The following is an excerpt from an email message from a person who has been purvey to the facts and issues of this project.
It accurately describes how and why the traffic-congestion-sparing two parallel/simultaneous bridge plan was not implemented.
“...Our city, our county and our state representatives were all in favor of a parallel Mulholland Drive Bridge being built before the current bridge would be taken down. METRO, the lead agency for this project, had these plans in place ready to go and then were faced with a potential lawsuit by The Brentwood Coalition of Neighbors and a redesign request by the Mulholland Design Review Board wanting a "world class architect" to design the bridge. METRO has no time for a lawsuit or a redesign, so they returned to the original plan of taking down half of the bridge at a time….
…Jay Greenstein, Councilman Koretz's transportation aide, Vivian Rescalvo, Supervisor Yaroslovsky's aide, and Ellen Issacs, Assemblyman Feuer's aide. Everyone was on board with the parallel bridge idea until the 21 page letter arrived from the Brentwood Coalition of Neighbors. A hearing was held before the Mulholland Design Review Board. METRO made there[sic] decision to stay on schedule and return to the original plan that will take 23 months with TWO [emphases mine-ed] complete closures of the 405.”
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
405 Shut -Down could have been delayed for two years
Traffic congestion caused by using only half of the bridge could have been avoided.
Metro and Caltrans had devised a plan to preserve the Mulholland bridge and all of its lanes during the time a new bridge was being built about 200 yards south of the current bridge. Then, after all of the new bridge with all of its lanes were available to us and the schools in the area and Sepulveda itself widen by an extra lane, the forty-two year old bridge would be removed in 2013.
This would have be the perfect solution to preserving the normal traffic flow that we see now instead of the massive congestion, inconvenience and danger caused by having only one lane in each direction.
However good this would have been for the vast number of valley residents, the plan was rejected by Caltrans and Metro do to threats of legal actions and court delays by four small factions who had irrational reasons and logic for preventing this wonderful solution.
Metro and Caltrans had devised a plan to preserve the Mulholland bridge and all of its lanes during the time a new bridge was being built about 200 yards south of the current bridge. Then, after all of the new bridge with all of its lanes were available to us and the schools in the area and Sepulveda itself widen by an extra lane, the forty-two year old bridge would be removed in 2013.
This would have be the perfect solution to preserving the normal traffic flow that we see now instead of the massive congestion, inconvenience and danger caused by having only one lane in each direction.
However good this would have been for the vast number of valley residents, the plan was rejected by Caltrans and Metro do to threats of legal actions and court delays by four small factions who had irrational reasons and logic for preventing this wonderful solution.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
405 tie-up could have been delayed for two years
Traffic congestion caused by using only half of the bridge could have been avoided.
Metro and Caltrans had devised a plan to preserve the Mulholland bridge and all of its lanes during the time a new bridge was being built about 200 yards south of the current bridge. Then, after all of the new bridge with all of its lanes were available to us and the schools in the area and Sepulveda itself widen by an extra lane, the forty-two year old bridge would be removed in 2013.
This would have be the perfect solution to preserving the normal traffic flow that we see now instead of the massive congestion, inconvenience and danger caused by having only one lane in each direction.
However good this would have been for the vast number of valley residents, the plan was rejected by Caltrans and Metro do to threats of legal actions and court delays by four small factions who had irrational reasons and logic for preventing this wonderful solution.
I invite commentator to guess at who these groups are. You will be surprised by when you find that may of them are only tangentially associated with your valley.
Metro and Caltrans had devised a plan to preserve the Mulholland bridge and all of its lanes during the time a new bridge was being built about 200 yards south of the current bridge. Then, after all of the new bridge with all of its lanes were available to us and the schools in the area and Sepulveda itself widen by an extra lane, the forty-two year old bridge would be removed in 2013.
This would have be the perfect solution to preserving the normal traffic flow that we see now instead of the massive congestion, inconvenience and danger caused by having only one lane in each direction.
However good this would have been for the vast number of valley residents, the plan was rejected by Caltrans and Metro do to threats of legal actions and court delays by four small factions who had irrational reasons and logic for preventing this wonderful solution.
I invite commentator to guess at who these groups are. You will be surprised by when you find that may of them are only tangentially associated with your valley.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
We deserve better
This simple message was sent by Shuda Kaseysey, ShudaK@metro.net, of Metro :
ONE YEAR!!! Come on now how little respect do these people have for use?
It is this same matter-of-fact attitude toward our inconvenience that is allowing the better two Mulholland bridges idea to be discarded in order to benefit a small minority of objectors.
Even though they are keeping open two of Wilshire's three lanes, They are still restricting traffic flow by 1/3rd on one of the busiest streets in our (or is the correct term their?)city.
The 10 Freeways earthquake damage was repaired in months, are these people not trying or do they just don’t care?
The Contractor will begin placing k-rail and installing temporary lighting and signals at Wilshire Bl and Sepulveda Bl on Friday, April 8, 2011 for 12 hours. During this period all traffic signals at the intersection of Wilshire and Sepulveda will be turned off …. Once complete, Wilshire Bl will be reduced by one center lane in each direction. All turn lanes will remain. This reduced traffic configuration is anticipated to be in place for one year.
ONE YEAR!!! Come on now how little respect do these people have for use?
It is this same matter-of-fact attitude toward our inconvenience that is allowing the better two Mulholland bridges idea to be discarded in order to benefit a small minority of objectors.
Even though they are keeping open two of Wilshire's three lanes, They are still restricting traffic flow by 1/3rd on one of the busiest streets in our (or is the correct term their?)city.
The 10 Freeways earthquake damage was repaired in months, are these people not trying or do they just don’t care?
Monday, March 14, 2011
Traffic tie ups CAN be avoided
Future traffic problems can be avoided by building a second Mulholland bridge before removing the old bridge. But this will not be happening unless action is taken now.
Catrans* has a wonderful plan to first build a new bridge accross the 405 freeway just south of the existing bridge before removing the existing bridge. The full width of the existing bridge will be usable with very little traffic disruption. When the new bridge is completed and fully functional, the old will be demolished thus avoiding the terrible traffic and safety problems of the skirbal and sunset bridge projects. This will also save $4 million and take 4 less months.
As clever and rational as this sounds, there are five factions who do not see the elegance of this plan and are forcing Caltrans and Metro* to revert to the same plan you see used on the Skirbal bridge. That being to tear down 1/2 of the width of the bridge and leaving only one lane in each direction during 22 months of construction.
*Caltrans has contracted with Metro to oversee the 405 widening project
Catrans* has a wonderful plan to first build a new bridge accross the 405 freeway just south of the existing bridge before removing the existing bridge. The full width of the existing bridge will be usable with very little traffic disruption. When the new bridge is completed and fully functional, the old will be demolished thus avoiding the terrible traffic and safety problems of the skirbal and sunset bridge projects. This will also save $4 million and take 4 less months.
As clever and rational as this sounds, there are five factions who do not see the elegance of this plan and are forcing Caltrans and Metro* to revert to the same plan you see used on the Skirbal bridge. That being to tear down 1/2 of the width of the bridge and leaving only one lane in each direction during 22 months of construction.
*Caltrans has contracted with Metro to oversee the 405 widening project
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)