How We Roll, Oct. 26: Anna vs the Crepe, fun with maps, DTLA vs parking ‘podiums’

Reminder: The Source is on record picking the Tribe to beat the Cubs in the World Series. So far, so good.

Reminder 2:

From the Dept. of Choking Down Tasty Crepes: 

I knew Anna could do it (spoiler!) just as I knew last night that Sam didn’t have the mettle to survive that long walk across Alexandria. On the plus side, Daryl is even better with an RPG than he is the crossbow 👏.

Art of Transit: 

Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.

Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.

Fun With Maps!: 

The maps do make Pas look a bit like a food desert. I recommend Gales (Italian) and Saladang (Thai), both easy to reach from the Gold Line Del Mar Station. In South Pas, it’s a short walk from the Gold Line to Gus BBQ and their amazing fried chicken sandwich. In SaMo, I highly recommend Fritto Misto (Italian), a short walk from the Downtown SaMo Station, and the Galley (steak and fish), a nice stroll or bike share from DTSM Station.

Editorial: Measure M (Daily News) 

The editorial board of the Daily News and other L.A. Newspaper Group newspapers takes an against stance on Measure M, Metro’s sales tax ballot measure on the Nov. 8 ballot. While the editorial offers some praise for the proposal, their biggest beef was the tax having no sunset. The editorial does leave the door open that it could support a future proposal.

For those keeping score at home, the Los Angeles Times’ editorial board has endorsed Measure M while the second-largest newspaper in the county — the LANG papers — has come out against it. Those with longish memories may recall the LANG papers endorsed Measure R in 2008 but did not back Measure J (a proposed extension of R) in 2012. The LAT editorial board endorsed Measure R, J and M. Measure R won narrowly and Measure J lost narrowly.

Measure M would raise the countywide sales tax by a half cent and continue the Measure R half-cent sales tax beyond its 2039 expiration date to fund a number of transit, road, pedestrian and biking projects. To learn more, click here — and scroll down to see the project map. Also, there are fact sheets (scroll down) for the county’s nine subregions here that help break down projects/programs by different parts of the county and that might interest LANG readers in the SFV, SGV, Long Beach and South Bay areas.

Related: The I-5 North Capacity Enhancements Project — which would receive funding from Measure M — in the Santa Clarita Valley area would not require toll lanes, so says Metro CEO Phil Washington in a letter to the Santa Clarita Valley Economic Development Corporation, according to this op-ed.

Planning department tackles parking podiums (Urbanize LA)

A loophole of sorts allows developers in DTLA to build big parking garages at street level and then put the actual part of the building serving people on top of them.

That means fewer eyes on the street and more all-around ugliness and perhaps less human activity at street level. The city’s planning department is trying to come up with solutions. Not really tackled is why someone didn’t realize the unintended consequences of the existing zoning laws — which some (read: me among them) have criticized as being out of date.

Quasi-related commentary: It’s great to see everything happening in DTLA and I came downtown for a stroll and a beer(s) and a “Cubs Win!” on Saturday night. Either I’m an Old Goat with failing eyesight or downtown — as I’ve mentioned many times before — is crazy dark and inadequately lit. Streetlights, people!

LA Metro CEO: more cars, increased frequency will reduce Expo Line delays (KPCC)

Metro’s Phil Washington returns to AirTalk and tackles a number of issues, including safety and security, the Blue Line and its improvements program, bike share and parking at the two Gold Line stations in Azusa.

On that issue, Phil said that Metro is looking into acquiring property for more parking but the agency needs willing partners — i.e. either the city or private owners.

 

1 reply

  1. Today’s editorial in the PASADENA STAR-NEWS (which serves the region that sunk Metro’s Measure J) has come out against Measure M, mainly because there’s no “sunset clause”. Measure M is a unique “forever” transit sales tax which will, in effect, further limit public control of the Metro Board. Moreover, the editorial states that the only sure beneficiaries of Measure M will be Metro’s employees. I would only add that another beneficiary is the construction lobby, including the unions, which has spent millions to promote Measure M. Any wonder why?.