the gift shop and fast food outlets — and by inviting a world-class restauranteur to turn the beautifully situated, three-tiered eatery on the second level into a regional dining destination. With its excellent view of one of the busiest fields in the country for private aircraft and its almost unlimited parking, the Long Beach Airport restaurant would be hard to beat for a romantic evening out.

If you like the airport in Long Beach the way it is, you should let city officials and JetBlue know. Not only would keeping the airport intact benefit residents and travelers, but JetBlue may find that unintended consequences — like increased competition: the city will be hard-pressed to keep other airlines out of an expanded airport — and the loss of frequent fliers like me, who may not see low fares alone as sufficient to justify the long haul to what in New York would be one of the outer boroughs, for no other reason than to save a couple of bucks on a plane ticket — aren’t worth the trouble. (originally posted to Impractical Proposals, 2005-06-06).




The Santa Monica Mountains: Catch a free ride to paradise

…the National Park Service (NPS) [has] a public shuttle service called parkLink: alternative transit designed to connect visitors to beaches, parks and trailheads through the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (SMMNRA).

Eco-conscious NPS is moving forward with the vision in order to improve air quality, protect the environment and reduce vehicle impact. “We want to bring more people into the parks while limiting the number of cars driving through the canyons,” says Jean Bray, Public Affairs Officer with SMMNRA.

On weekends and holidays, park for FREE at an NPS site along the route and catch one of the shuttles departing every 30 minutes. With nine stops on the agenda, consider lunching in chic Malibu, surfing at Zuma or picnicking with the peacocks at Peter Strauss Ranch. The clean-diesel shuttles have space for all your gear: trip bike racks, storage for coolers and surfboards, wheelchair lifts and room for 20.

The multi-agency partnership, which includes NPS, California State Parks, Santa Monica Mountains conservancy and LA County Beaches and Harbors has high hopes for the parkLink project. “Together we can contribute to the greening of American by using the shuttle,” effuses Bray. You’ll also spare yourself the repetitive motion of hitting the brake pedal all the way down PCH.”

Visit <NPS shuttle> for scheduled stops and complete info on how to use parkLink.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
)(