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
This blog is to bring sanity to the Mulholland-405-Bridge project and emphasize the many advantages of building a new bridge BEFORE destroying the old bridge. I hope to point out that the virtues of two simultaneous bridges trump the reasons for advocating destroying and re-building 1/2 of the bridge at-a-time and creating a horrific traffic problem which can easily be avoided If we act now. MulhollandBridge.BlogSpot.com
Open Letter to those people who can postpone this one and stop a sendond Carmageddon
A good friend of mine sent this letter:
Dear Leadership of the Hillside Federation,
You are in the enviable position of being empowered to avoid a second full weekend freeway closure through your own efforts and your close relationship with the Mulholland Design Review Board.
Your memo of February 2, 2011 outlining reasons for opposing realignment of the Mulholland Bridge overpass of the 405 somehow reached my desktop via a Google alert prompted this response based on our current knowledge of the full freeway closure situation.
At the time your outline was presented this past February it appeared that opposing METRO’s bridge realignment plan and insisting on the normal EIR process apparently would only effect 8,000 to 9,000 cars daily with very little fiscal impact.
You have been a very good steward and defender of the hillside and its residents’ welfare. One could only imagine the shape and size of the schools and the daily traffic in the corridor near the 405 bridge without your and the Mulholland Design Review Boards constant oversight and strong insistence on enforcement. I myself know that you are the reason cars are not constantly turning left into my path as I drive along Mulholland.
However, we now have been made aware of the previously unknown, yet enormous impact a full freeway closure will have on 500,000 cars, several streets and freeways along with the far reaching fiscal and personal impacts any closure will have.
Who would have thought the LAPD would insist, on closing the 405 all the way down to the 10 freeway. How many of us realized during those meetings that METRO was really talking about two of these full closures back then.
Practicality and strong leadership must now prevail.
Facing these dire problems not once but twice, we must stop METRO's two closure plan. Metro dropped the ball earlier by not incorporating the realignment-two-simultaneous-bridges-but-only-one-freeway-closure scenario originally in the project. You have the power and, many, people feel,the obligation, to mitigate the damages METRO would otherwise be reaping upon the citizens of Los Angeles.
Your reasons for opposition to the re-alignment were an understandable defense of the highway in February when it appeared that only thousands of drivers would be effected. However, it is now apparent that we are facing not one but two full freeway closures effecting hundreds of thousands of drivers and these closures will be more sever and extensive then perviously thought. Those ideas, which appeared to be so innocuous and noble to you in February, now pale in importance when compared to the magnitude of the problems created by opposing METRO’s bridge realignment plan.
You need to greatly modify your position on opposing METRO's plan. Your sane judgement and leadership is now needed. Please take the reins of leadership and convince your colleagues on the Mulholland Design Review Board to also withdraw their objections to a realigned bridge. Contact mike Barbour and have him work with you to fast tract the design, permitting and EIR processes.
This of course this will not prevent the problems inherent to a weekend full freeway closure. However your positive actions on this matter will protect the citizens, the city and the county from the effects of a second full closure. And delay it for two full years. This will be a win-win situation for everyone. The only looser will be the company renting sand to Kiewit.
As you can imagine, time is of the essence, please quickly convey your thoughts on this matter to me
P.S. Think about all of the reasons that you opposed METRO’s realigned bridge proposal then Compare them to all of the problems that two full freeway closures will cause and decide in your own mind which has the higher priority, thank you.
A good friend of mine sent this letter:
Dear Leadership of the Hillside Federation,
You are in the enviable position of being empowered to avoid a second full weekend freeway closure through your own efforts and your close relationship with the Mulholland Design Review Board.
Your memo of February 2, 2011 outlining reasons for opposing realignment of the Mulholland Bridge overpass of the 405 somehow reached my desktop via a Google alert prompted this response based on our current knowledge of the full freeway closure situation.
At the time your outline was presented this past February it appeared that opposing METRO’s bridge realignment plan and insisting on the normal EIR process apparently would only effect 8,000 to 9,000 cars daily with very little fiscal impact.
You have been a very good steward and defender of the hillside and its residents’ welfare. One could only imagine the shape and size of the schools and the daily traffic in the corridor near the 405 bridge without your and the Mulholland Design Review Boards constant oversight and strong insistence on enforcement. I myself know that you are the reason cars are not constantly turning left into my path as I drive along Mulholland.
However, we now have been made aware of the previously unknown, yet enormous impact a full freeway closure will have on 500,000 cars, several streets and freeways along with the far reaching fiscal and personal impacts any closure will have.
Who would have thought the LAPD would insist, on closing the 405 all the way down to the 10 freeway. How many of us realized during those meetings that METRO was really talking about two of these full closures back then.
Practicality and strong leadership must now prevail.
Facing these dire problems not once but twice, we must stop METRO's two closure plan. Metro dropped the ball earlier by not incorporating the realignment-two-simultaneous-bridges-but-only-one-freeway-closure scenario originally in the project. You have the power and, many, people feel,the obligation, to mitigate the damages METRO would otherwise be reaping upon the citizens of Los Angeles.
Your reasons for opposition to the re-alignment were an understandable defense of the highway in February when it appeared that only thousands of drivers would be effected. However, it is now apparent that we are facing not one but two full freeway closures effecting hundreds of thousands of drivers and these closures will be more sever and extensive then perviously thought. Those ideas, which appeared to be so innocuous and noble to you in February, now pale in importance when compared to the magnitude of the problems created by opposing METRO’s bridge realignment plan.
You need to greatly modify your position on opposing METRO's plan. Your sane judgement and leadership is now needed. Please take the reins of leadership and convince your colleagues on the Mulholland Design Review Board to also withdraw their objections to a realigned bridge. Contact mike Barbour and have him work with you to fast tract the design, permitting and EIR processes.
This of course this will not prevent the problems inherent to a weekend full freeway closure. However your positive actions on this matter will protect the citizens, the city and the county from the effects of a second full closure. And delay it for two full years. This will be a win-win situation for everyone. The only looser will be the company renting sand to Kiewit.
As you can imagine, time is of the essence, please quickly convey your thoughts on this matter to me
P.S. Think about all of the reasons that you opposed METRO’s realigned bridge proposal then Compare them to all of the problems that two full freeway closures will cause and decide in your own mind which has the higher priority, thank you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Haven't any concerns been expressed about the safety of the thousands of students and staff at the six schools, as well as the Bel Air Presbyterian Church in that small corridor on Mulholland? When there will be only one lane each way on the Mulholland Bridge, how will emergency or evacuation vehicles get into the area if there is a fire or earthquake?
ReplyDeleteCompounding the problem and the traffic is the simultaneous construction of the Skirball Bridge and the Sepulveda on-ramp. Not only will there be only one lane each way on the Mulholland and Skirball bridges, but there will be less lanes on nearby Sepulveda. The alternative (temporary) bridge that Metro had planned on building would have alleviated the traffic impact and allowed for safety in the case of an emergency. However, some very selfish and vindictive groups have put pressure on Metro to scrap their plans that would have saved 4 million dollars.
We can't let them win. We must fight for the safety of our children and our quality of life.
The I405 freeway will be shutdown in both directions to dismantle the mulholland bridge sometime this summer. If the good plan to build a second bridge just south of the old bridge before dismantling it is re-approved, then this shutdown can be averted for two more years when Sepulveda will have had time to have been widened and can better handle more of the additional traffic.
ReplyDelete