City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution: (1) adopting a Negative
Declaration based on the Initial Study finding that the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and (2)
approving the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
BACKGROUND:
In November 2006, recognizing that a community’s environment affects public health, the
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors created the “Policies for Livable Active
Communities and Environments” (PLACE) Program. On October 22, 2007, the City Council
authorized the submittal of a PLACE grant application for the preparation of the City’s first
Citywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) and the implementation of the BPMP
through initiating grant funded programs, review and updating of City’s related plans, codes,
policies and standards, and the installation of physical bikeway improvements.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors awarded a PLACE grant to the City on July
1, 2008. After the City received the grant award, Public Works Department staff in
conjunction with our grant partners, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC) and
Alta Planning and Design (Alta), began working on the BPMP. In order to ensure
consistency with policies and practices and promote coordination across other City
departments, a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made up of City staff from relevant
departments was formed. In order to help ensure community participation in all steps of the
Meeting Date: 11/08/2010 Item Number: A-2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Culver
City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and Adopting a Negative Declaration
Relating Thereto.
Contact Person/Dept.: John Rivera,
Senior Management Analyst; Helen
Kerstein, Management Analyst
Phone Number: (310) 253-5616; (310)
253-5618
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No [X]
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Commission Action Required: Yes [] No [X] Date: ________________
Public Notification: (Email) Agenda and Meetings – City Council (11/03/10); (Email)
Planning Commission (11/03/10); (Email) Brett Hondorp, Andrew Lee, and David
Pulsipher, Alta Planning + Design (10/20/10); (Email) Jennifer Klausner and Alexis
Lantz, Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (10/20/10); (Email) Public Advisory
Committee (10/20/10); (Email) Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Email List
(10/22/10); (Advertisement) Culver City News (10/28/10 and 11/04/10)
Department Approval:
Charles D. Herbertson (10/28/10)
City Attorney Approval:
Carol Schwab (by H. Baker) (11/03/10)
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (by M. Noller) (11/03/10)
City Manager Approval:
John M. Nachbar (11/03/10) City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
BPMP development, the City Council created a Public Advisory Committee (PAC). The PAC
is intended to serve to provide public input on the BPMP in coordination with the public
participation process. Members of the PAC provided input on policy issues, principles,
prioritization, design guidelines and standards, within the overall content and format of the
BPMP. The PAC, with the assistance of Alta, LACBC, and City staff, held five community
meetings between April 2009 and June 2010.
Based on the input received from the PAC, community, and TAC, as well as field studies
and other data gathering, a draft BPMP was released for public comment on May 28, 2010.
The comments that were received through the comment period (which ended June 18,
2010) along with staff responses have been incorporated into the BPMP (see Attachment 3
for the BPMP and attachments). The BPMP was presented to the Planning Commission for
comment on October 27, 2010. The Planning Commission discussion involved the
following:
• The proposed Bikeway Networks connections to the regional bikeway system,
particularly the City of Los Angeles – The Culver City Network provides connections
to the adjoining existing and proposed bikeway facilities identified in the City of Los
Angeles 2010 Bicycle Plan.
• Bikeway connections between Downtown Culver City and the Exposition Light Rail
Transit (Expo) Station Area – The discussion focused on the reasoning for pursuing
a bikeway facility on Washington Boulevard, when the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane
exists as an alternate route. The proposed Washington Boulevard facility provides
connectivity between the Expo Station and associated future developments in the
Washington/National area and downtown that was requested by community
workshop participants and the PAC members. The Venice Boulevard Bike Lane
alone does not provide direct access to Culver City Downtown from the Expo Station
area, when compared to Washington Boulevard. In addition, the Venice Boulevard
roadway characteristics (seven lanes), traffic volume and speeds, compared to those
of Washington Boulevard, make it less desirable for many possible riders. Finally,
Washington Boulevard provides the best connectivity between Downtown Culver City
and easterly Culver City business districts.
• The use of cost/benefit analysis to prioritize the top priority projects – The PAC was
asked at the beginning of the process to identify their priorities for establishing the
proposed bike and pedestrian network for the City. Under the context of
encouraging and improving walking and biking in the City, the PAC developed the
following ranking criteria:
1. System Gaps & Connectivity to Existing Facilities
2. Connections to Activity Centers
3. Proximity to Transit Hubs
4. Proximity to Schools City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
5. Collisions & Public Input
These criteria are believed to be a better guide to identifying projects that will
encourage and improve walking and biking in the City than using a cost/benefit
analysis.
• The advisability of using high-visibility crosswalks – A question about the safety of
high-visibility crosswalks was raised. The BPMP discusses the use of these
crosswalks in selected areas where high pedestrian volumes exist. There have been
engineering analyses conducted in the past regarding the use of these types of
crosswalks that have found that some risks do exist, but they can be reduced or
eliminated through the use of additional traffic control measures. Prior to installing
any future crosswalk, the Public Works Department would conduct a traffic
engineering analysis of the locations and ensure that the appropriate control
measures would be provided.
Subsequently, minor editorial changes as well as some changes to the bicycle network were
made. Tonight, this document is being brought to the City Council for adoption.
DISCUSSION:
The BPMP is intended to serve as an official policy document guiding the development of
policies, programs and facilities that foster cycling and walking. It also ensures the City’s
eligibility for funding facilities and programs through various grant opportunities, including
the State of California’s Bicycle Transportation Account. Although the BPMP proposes a
network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as specific projects and programs, the
majority of their implementation is contingent on the receipt of grant funding.
The BPMP begins with the articulation of a vision for the City. The vision focuses on
changing the traditional transportation planning paradigm by adopting a Complete Streets
policy. The PAC emphasized the importance of adopting the “Complete Streets” policy.
Complete Streets, or “routine accommodation,” is a movement to design roadways for all
modes of transportation, including pedestrian, bike, transit and motor vehicle. This
movement stems from difficulties bicyclists, pedestrians (particularly the elderly and mobility
impaired persons) and others may have when using streets primarily designed for motor
vehicle use.
Bicyclists have legal access to all city streets. While the BPMP identifies a specific subset of
streets as existing or potential official Bikeways or Pedestrian Corridors, most bicyclists and
pedestrians will need to use other streets beyond those officially recognized in this Plan in
order to reach their destinations. Therefore, it is important that all roadways, to the extent
possible, have features that accommodate all users of the road. The California Complete
Streets Act (CCSA) of 2008 (AB 1358) provides the following:
Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantive revision of the circulation element,
the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal
transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban
context of the general plan.…
For purposes of this paragraph, "users of streets, roads, and highways" means bicyclists,
children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians,
users of public transportation, and seniors.
The CCSA lays out the minimum provisions for meeting bicyclists and pedestrian
requirements. Having a “balanced” transportation network is a lofty goal because networks
historically favor motor vehicle movement. The BPMP goes beyond the CCSA stipulations
and recommends prioritizing efforts to create policies, programs and infrastructure for
bicyclists and pedestrians in order to help develop a balance between the movement of
people using all modes of transportation. In keeping with the Complete Streets concept, the
BPMP articulates an overarching goal for the City:
Transform the City into a place with an extensive bicycle and pedestrian network that
allows travelers of all levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and biking to their
destinations. In so doing, encourage more people to forgo car trips, when possible, in
favor of alternative forms of transportation and become truly bicycle and pedestrian
friendly.
After presenting this vision and overarching goal, the BPMP provides a summary of the
process used to create the BPMP, including the role of the PAC, TAC, and larger
community. It describes the current conditions in the City, including existing facilities for
bicyclists and pedestrians as well as relevant policies in the Municipal Code, General Plan
Elements, and other City documents. Next, the BPMP identifies bicycle and pedestrian
needs based on collision data, bicycle and pedestrian counts and audits, surveys, and
feedback from the community workshops described above.
In order to help meet the identified needs and the overarching goal of the BPMP, the Plan
proposes bicycle and pedestrian networks. These networks are intended to facilitate non-
motorized travel throughout the City by proposing facilities such as bike lanes, shared lane
markings (“Sharrows”), bicycle friendly streets, and pedestrian friendly treatments on key
corridors throughout the City (as feasible given existing rights-of-way and traffic conditions).
The BPMP also outlines priority projects for grant funding to help make the network a reality.
Since creating a bicycle and pedestrian friendly City is about more than just infrastructure,
the BPMP goes beyond proposing a network and physical improvements, and also identifies
potential enforcement, education, and awareness programs to help promote non-motorized
transit options. And, because implementation is contingent on grant funds, the BPMP
identifies potential outside funding sources. The BPMP also includes a discussion of
evaluation and implementation. Finally, the BPMP concludes with a reiteration of the
overarching goal of the Plan and an articulation of specific objectives, polices and actions
that will help achieve this goal. The objectives identified in the plan include:
• Objective 1 - Implement the 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), by
initiating funded projects and programs and pursuing grant funding for unfunded projects
and programs over the next 5 years. City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
• Objective 2 – Implement a “Complete Streets” Program by evaluating the needs of
and/or the potential impacts on cyclists and pedestrians, including persons with special
mobility needs, during planning/review of proposed public and private development and
capital improvement projects.
• Objective 3 - Create a Mobility Coordinator position.
• Objective 4 - Reduce the number of bicyclists and pedestrian involved in traffic crashes.
• Objective 5 - Over the next five (5) year planning period, double the percentage of total
trips made by bicycling and walking in the City as observed from the City’s 2009 bicycle
and pedestrian counts.
• Objective 6 - Amend and update the bicycle and walking related sections of the
Municipal Code.
• Objective 7 – Annually evaluate the outcomes of the BPMP implementation.
Areas for Future City Council Actions
As mentioned above, the BPMP identifies the specific objectives, policies and actions for
achieving the goals set forth in the BPMP. These goals encompass expanding the City’s
network of facilities and creating non-infrastructure programs to encourage cycling and
walking, and will require modification of the Municipal Code and some City development
criteria. Some of the actions identified in the BPMP are established and implemented by
adoption of this Plan. In most instances, however, implementation will be dependent upon
obtaining grant funding. The following is a listing of specific actions which would involve
formal City Council review in the future should the City Council adopt the current version of
the BPMP. The first number of each action identifies the related objective and the lower
case letter identifies the related policy.
Action 2a.1 - Adopt a “Complete Streets” policy requiring that bicyclists, pedestrians, and
transit users needs are analyzed as part of all discretionary development review processes
and capital improvement project design phases.
Action 2a.2 - Revise the City’s Traffic Study criteria to ensure that bicycle and pedestrian
movements are counted along with other vehicle movements counts, and that the analysis
shall include a weighing of the merits of the motor-vehicle related improvements against the
needs of accommodating bicyclist and pedestrian movements.
Action 2a.3 – Consider adopting a mechanism for project related vehicle trips to be
mitigated through funding of BPMP projects and/or programs or the provision of end-of-trip
amenities, such as additional bicycle parking and shower and clothing locker facilities to be
located at transit centers and new employment sites to promote bicycle commuting.
Action 2a. 4 – Consider establishing a trip-mitigation fee or expanding/increasing the New
Development Impact Fee to fund BPMP project and program implementation.
Action 2a.5 – Consider establishing a process for payment of an in-lieu fee for use to fund
BPMP projects and/or programs as a trip reduction credit. City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Action 5a.5 – Pursue grant funding for design/community outreach and construction for a
separate walking path along Ballona Creek and enhancements to the Bike Path.
Action 5b.4 – Explore increasing the City’s Transportation Demand Management
requirements for bicycle racks, lockers, and shower amenities for non-residential projects.
Action 5b.5 – Adopt design standards for all bicycle racks on public property, right-of-way,
and design requirements for private development.
Action 6a.2 – Adopt Municipal Code provisions for regulating bicyclists and pedestrian
behavior on the Ballona Creek and Culver Boulevard Bike Paths and public sidewalks and
plazas.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, the BPMP has
been determined to have less than significant adverse impacts on the environment and thus
a Negative Declaration is appropriate and has been prepared for adoption by the City
Council (Attachment 2). Further implementation of the proposed bicycle and pedestrian
networks and projects may require project-specific environmental review and analysis
pursuant to CEQA at the time the actual projects are considered.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
The BPMP is a policy level document. Although it proposes a network of bicycle and
pedestrian facilities as well as specific projects and programs, it makes it clear that their
implementation is contingent on the receipt of grant funding. Therefore, approval of the Plan
does not require a financial commitment on the part of the City.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Resolution
2. Negative Declaration and Initial Study
3. Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and Attachments
MOTIONS:
That the City Council:
Adopt a Resolution (1) adopting a Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study finding
that the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan will not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment; and (2) approving the Culver City Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan.
DRAFT
Prepared for:
City of Culver City
Prepared by:
Alta Planning + Design October, 2010
BICYCLE &
PEDESTRIAN
MASTER PLAN
The Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) is the City‘s first ever comprehensive plan for
bicycling and walking. Created through a partnership between Culver City and the Policies for Livable,
Active Communities and Environments (PLACE) Program of the Los Angeles County Department of Public
Health, the BPMP seeks to articulate a new paradigm for transportation planning in the City that embraces
the concept of ?Complete Streets.? The BPMP also provides a guide for the future development of bicycle and
pedestrian facilities, and education, enforcement, and encouragement programs for Culver City. In so doing,
the BPMP will encourage walking and biking and lead to a host of associated benefits, including reduced
congestion; lower greenhouse gas emissions; a thriving, walkable business environment; and the promotion of
healthier lifestyles and improved quality of life in the City and adjacent communities.
While articulating a new paradigm for transportation planning and goals for the City is critically important
part of the Plan, it is not sufficient on its own. The Plan must also provide a practical roadmap to help guide
bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the City. With this in mind, the Plan inventories and evaluates the
City‘s current bicycle network, addresses opportunities and constraints, and recommends specific policy
changes to encourage bicycling and walking. The Plan‘s attached Design Guide also provides guidance for
implementing high quality facilities, including shared-use paths, bike lanes, bike routes, bicycle parking, and
newer treatments such as Bicycle Friendly Streets and sharrows that conform to current standards and best
practices. The Plan prioritizes bicycle and pedestrian facilities and—because grant funding is necessary to
implement the proposed projects and programs—the Plan establishes funding and implementation priorities
for the upcoming years.
As the City‘s first Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, this document is critically important in advancing bicycle and
pedestrian issues in the City. Yet it is important to acknowledge that, despite its strengths, this first Plan is
also just the first step in a long journey. The City must update the Plan regularly as conditions change and the
City progresses towards its bicycle and pedestrian goals. In addition, just as public input greatly enriched this
first Plan, continued civic participation from neighborhoods, advocacy organizations, the business
community, and others is essential as the City implements and updates this Plan in future years.
In creating its first ever Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan (BPMP), the City of Culver City is embracing a
new vision of transportation planning, recognizing that
it is essential to enhancing the quality of life for not only
residents and visitors, but also the broader community
and world. To this end, the City is adopting the concept
of Complete Streets, which emphasizes a balanced
transportation system that considers all users of the
road when planning development and transportation
projects, whether cyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, or
vehicles. The City is also articulating its principal goal:
To transform the City into a place with an extensive bicycle and pedestrian network that allows
travelers of all levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and biking to their destinations.
In so doing, encourage more people to forgo car trips, when possible, in favor of alternative
forms of transportation and become truly bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
The BPMP, including the focus on the concept of Complete Streets and the principal goal presented above,
was developed as a result of a community-based process that included five public workshops and extensive
participation from a City Council-appointed Public Advisory Committee (PAC). The PAC consisted of
bicycle and pedestrian advocates, representatives from neighborhood organizations, and representatives from
the business community. Culver City also convened a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) composed of
City staff from Departments that have a stake in overseeing and implementing the Plan. The TAC provided
input throughout the BPMP‘s development.
The BPMP reviews those Elements of the current Culver City General Plan that relate to bicycling and
walking, specifically the Circulation Element, Open Space Element, and Land Use Element. The Circulation
Element calls for a comprehensive bikeway plan and identifies Ballona Creek as the backbone of Culver City‘s
bikeway network. The Open Space Element dictates human-scale design that caters to pedestrians; it
designates bike paths as active recreation areas and calls for new bike paths along National Boulevard and
better on-street connections between Downtown and the Ballona Creek Bicycle Path. The Land Use Element
of the Culver City General Plan establishes walkability as a guiding principle for Culver City‘s development.
The BPMP then reviews walking and bicycling related Municipal Codes. It covers Ballona Creek Resolution
No 2004-R044, which promotes active use of the Creek while mitigating the potential negative effects on
residents who live alongside it. The BPMP also examines design guidelines for Downtown Culver City that
foster walking.
Finally, the BPMP catalogues the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The existing bikeways in Culver
City are the Ballona Creek Bike Path, Culver Boulevard Bike Path, and the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane. The
Plan lists existing pedestrian areas, including Downtown Culver City, major employment and commercial
centers, parks and open space, retail centers, commercial corridors, schools, and residential areas. The BPMP
also reviews the bicycle parking in Culver City.
To identify the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in Culver City, the project team (City Staff, Alta Planning +
Design and the Los Angeles County Bike Coalition) working with the PAC and community volunteers
conducted an online survey, bicycle and pedestrian counts, bike and walk audits, and public workshops. The
team also analyzed collision statistics involving bicyclists and pedestrians in Culver City.
The online survey solicited information about
purposes, frequency, and trip characteristics of
walking and bicycling. It also asked for respondents‘
favorite areas to bike and walk as well as areas
needing improvement. The survey helped to ensure
public involvement throughout the development of
the BPMP. Key conclusions of the survey include:
Most utilitarian bike trips are less than 6
miles; bicyclists‘ top concern is safety,
especially as it relates to car speeds
Many pedestrians walk for exercise and
health
Pedestrians want pleasant walking conditions on major arterials
The bicycle and pedestrian counts indicate where people in Culver City are currently bicycling and walking,
and how bicyclists in Culver City behave, particularly concerning rates of sidewalk riding, wrong way riding,
and helmet use. Trained volunteers counted over 1,800 bicyclists and over 4,500 pedestrians at 18 intersections
throughout the City. Key results of the counts include:
Male bicyclists outnumbered female bicyclists 4:1
Many people bicycle on Washington Boulevard, which had the highest volumes of bicyclists after the
Ballona Creek Bike Path, the Culver Boulevard Bike Path, and the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane
Over 42% of all pedestrians counted were at the intersection of Culver Boulevard and Cardiff Avenue
in Downtown Culver City, reflecting Downtown‘s attraction for pedestrians
The bike and walk audits of six geographically diverse, strategically selected locations around the City
provided an on-the-ground evaluations of the City‘s walking and bicycling conditions, and gave PAC members
and volunteers an opportunity to learn about how and where physical improvements might be installed in
Culver City. Audits identified:
Sidewalk obstructions
Crossing problems
Lack of shade
Discomfort due to high motor
vehicle speeds, and
Rough road conditions for
bicyclists
At public workshops, attendees had the
opportunity to comment on existing
bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Culver
City, and to suggest improvements and
programs. The BPMP summarizes the
public comments. Particular concerns included:
Safety on the Ballona Creek Bike Path
Difficult and potentially hazardous intersections and roads for biking and walking
Enhancing multi-modal connections and bike parking
Collision statistics over the past five years indicate the relative safety of bicycling and walking throughout the
City. The BPMP includes maps of all bicycle and pedestrian collisions of the past five years. Bicycle collision
rates remained constant over the past five years, while pedestrian collisions rose slightly in the past two years.
All of the elements of the needs analysis informed the selection and prioritization of the recommended bicycle
and pedestrian network.
The BPMP proposes a bicycle network of 36.88 miles of bikeways, including 6.5 miles of bike lanes, 9.73 miles
of sharrows (technically named ?Shared Roadway Bicycle Marking? and also referred to as a ?Shared Lane
Marking?), 5.61 miles of bike routes, and 14.62 miles of potential Bicycle Friendly Streets. On major roadway
segments that are not wide enough to accommodate a bicycle lane without roadway reconfiguration and meet
the State required guidelines, the BPMP recommends sharrows and bicycle route signage. Also, the BPMP
identifies streets that have potential for designation as ?Bicycle Friendly Streets? after further analysis and, if
needed, improvements. Bicycle Friendly Streets is a bikeway designation referring to enhanced routes on
residential streets with low traffic volumes. Prior to a Bicycle Friendly Street designation, they will receive
bicycle route signage at a minimum, and may receive custom signage, sharrows, and, if needed, traffic calming
measures.
The BPMP also identifies Pedestrian Improvement Zones and Corridors based on public input and fieldwork.
Pedestrian Improvement Zones are areas with high pedestrian demand and potential and their designation
gives them priority for pedestrian improvements. Pedestrian Improvement Corridors are linear segments of
roadway identified as significant to pedestrian travel in Culver City.
To prioritize the bikeway and pedestrian networks, the BPMP scores and ranks them according to six criteria
identified by the PAC and TAC. In priority order, these criteria are:
1. Closes system gaps and creates connectivity to existing facilities
2. Creates connections to activity centers
3. Proximity to transit hubs
4. Proximity to schools
5/6. Reduces collisions & accounts for public input (tie)
Each project in the proposed bikeway and pedestrian networks receives a weighted score according to these
criteria and the priority ranking above. The BPMP presents the resulting project priorities in Tables 6.2 and
6.3.
The BPMP includes a detailed presentation of the most critical project, as well as the five high-priority bicycle
projects and the five high-priority pedestrian projects. The project sheets include a description of the project
area and issues, a listing of the specific improvement recommendations, a cost estimate, an overview map of
the project area, and conceptual designs of each of the bicycle/pedestrian improvement recommendations.
Creating a city that supports and encourages its residents to bicycle and walk involves more than just
infrastructure improvements. The BPMP proposes ongoing enforcement, education, and awareness programs
and identifies City agencies and community populations that should participate in these programs. These
include:
Targeted enforcement
Bicycle patrol units, speed limit enforcement
Ballona Creek Bike Path Volunteer Program
Adult cycling skills education, motorist education
School-based education
Creation of a safety handbook
To increase awareness and encourage bicycling and walking, the BPMP proposes a Safe Routes to School
Program, a Share the Road education campaign, a bike light campaign, a bike-to-health campaign, bicycle
parking at events, community bikeway and walkway adoption, a multi-modal access guide, Ciclovias, a
bicycle and pedestrian signage program, and a Ballona Creek Bike Path Volunteer Program.
The BPMP catalogues available funding
sources for network improvements as well
as enforcement, education, and awareness
programs. The Plan sorts these funding
sources by level of government, either
federal, State of California, County of Los
Angeles, or local. It describes the purpose
of each funding source and the types of
projects and programs that are eligible for
funding by that source, as well as the
selection process and the criteria used to
select grantees.
Evaluation is a critical to ensuring that the Plan meets its goals and contributes to a truly bicycle and
pedestrian friendly City. The BPMP includes a discussion of an evaluation program to serve this purpose.
Additionally, this chapter designates the Public Work Department‘s Administration Division as the agency in
the City charged with implementing and evaluating the BPMP.
The document concludes with a reiteration of the principal goal of the Plan and an identification of objectives,
polices and actions to help meet this goal. This goal and its associated objectives, policies and actions relate to
all the issues addressed in the BPMP, from vision, to policy changes informed by the existing conditions, to
expanding the City‘s network of facilities and creating non-infrastructure programs to encourage cycling and
walking. The objectives presented in the Plan include:
Objective 1 - Implement the 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), by initiating funded
projects and programs and pursuing grant funding for unfunded projects and programs over the next
5 years.
Objective 2 – Implement a ?Complete Streets? Program by evaluating the needs of and/or the
potential impacts on cyclists and pedestrians, including persons with special mobility needs, during
planning/review of proposed public and private development and capital improvement projects.
Objective 3 - Create a Mobility Coordinator position.
Objective 4 - Reduce the number of bicyclists and pedestrian involved in traffic crashes.
Objective 5 – Over the next five (5) year planning period, double the percentage of total trips made by
bicycling and walking in the City as observed from the City‘s 2009 bicycle and pedestrian counts.
Objective 6 - Amend and update the bicycle and walking related sections of the Municipal Code.
Objective 7 – Annually evaluate the outcomes of the BPMP implementation.
The document contains two appendices; Appendix 1 is the Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide and,
Appendix 2 includes all the comments received on the draft of this Plan, which was released to the public,
along with responses.
Historically, transportation planning focused primarily on the car, often at the expense of other modes of
transportation. The result of this emphasis is clear: a car-dominated environment that fills roads to the point
of intense congestion, uses vast amounts of fossil fuel, and harms human health by discouraging walking and
biking and by sending harmful pollutants into the air. Gradually, this mentality is changing. Cities across the
state and nation are beginning to recognize that walking and biking are a viable means of transportation and
that creating accessibility for all modes of travel is not only essential, but inevitable in order to accommodate
future travel demand and address our environmental and health challenges.
In creating its first ever Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan (BPMP), the City of Culver City is embracing this
new vision of transportation planning, recognizing that
it is essential to enhancing the quality of life for not only
residents and visitors, but also the broader community
and world. To this end and as part of this Plan, the City
is adopting the concept of Complete Streets, which
emphasizes a balanced transportation system that
considers all users of the road when planning
transportation projects, whether cyclists, pedestrians,
transit riders, or vehicles. The City is also adopting the
goal of transforming itself into a place with an extensive
bicycle and pedestrian network that allows travelers of all levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and
biking to their destinations. In so doing, Culver City hopes to encourage more people to forgo car trips in
favor of alternative forms of transportation and to become truly bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
While articulating a new paradigm for transportation planning and goals for the City is critically important
part of the Plan, it is not sufficient on its own. The Plan must also provide a practical roadmap to help guide
bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the City. With this in mind, the Plan inventories and evaluates the
City‘s current bicycle network, addresses opportunities and constraints, and recommends specific policy
changes to encourage bicycling and walking. The Plan‘s Design Guide (Appendix 1) also provides guidance for
implementing high quality facilities, including shared-use paths, bike lanes, bike routes, bicycle parking, and
newer treatments such as Bicycle Friendly Streets and sharrows that conform to current standards and best
practices. The Plan prioritizes bicycle and pedestrian facilities and—because grant funding is necessary to
implement the proposed projects and programs—the Plan establishes funding and implementation priorities
for the upcoming years.
As the City‘s first Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, this document is critically important in advancing bicycle and
pedestrian issues in the City. Yet it is important to acknowledge that, despite its strengths, this first Plan is
also just the first step in a long journey. The City must update the Plan regularly (every five years) as
conditions change and the City progresses towards its bicycle and pedestrian goals. In addition, just as public
input greatly enriched this first Plan, continued civic participation from neighborhoods, advocacy
organizations, the business community, and others is essential as the City implements and updates the Plan in
future years.
Special thanks to everyone who participated in the process of creating this document, including the Public
Advisory Committee (PAC) and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Also, many thanks to the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Health‘s Policies for Livable, Active Communities and Environments
(PLACE) program for the funding and support they provided, without which this document would not exist.
The following details how the City developed the BPMP, including its vision and the principal goal that
guides the Plan.
The BPMP is the product of significant public outreach, input, and work from City staff, staff of the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Health, volunteers, advocates, and the project team.
The project team conducted five public meetings toward the production of this plan.
The first public workshop occurred in April 2009. This meeting asked workshop participants to
report on existing bicycle and pedestrian conditions in Culver City.
The second public workshop occurred in July 2009. This workshop asked participants to provide
feedback on the areas planned for new facilities or the existing conditions that need improvement, as
well as provide input on project goals.
The third public workshop occurred in October 2009. This meeting provided a rough draft of the
pedestrian and bicycle network as well as an introduction to the bicycle/pedestrian connector
between East Culver City/Expo Light Rail Station and Downtown.
The fourth public workshop occurred in January 2010. This presentation focused on the locations of
specific bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Culver City. Participants provided feedback on the
network recommendations.
The fifth public workshop occurred in June 2010. This workshop oriented the public to the
organization of Culver City‘s draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Culver City‘s City Council approved and appointed members to a Public Advisory Committee (PAC) in order
to guide the Master planning process. The PAC‘s primary role was to ensure that the BPMP considered and
represented public input. The PAC also served in an advisory role for recommendations incorporated in the
Plan. PAC members selected included individuals from neighborhood organizations, the business community,
bicycle/pedestrian advocates, and others from a variety of professional and personal backgrounds. The City
also formed a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of representatives from city agencies that will
have a stake in overseeing and implementing the Plan, such as Public Works, Transportation, Community
Development, and Police (CCPD). The TAC consulted with the project team throughout the development of
the Plan, and participated in the needs analysis.
The PAC convened in August 2009 to discuss the results of the second public workshop, which focused
specifically on identifying primary and secondary project goals for the BPMP. During this second workshop,
participants voted for their top priorities pertaining to bicycle and pedestrian policies, as well as bicycle and
pedestrian areas in need of improvement in Culver City. The PAC discussed the most common responses,
which dealt with shifting the focus from motor vehicle use toward more bicycling, walking, and transit use.
Based on the outcome of the public ranking exercise, the PAC transformed the public input into project goals
for the BPMP. The PAC adopted the following six areas as the highest priority policies and areas in need of
being addressed according to primary, secondary, and tertiary goals:
Bicycle & Pedestrian Network Improvements
Programs
Support Facilities
Pedestrian Improvement Corridors
Bikeway Corridors
Intersection Improvements
The City used these six areas and the public workshop
process to develop the vision for the document and
principal, overarching goal and associated objectives,
policies, and actions, which are presented in Chapter 10
of the Plan. The principal goal is as follows:
To transform the City into a place with an extensive bicycle and pedestrian network that allows
travelers of all levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and biking to their destinations.
In so doing, encourage more people to forgo car trips, when possible, in favor of alternative
forms of transportation and become truly bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
Primary Goal Secondary Goal Tertiary Goal
Adopt a ?complete streets? policy
requiring bicycle and pedestrian
improvements in all transportation
and development (private or public)
projects subject to discretionary
review (discussed in Section 2.4)
Improve bicycling conditions and
connectivity on primary and secondary
arterials. Provide more bicycle parking and
support facilities at destinations on private
development and public property. Add
pedestrian facilities in areas with high
pedestrian activity (where appropriate),
especially Downtown, in commercial areas
and schools. Widen and/or add amenities to
existing sidewalks.
Primary Goal Secondary Goal Tertiary Goal
Develop and citywide educational
program for all users of roadways and
bicycle facilities
Collaborate with businesses and business
organizations to promote bicycle ridership as
part of a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategy to reduce or
redistribute automobile use.
Primary Goal Secondary Goal Tertiary Goal
Enhance transit stations and bus stops
to facilitate multi-modal trips by
adding facilities/amenities where
appropriate.
Improve safety and amenities along existing
bike paths.
Primary Corridor Secondary Corridor Tertiary Corridor
Washington Boulevard Overland Avenue Jefferson Boulevard
Schools Major shopping centers, including
Downtown, Costco, and the Target / Bed Bath
& Beyond / Pavilions area.
Washington Boulevard (west
of Overland Avenue)
Primary Intersection Secondary Intersection Tertiary Intersection
Jefferson Boulevard at Overland
Avenue
Washington Boulevard at Ince Avenue Culver Boulevard at Overland
Avenue
As stated previously, the PAC emphasized the importance of ?Complete Streets,? a movement to design
roadways for all modes of transportation, including pedestrian, bike, transit and motor vehicle. This
movement stems from difficulties bicyclists, pedestrians, the elderly and others may have when using streets
primarily designed for motor vehicle use.
Bicyclists have legal access to all city streets. While the BPMP identifies a specific subset of streets as existing
or potential official Bikeways or Pedestrian Corridors, most bicyclists and pedestrians will need to use other
streets beyond those officially recognized in this Plan in order to reach their destinations. Therefore, it is
important that all roadways, to the extent possible, have features that accommodate all users of the road. The
California Complete Streets Act (CCSA) of 2008 (AB 1358) mandates that cities plan for all users of roadways.
Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantive revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the
circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets,
roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of
the general plan.…
For purposes of this paragraph, "users of streets, roads, and highways" means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities,
motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.
- California Complete Streets Act of 2008
The CCSA lays out the minimum provisions for meeting
bicyclists and pedestrian requirements. Having a
?balanced? transportation network is a lofty goal
because networks historically favor motor vehicle
movement. The BPMP goes beyond the CCSA
stipulations and recommends prioritizing efforts to
create policies, programs and infrastructure for
bicyclists and pedestrians in order to help develop a
balance between the movement of people using all
modes of transportation.
The Culver City BPMP will also be compliant with the
California Streets and Highway codes, specifically section 891.4, which relates to bicycle transportation plans.
The Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) is the most common source of bicycle facility funding in the State
of California. BTA funds can fund City projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters.
In order for Culver City to qualify for BTA funds, its Master Plan must contain specific elements. Table 2-2
displays the requisite BTA components and their location within this plan. The table includes ?Approved?
and ?Notes/Comments? columns for the convenience of the Caltrans official responsible for reviewing
compliance.
This chapter describes existing conditions for bicycling and walking in Culver City. It includes a review of
plans, ordinances, and programs related to bicycling and walking; a summary of the existing bikeways and
pedestrian facilities; and an analysis of data detailing bicycle and pedestrian collisions.
The BPMP refers to bikeways using California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standard
designations. The section below defines the three types of bikeways identified by the Streets and Highways
Code and by Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design Manual (HDM)
Figure 3.1 illustrates the three types of bikeways.
Class I Bikeway: Typically called a ?bike path,? a Class I Bikeway provides bicycle travel on a paved
right-of-way completely separated from any street or highway.
Class II Bikeway: Often referred to as a ?bike lane,? a Class II Bikeway provides a striped, signed, and
stenciled lane for one-way travel on a street or highway.
Class III Bikeway: Generally referred to as a ?bike route,? a Class III Bikeway provides for shared use
with bicycle or motor vehicle traffic and uses only signage identification.
Culver City contains approximately 4.22 miles of bikeways. This includes 3.22 miles of off-street bicycle
paths and one mile of bike lanes.
Map 3.1 identifies the corridors listed in Table 3-1 and Error! Reference source not found., as well as existing
pedestrian facilities. Each of these bikeway facilities connects to a similar facility in the City of Los Angeles,
which in turn provides access to the regional bikeway network.
This section reviews relevant existing policies, documents, and ordinances to the BPMP. These documents
provide the political framework for bicycle and pedestrian conditions in Culver City.
The 1996 Circulation Element (CE) of the General Plan addresses the challenges of increasing accessibility to,
from, and within Culver City while protecting its ?small town qualities.? One part of the solution is to
establish a ?comprehensive bikeway plan,? a primary objective within the CE.
A bicycle plan creates a system of policies that make bicycling a viable means of transportation within the
City. In order to maximize the bikeway network‘s impact on congestion relief, the network must connect
bicyclists of varied skill levels to the places they want to go.
The CE identifies the Ballona Creek Bike Path as the ?backbone? of the City‘s bikeway network. While many
view it as solely a recreational facility, increasing bikeway connectivity to it expands its ability to meet the
transportation needs of Culver City bicyclists. Additionally, the CE identifies most of the City‘s primary and
secondary arterials and neighborhood feeders as proposed bikeways.
Connectivity is also an important issue for pedestrians. The Circulation Element seeks to increase pedestrian
connectivity to transit stations and improve the pedestrian environment throughout the City.
The Culver City Council approved the Open Space
Element (OSE) in 1996. It addresses several issues that
pertain to bicyclists and pedestrians, including Active
Recreation Areas, Urban Forests, and Streetscape
Designs. This Element discusses the concept of the
?Pedestrian-Oriented Emphasis.? This approach dictates
human-scale design, including transparent storefronts,
benches, street lighting closer to the sidewalk, and other
designs that cater to pedestrians.
The OSE includes Bike Paths in the definition of Active
Recreation Areas. The City must face the challenge of
promoting and upgrading the Ballona Creek Bike Path
facility without adversely affecting its adjacent neighborhoods.
The OSE includes references to policies that address bicycle and pedestrian issues, the most relevant of which
the report discusses below.
Policy 2D of the Open Space Element proposes bikeway connectivity to Downtown from the Ballona Creek
Bike Path. Duquesne Avenue and National Boulevard currently serve as access points to the Ballona Creek
Bike Path and Downtown bound bicycle traffic. The Expo line bikeway enables bicycle access to Ballona
Creek, Downtown Culver City, and the Expo Light Rail station. Higuera Street crosses over the Ballona
Creek Bike Path, but does not provide path access. Funding for the Higuera Street project is under study.
Currently, Duquesne Avenue, National Boulevard, and Higuera Street (arterials) are not designated as
bikeways within Culver City.
Policy 2E discusses Overland Avenue and Culver Boulevard. Overland Avenue is a major component of Culver
City‘s transportation system, connecting to:
Ballona Creek Bike Path
Venice Boulevard Bike Lanes
Employment (Sony)
Civic/public life (Veteran‘s Center, Senior Citizen Center)
Recreation (Ballona Creek Bike Path, Veteran‘s Park)
Commercial Centers (Culver Center, Ralphs, Best Buy, Bally Fitness)
West Los Angeles College
Residential neighborhoods
A segment of Culver Boulevard currently features a bike path. Section 3.4.1 discusses the Culver Boulevard
Bike Path in more detail.
Policy 2F calls for the development of a bike path along National Boulevard and pre-dates the Exposition
Light Rail Transit Project (Expo) plans. As part of the Expo project, there are plans for a Class I facility in
Culver City that parallels the Expo right-of-way.
Policy 2G encourages expanding active recreation opportunities along the Ballona Creek Bike Path. The
Ballona Creek Focused Special Study prepared and developed planning proposals in response to this policy.
Refer to further discussion on the Ballona Creek Bike Path in Section 3.5.
Policy 2H discusses Syd Kronenthal Park and its connectivity to the Ballona Creek Bike Path. Syd Kronenthal
Park is on the north side of National Boulevard and is directly west of the Ballona Creek Bike Path. The park
needs a paved pathway to better connect to the Ballona Creek Bike Path and the surrounding communities.
Policy 3C discusses the concept of ?Parkettes.? Parkettes are small-scale parks, taking advantage of under-
utilized parcels of property. The installation of Parkettes will contribute to a pedestrian friendly Culver City.
Parkettes can provide additional seating and eating areas that are valuable community amenities, and provide
incentives for people to walk and rest. An important element of Policy 3C is to identify potential ?highly
visible? areas for future projects.
This document provides the guidance for all land use planning in Culver City. A major theme within the
Land Use Element is walkability. The Plan seeks to guide development in a pedestrian friendly pattern that
connects residential, recreational, and commercial land uses together.
Of particular interest to Culver City is maintaining growth that is ?human-scale.? In addition to calling for
the creation of a citywide bicycle master plan, the Land Use Element calls for a pedestrian oriented
Downtown that separates users from busy arterials. The Land Use Element also addresses bikeway
connectivity by focusing on the use of bicycle facilities that link to Ballona Creek, Downtown and other
activity centers.
There are several sections of the Culver City Municipal
Code (CCMC) that relate to the provision and design of
bicycle parking.
CCMC §17.320.045 states that bicycle parking is to be
provided at most multi-family and non-residential uses.
Generally, bicycle parking is required at rates that vary
between 5-10% of the motor vehicle parking provided at
the respective facility. This section dictates bicycle
parking design by requiring that facilities be stationary,
installed at a minimum distance of five feet from vehicle
parking, and conveniently located.
CCMC §7.05.015 (Transportation Demand and Trip
Reduction Measures) imposes additional requirements
for bicycle parking. It requires all new non-residential developments that equal or exceed 50,000 gross square
feet provide bicycles racks or other secure bicycle parking as a way to encourage biking as an alternative mode
of transportation and reduce the use of automobiles.
The Municipal Code also mentions the use of in-lieu fees to pay for bicycle parking (§17.320.025). In-lieu fees
allow non-complying parties to pay fees deposited to a central funding source for additional parking.
Furthermore, the CCMC expressly prohibits using parking meters as bicycle parking (§7.03.535) and provides
additional guidance on where bicycles can park legally (§7.04.240).
The CCMC also contains provisions that relate to bicycle riding. Many of these code sections simply repeat
or paraphrase the California Vehicle Code (CVC), or they are actually in conflict with the CVC. For example,
CCMC §7.04.220 contains language regarding a bicyclist‘s position on the road. CVC §21202 provides
superior language with detailed exceptions that benefit the safety of bicyclists. CCMC §7.04.245 precludes
bicyclists from riding on a street where a bicycle path is provided, which is inconsistent with the CVC. If
enforced, this code would prohibit bicyclists from riding on Culver Boulevard wherever the Culver Boulevard
Bike Path is present.
Other sections of note relating to bicycle riding include CCMC §7.04.250 relating to riding on sidewalks,
CCMC §7.04.235 prohibiting bicyclists carrying items while riding a bike in a manner that prevents them
from placing both hands on the handlebars, CCMC §7.04.250 relating to the purchase of new bicycle lights,
and the requirements of lights and reflectors. Finally, CCMC §7.04.215 refers to limits and restrictions on
group riding, specifically prohibiting multiple individuals from riding on a standard bicycle. This law most
likely intends to affect youths who frequently give each other rides on their bicycle. Often times these riders
travel at slow speeds, on sidewalks, or on residential streets.
The CCMC not only provides guidance on bicycle parking and riding, but also on various pedestrian-related
topics.
CCMC §9.08.035 authorizes the administrative licensing of outdoor dining areas where they will promote
commercial revitalization and business opportunities in a manner that is consistent with public welfare and
safety. Because of this provision and the popularity of these outdoor dining areas that accent the vibrant
pedestrian friendly Downtown area (which places many individuals on the sidewalk at any given time), the
regulation and oversight of sidewalks is an area to examine in the BPMP.
CCMC §7.05.015 (Transportation Demand and Trip Reduction Measures) requires all new non-residential
developments that equal or exceed 100,000 gross square feet to provide direct and safe pedestrian access
to/from vehicle and bicycle parking and transit facilities.
The Focused Special Study discussed the state of—and
a proposed vision for—Ballona Creek and its
surrounding neighborhoods. In the document, the term
?trail? refers to a paved Bike Path. One of the key goals
of the Focused Special Study was to ?promote the
development of a pedestrian and bicycle path system
that will be safe, secure and meet ADA accessibility
requirements.?
The study recognized the use of the path for both
commuting and recreational purposes. Accessibility to
and the safety of the path for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
others with impaired mobility was a primary concern.
The study promoted active use of Ballona Creek while
mitigating the potential impacts on the adjacent residential areas. The Council received and filed the study in
January 2004. The Council adopted Table 5A (following page) and directed amendments to the Land Use,
Open Space and Circulation Elements of the General Plan incorporate the concepts expressed in Table 3.3.
The City Council Resolution No. 2004-R044 amends the Land Use, Open Space and Circulation Elements of
the Culver City General Plan as they pertain to the Ballona Creek. Table 5A of the Ballona Creek and Trail
Focused Special Study provides guiding principles for improvements that will connect the Ballona Creek Bike
Path with the rest of the City Bicycle Network. Major themes of the Resolution include:
Protecting the surrounding neighborhoods from externalities of trail access and use
Establishing guidelines that direct future improvements/additions to the trail
Safety, maintenance, and crime prevention
Including surrounding communities in the improvement process
Installing Class II bike lanes along major arterials to facilitate bicycle travel to/from the Ballona Creek
Bike Path
The Culver City Redevelopment Agency prepared the
Downtown Design Guidelines to influence design of
future development in Downtown. This document
intends to ?encourage and enhance a pedestrian friendly?
Downtown by favoring businesses that support
pedestrian use above others that may create an
uncomfortable atmosphere for pedestrians. The
Guidelines give preference to business types that
typically do not result in higher levels of crime.
This document details pedestrian access to businesses
and parking, including City oversight to ensure access for
persons with limited mobility. Downtown Culver City
fosters pedestrian travel because of the sidewalk
environment. Sidewalks are wide and have rest areas
with storefronts that are attractive and inviting.
According to the Downtown Plan, Culver Boulevard is to be the ?Pedestrian Street? with human-scale features
including tree canopies, gardens, benches, kiosks, artwork, widened sidewalks, etc. These amenities contrast
to Washington Boulevard, which has a designation as an auto corridor and favors motor vehicle use.
Downtown Culver City and Sepulveda Boulevard south of Culver
Boulevard are popular destinations for shopping and dining. Culver City
updated its Outdoor Dining Standards in 2009 in conjunction with the
development of the Downtown Culver City Design Guidelines (Section
3.2.7.). Many of the Downtown restaurants offer outdoor seating. The
popularity and the demand for expansion of restaurants‘ outdoor seating
have the potential to encroach into the public right-of-way. In order to
prevent this conflict, the City created Outdoor Dining Standards. The
following standards are not a comprehensive list of the Design Guidelines,
but instead include only the most pertinent to the BPMP.
Outdoor Dining Standards (ODS) require that seating and dining areas
leave an ADA compliant passageway at least four feet wide. These
standards protect the rights of pedestrians while allowing for outdoor
seating to contribute to the vibrancy of the pedestrian environment.
Barriers clearly define eating areas and distinguish boundaries. Barrier height is regulated and barriers cannot
be draped or connected with materials that prevent pedestrians from seeing into the areas. Visual
permeability is a key component to an inviting environment for pedestrians.
The ODS closely regulate the use of landscaping. The ODS encourages the use of landscaping as a barrier –
greatly contributing to the attractiveness of the pedestrian environment. the ODS also prevents landscaping
from infringing on the public right-of-way by imposing similar height and other restrictions to landcaping as
to other types of barriers.
The ODS outline the Standards of Operation, which put the responsibility of sidewalk upkeep on the
restaurants. The constant maintenance provided by restaurants enhances the pedestrian environment by
providing a clean, attractive sidewalk.
This section presents an estimate for the current and potential number of bicycle commuters in Culver City.
2000 Census data, in combination with national commuting statistics from the 2001 National Household
Travel Survey (NHTS) and EPA estimates of standard emissions rates for motor vehicles, give a rough
projection of potential future bicycle ridership in Culver City, along with trip reduction and air quality
benefits (Table 3-5).
Calculations are included in this Plan to meet Caltrans Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) requirements
to provide ?the estimated number of existing bicycle commuters in the Plan area and the estimated increase in
the number of bicycle commuters resulting from implementation of the Plan.? BTA compliance is important
to Culver City‘s bicycle plan in order to grant proposed projects eligibility for funding from the State of
California‘s BTA (approximately $7.2M, annually).
According to the NHTS, the average work commute time in Culver City has remained close to 20 minutes
since 1983. Averaging all modes, the commute time in 2001 was 23 minutes. Assuming an average speed of 10
miles per hour, a cyclist traveling for 23 minutes covers approximately four miles, which would be equivalent
to a 9-minute motor vehicle trip (traveling at about 30 mph).
Table 3-4, which uses US Census data, shows that 1,544 Culver City residents (about 8%) had a commute
time of 9 minutes or less in 2000. Subtracting those residents that already walk or bike to work (819), we find
that 725 Culver City residents could potentially convert their short (9-minute or less) commute trip from a
vehicle trip into a bicycle trip.
This number represents the minimum number of people who could already change to bicycling for their
commute. With the completion of the Exposition Light Rail Transit Project and supplemental bicycling
facilities and programs, the number could potentially be much higher. Additionally, Census figures only
represent the commuter behavior of Culver City residents. The estimate does not include commuters into, or
through, Culver City by people who live elsewhere.
The following pages (Table 3.5 and Map 3.2) provide valuable information about the benefits of bicycle
commuting on the environment and land use in Culver City. Their inclusion in this Plan is one component of
State BTA compliance.
Existing Communting Statistics
Variable Figure Source
Existing study area population 38816.00 2000 Census, STF3, P1.
Existing employed population 19835.00 2000 Census, STF3, P30.
Existing bike-to-work mode share 0.01 2000 Census, STF3, P30.
Existing number of bike-to-work commuters 119.01 Employed persons multiplied by walk-to-work mode share
Existing work-at-home mode share 0.04 2000 Census, STF3, P30.
Existing number of work-at-home bike commuters 436.37 Assumes 50% of population working at home makes at least one daily bicycle trip
Existing school children, ages 6-14 (grades K-8) 4504.00 2000 Census, STF3, P8.
Existing school children bicycling mode share 0.02 National Safe Routes to School surveys, 2003.
Existing school children bike commuters 90.08 School children population multiplied by school children bike mode share
Existing number of college students in study area 2865.00 Full-time undergradate and graduate student population in study area
Existing estimated college bicycling mode share 0.10
Review of bicycle commute share in seven unversity communities (source: National
Bicycling & Walking Study, FHWA, Case Study No. 1, 1995).
Existing college bike commuters 286.50 College student population multiplied by college student bicycling mode share
Existing total number of bike commuters 931.96 Total bike-to-work, school, college and utilitarian bike trips. Does not include recreation.
Total daily walking trips 1863.92 Total bicycle commuters x 2 (for round trips)
Existing Vehicle Trips and Miles Reduction
Reduced Vehicle Trips per Weekday 662.31
Assumes 73% of bicycle trips replace vehicle trips for adults/college students and 53% for
school children
Reduced Vehicle Trips per Year 172864.16 Reduced number of weekday vehicle trips multiplied by 261 (weekdays in a year)
Reduced Vehicle Miles per Weekday 4964.32
Assumes average round trip travel length of 8 miles for adults/college students and 1 mile
for schoolchildren
Reduced Vehicle Miles per Year 1295687.94 Reduced number of weekday vehicle miles multiplied by 261 (weekdays in a year)
Existing Air Quality Benefits
Reduced PM10 (tons/weekday) 91.34 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0184 tons per reduced mile
Reduced NOX (tons/weekday) 2476.20 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.4988 tons per reduced mile
Reduced ROG (tons/weekday) 360.41 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0726 tons per reduced mile
Reduced PM10 (tons/year) 23840.66 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0184 tons per reduced mile
Reduced NOX (tons/year) 646289.14 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.4988 tons per reduced mile
Reduced ROG (tons/year) 94066.94 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0726 tons per reduced mile
Future Communting Statistics
Variable Figure Source
Future study area population 39994.00 Estimate this number based on historic population growth (or decline) trends
Future employed population 20133.00 Estimate this number based on historic employment growth (or decline) trends
Future bike-to-work mode share 0.02
Make a logical estimate of the potential mode share increase associated with
planned/proposed bikeway system improvements
Future number of bike-to-work commuters 302.00 Employed persons multiplied by bike-to-work mode share
Future work-at-home mode share 0.04 Estimate this number based on historic work-at-home population growth (or decline) trends
Future number of work-at-home bike commuters 442.93
Assumes 50% of population working at home makes at least one daily bicycle trip.
Change the formula in this cell if the percentage is expected to increase or decrease
Future school children, ages 6-14 (grades K-8) 4572.00 Estimate this number based on historic population growth (or decline) trends
Future school children bicycling mode share 0.02
Make a logical estimate of the potential mode share increase associated with
planned/proposed bikeway system improvements
Future school children bike commuters 91.44 School children population multiplied by school children bicycling mode share
Future number of college students in study area 2908.00
Estimate this number based on historic college student population growth (or decline)
trends. Universities may also have enrollment projections
Future estimated college bicycling mode share 0.10
Make a logical estimate of the potential mode share increase associated with
planned/proposed bikeway system improvements
Future college bike commuters 290.80 College student population multiplied by college student bicycling mode share
Future total number of bicycle commuters 1127.16
Total bike-to-work, school, college and utilitarian walking trips. Does not include
recreation.
Future total daily walking trips 2254.32 Total walk commuters x 2 (for round trips)
Future Vehicle Trips and Miles Reduction
Reduced Vehicle Trips per Weekday 804.54
Assumes 73% of walking trips replace vehicle trips for adults/college students and 53% for
school children
Reduced Vehicle Trips per Year 209984.82 Reduced number of weekday vehicle trips multiplied by 261 (weekdays in a year)
Reduced Vehicle Miles per Weekday 931.52
Assumes average round trip travel length of 1.2 miles for adults/college students and 0.5
mile for schoolchildren
Reduced Vehicle Miles per Year 243127.55 Reduced number of weekday vehicle miles multiplied by 261 (weekdays in a year)
Future Air Quality Benefits
Reduced PM10 (tons/weekday) 17.14 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0184 tons per reduced mile
Reduced NOX (tons/weekday) 464.64 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.4988 tons per reduced mile
Reduced ROG (tons/weekday) 67.63 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0726 tons per reduced mile
AIR QUALITY BENEFITS MODEL - BICYCLE
This section describes the facilities available to bicyclists in Culver City, primarily the Culver Boulevard Bike
Path and the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane. A separate portion of in this section specifically discusses the
Ballona Creek Bike Path.
The Culver Boulevard Bike Path passes through both Culver City and Los Angeles. In Culver City, it runs
from the Culver City border at Sawtelle Boulevard to Elenda Street (approximately 0.7 miles).
The Culver Boulevard Bike Path is different from other Class I facilities in that it runs on the raised median of
a major arterial road (Culver Boulevard). It is elevated 2 to 3 feet above street level but drops down to grade
level when crossing intersections.
The Culver Boulevard Bike Path is a popular facility in
Culver City. Part of its popularity comes from its ability
to serve a variety of users. In addition to being a bike
path, it also features an adjacent non-paved trail for
walking, attractive landscaping, public art, benches, and
other amenities that invite and encourage usage.
Unlike the Ballona Creek Bike Path, the Culver
Boulevard Bike Path requires bicyclists and pedestrians
to yield to traffic signals at intersections. The Culver
Boulevard Bike Path crosses heavily used arterials
including Sepulveda Boulevard, Sawtelle Boulevard and
on-ramps to the San Diego I-405 Freeway.
As noted previously, CCMC §7.04.245 precludes bicyclists
from riding on a street that provides an adjacent bicycle path. As it applies to the Culver Boulevard Bike Path, the
code makes riding a bicycle illegal both north or south on Culver Boulevard where the Bike Path is present if not on
the path itself. This makes access to the residential and commercial corridors difficult for bicyclists who are not
boarding or departing the path at one of its entrances or exits (usually at intersections).
The Venice Boulevard Class II Bike Lane is a critical component of the regional bicycle network. As Los
Angeles County‘s longest bike lane, the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane provides extensive access to bicyclists
coming to and from Culver City. The lane itself runs continuously for over nine miles from Crenshaw
Boulevard, east to Venice Way. The one-mile segment of the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane within Culver City
boundaries runs east from Bledsoe Avenue to Overland Avenue. Within these limits, only the eastbound
section of the lane is in Culver City.
In many cases, the bike lane runs adjacent to street parking. Bicyclists attempting to avoid being ?doored?
(when a motor vehicle door opens immediately in front of a bicyclist) opt to ride on the left side of the lane,
closer to motor vehicle traffic. Because Venice Boulevard features a significant amount of commercial activity,
bicyclists must be constantly aware of motor vehicles pulling out of cross-streets, driveways, and from
between parked motor vehicles, as well as individuals exiting parallel parking spaces.
Despite the issues that face the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane, it remains a valuable part of the region‘s and
Culver City‘s bicycle infrastructure.
Culver City has bicycle parking facilities available
throughout the City. Downtown is one of Culver City‘s
most popular attractions and trip generators. As such,
its quality and stock of bicycle parking is important to
analyze in supporting future bicycle trips. The following
map displays the location of bicycle parking available in
Downtown Culver City.
The Ballona Creek Bike Path is the backbone of Culver
City‘s bicycle infrastructure. Spanning approximately
3.25 miles, its western terminus makes the prime
connection between Culver City and communities to the
west, including Venice, Marina del Rey, Playa del Rey,
and the Marvin Braude Beach Path. Its original purpose
was as a bike path, but now serves as a multi-modal
path.
Ballona Creek Bike Path is the primary off-street path in
the City facilitating utilitarian (e.g. commuting or
errand-running) as well as non-utilitarian (e.g.
exercising or recreational) trips. Students use the path
for school, and joggers and bicyclists use the path for all
purposes. The Path also provides regional access to the
beach and other Los Angeles bicycle facilities.
The access points to the Ballona Creek Bike Path within
Culver City are:
National Boulevard (eastern end)
Duquesne Avenue
Overland Avenue
Sepulveda Boulevard
Access to/from the Ballona Creek Bike Path has been a
sensitive point of discussion between the path‘s users
and the adjacent residential community. Path users see
increased access as a safety improvement and a crime
deterrent because it may increase pathway use and keep
more eyes on the area. Residents see reduced access as a
crime deterrent because it will prevent access to
neighborhoods.
Public comments frequently request increasing access to the Ballona Creek Bike Path. While there are no
recommendations to increase residential access to the Ballona Creek Bike Path at this time, Higuera Street is a
recommended new access point. A study is also exploring access improvements in the tri-school area (Culver
City High School, Culver City Middle School, and Farragut Elementary School) to encourage more children to
access school by walking or bicycling. Both of these access points will require additional study and individual
plans before funding is secured and projects are brought to fruition.
The location and design of the Ballona Creek Bike Path make it a popular facility, but also reveal some
limitations and areas in need of improvement. The Ballona Creek Bike Path enables uninterrupted travel
between the eastern edge of Culver City at National Boulevard and the beach. All crossings are grade-
separated so cyclists do not have to stop at intersections. However, some concerns regarding criminal activity
has arisen as a result of individuals loitering beneath poorly lit underpasses. Underpasses may also present
visibility problems to those using the Path. Additional lighting would improve visibility for bicyclists, joggers,
pedestrians, etc. and discourage individuals from loitering beneath the underpasses.
Signage is an often over-looked, but important component of a complete bike path. Signage serves to orient
users on the path, and to alert individuals to path rules, restrictions, and neighboring amenities. Much like
highway signage, path signs are helpful for instructing individuals on access points for reaching popular
destinations within the City, and towards other bicycle facilities in the network. The City is working with
other agencies to complete various striping and signage projects along the path in the upcoming months
(2010/2011). Culver City will be developing a citywide signage plan that includes special signage for use on the
Ballona Creek Bike Path. The City will install stencils that will alert users on path etiquette and methods to
share this valuable public resource.
Maintenance of the Ballona Creek Bike Path plays a
considerable role in the usefulness and enjoyment of its
users. Maintenance concerns for the Ballona Creek Bike
Path include:
Landscaping/grooming
Clearing obstructions
Fence/rail repair
Pavement repair
Trash collection
Graffiti
The photo at right displays a portion of the Ballona
Creek Bike Path that is outside of Culver City
boundaries, but is included to show the types of maintenance issues found along the path. Proper/timely
maintenance ensures optimal safety and encourages high levels of use. When maintenance is less timely, it
discourages people from using the Path and can lead to a less inviting environment.
Many participants in the BPMP process expressed concern about safety along the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Reports of assaults on bicyclists using the Path have influenced the bicycling community‘s perception of the
Path. Many people feel that the Path is neglected and unsafe. One way to enhance the impression of safety is
through regular patrols and adequate lighting. For specific recommendations on lighting, refer to the Design
Guide, Appendix 1.
Other recommendations to enhance the user experience and safety of the Ballona Creek Bike Path are mileage
markers, overcrossing signage, and entrance street signage. Mileage markers and street identification can be a
combination of pavement markings and sign posts to indicate path users‘ distance travelled while on the path
and location. Mileage markers and street identification signage also serve to orient path users to their
location. This can be helpful in the event of an emergency for directing first-responders to accurate locations
along the path.
The Ballona Creek Bike Path is undergoing study for potential improvements to pedestrian and bicycling
conditions. Study is also underway for a separate walking path along the south side of the creek between
Higuera Street and Overland Avenue.
This section details existing pedestrian areas in Culver City. While this section focuses primarily on
pedestrian access and movement, it is important to note that bicycle access to these areas is important as well.
Major arterial roads with high traffic volumes typically serve commercial areas. Existing conditions make
pedestrian areas difficult to access by bicycle, making the need to implement an extensive bicycle network an
important issue for both pedestrians and bicycles.
Downtown Culver City has developed into a major
regional destination, complete with fine dining, a
Cineplex, live theater, and music venues. Small business
façade improvement grants assisted in the area‘s
renovation and created an aesthetically pleasing setting
with wide promenade sidewalks, public art, and an
abundance of street furniture (including planters and
benches).
Overall, as the political and cultural hub of Culver City,
Downtown sets the City standards for pedestrian
friendly design. Future projects will continue to enhance
the pedestrian friendliness of Downtown. For example,
the pedestrian plaza at the intersection of Main Street,
Washington Boulevard, and Culver Boulevard promises to contribute greatly to pedestrian mobility.
As the Expo Line stop brings rail transit to Culver City, planners must take careful consideration to ensure
that there is pedestrian connectivity between the station, and commercial areas Downtown, Hayden Tract,
and the Helms Bakery district.
Some major employers in Culver City include Sony Studios, the Culver Studios, and Brotman Medical Center.
According to the 2000 census, over 21,000 of Culver City‘s population aged 16 and older have a job. Culver
City‘s over-16 population at the time was approximately 31,000. Census results report that nearly 75% of this
same population drive to work alone.
Studio lots tend to be large and employees typically walk around the lots. Providing bicycle and pedestrian
connections could help to encourage non-motorized trips that connect into the City. Sony Studios uses a fleet
of bicycles for travel in the back lot and between facilities.
Culver City has a number of parks and open spaces, including a skate park and a dog park. These areas are
popular places for walking and bicycle trips. The following are City parks:
Blair Hills Park
Blanco Park
The Boneyard
(Dog Park)
Carlson Park
Coombs Park
Culver City Park
Culver City Skate Park
Culver West Alexander
Park El Marino Park
Fox Hills Park
Syd Kronenthal Park
Lindberg Park
Tellefson Park
Veteran‘s Park
Major retail centers in Culver City include:
Downtown
Ross
Target
Costco
Studio Village Shopping Center
Westfield Culver City
Culver Center
Each of these areas features vast parking lots, encouraging motor vehicle-trips rather than bicycle and
pedestrian trips. While driving can facilitate carrying larger loads, improved bicycle and pedestrian access
can increase accessibility for service-oriented trips that do not require heavy-duty hauling, thus increasing
frequency of such trips.
Pedestrian oriented retail centers vary greatly from motor vehicle oriented retail centers. At pedestrian oriented
retail centers, motor vehicle parking is often less convenient and further from the desired destination. Pedestrian
oriented areas (like Downtown) have benches, trees, and street furniture that encourage active use. They allow
individuals to park in one place, and then travel easily from one destination to the next on foot. Auto-oriented retail
centers (e.g. Costco, Target/Bed Bath & Beyond, and Ross on Jefferson Boulevard, etc.) provide ample room for motor
vehicle parking at the expense of pedestrian convenience.
Bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to Culver City‘s commercial corridors has great potential to reduce motor
vehicle trips. Culver City‘s commercial corridors often have access to adjacent residential areas. Corridors
such as Sepulveda Boulevard, Washington Boulevard and Culver Boulevard feature active commercial
stretches along the main thoroughfare with residential properties one block away. Depending on the
amenities, commercial corridors can meet the shopping, entertainment, and business needs of its immediate
neighbors. Sidewalk and road quality, safe, well-lit crossing facilities at major intersections, and adequate
bicycle parking encourage local residents to walk or bike to local corridors in lieu of making motor vehicle
trips.
Schools are major pedestrian areas. Culver City has one public high school, one public middle school, five
public elementary schools, several other private schools, and Antioch College. Additionally, while West Los
Angeles College is not within Culver City, affiliated faculty, staff and students must access the college using
Culver City streets.
Bicycle and pedestrian improvements should provide students with safe options to walk or bike to school and
nearby support facilities, such as libraries and athletic fields, from their homes. Improvements should seek to
insulate bicyclists and pedestrians from common road hazards, but not isolate them from the surrounding
environment.
Providing schools with non-motorized transportation
alternatives is also important in developing good habits
with children so that they regard walking and bicycling
as viable means of transportation, which can lead to
lower rates of obesity-related health problems.
Culver City has an extensive network of residential
roads that provide a comfortable environment for
bicycling and walking. The residential network, though
not a perfect grid, provides key connections to both local
commercial districts and citywide destinations.
Public comment points to Farragut Drive as one of Culver City‘s more challenging facilities. The City recently
updated the pathway by removing two poles at the access gate between Jackson Avenue and Jasmine Avenue. The
pedestrian pathway (located on Farragut) now allows both pedestrian and bicycle traffic to continue along
Farragut between Jackson and Jasmine, but could benefit from further access improvements. Traffic bollards
could provide the same restrictive qualities while expanding pedestrian access (see Bicycle Project 3: Farragut
Drive/Franklin Avenue: Duquesne Avenue to Elenda Street). Pedestrian improvements in the residential
areas of Culver City could provide greater connectivity to transit and schools, while providing leisure and
recreational opportunities.
Much of the existing bicycle parking in Culver City does not meet current best standards of bike rack design.
Some racks do not support the frame of the bicycle because they only allow one wheel to connect to the rack;
bicyclists commonly refer to these single-point of support racks as ?wheel bender? racks. This lack of frame
support allows unattended bicycles to knock over easily, leading to damage to the bicycle.
In addition to poorly supporting bicycles, single-point of support racks also do not allow the user to properly
secure their bicycle. Because the design only allows one wheel to connect to the rack, the rest of the bicycle is
susceptible to theft. The Design Guide (Appendix 1) contains a more detailed discussion of bicycle rack
standards.
The bicycle racks installed in the Downtown area allow greater bicycle security. The racks in Downtown
Culver City have a compact design that provides a safer structure for bicyclists. These bicycle racks are also
more space efficient than the single-point of support bicycle racks by providing equal or greater bicycle
storage capacity while taking up significantly less space when vacant. Refer to bicycle parking guide in
Appendix 1 for guidance on bicycle parking standards.
Culver City‘s own bus line serves as the City‘s primary public transit service. The City has supplemental
service provided by Metro and the City of Santa Monica‘s Big Blue Bus services. Culver City Bus, Metro and
Big Blue Bus all have two-bike capacity racks on the front of their buses. For bicyclists to use the racks on the
buses, they must be able to mount/dismount their bike from the racks without assistance from the bus
operator. The racks on buses are frequently full. In this event, patrons must wait for the next available bus
with an open rack. Culver City Bus does not allow bicycles aboard the bus itself. Metro buses have a slightly
more flexible policy when it comes to allowing bicycles on board the bus. Metro policy concerning bicycles
on board states that:
?Operators may allow a customer to bring a bicycle on board the last bus on a route, if the
headway is one hour, if the bike rack is full or defective, or if the bus is not equipped with a
bike rack. The bicycle must not block the doors or the aisle. In the event that the bus is at
full customer capacity and bringing the bicycle aboard is not reasonably safe, contact Bus
Operations Control Center (BOC) immediately.?
Aside from buses, Culver City residents will have a new
form of mass transit upon completion of Metro‘s Expo
rail line. The Expo Line will serve Culver City,
connecting to Downtown Los Angeles. Plans for the line
also include a western extension terminating in Santa
Monica. Metro allows bicycles on board rail cars within
specially designated sections of the car.
Most Metro stations have bicycle racks and lockers for
parking bicycles. Metro is considering
bicyclist/pedestrian connectivity and facilities as it
develops detailed plans for the Expo Station. There are
presently designs for a Clean Mobility Center at the
Culver City Station. The Clean Mobility Center may
provide basic support facilities to individuals bicycling or commuting by mass transit. The center may have
bicycle racks, changing facilities and other amenities like showers, a bicycle shop, and overnight storage.
This page intentionally left blank.
This chapter is the product of general, non-motorized
planning experience and various methods of local data
collection. It describes the needs of pedestrians and
bicyclists in Culver City through the following tasks.
This report analyzed the relative safety of bicyclists and
pedestrians in Culver City using bicycle and pedestrian
collision data. The clustering of collisions at specific
points in Culver City influenced count location
selection.
The Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Initiative website (ccwalkbike.org) featured an online survey that
asked questions about general patterns of bicycling and walking behavior. The survey also asked respondents
to list their favorite areas to walk and bicycle in Culver City, as well as areas that need improvement. The
survey data brings suggestions from the public to the BPMP and helps ensure greater public support during
the process.
The project team and community volunteers conducted bicycle and pedestrian counts. These counts serve as
the baseline estimate for non-motorized transportation levels in Culver City. The collected count data answer
the question, ?where and when do people walk/bike?? The pedestrian counts did not determine if pedestrians
arrived at the survey point by driving or bicycling. The count data will also serve as a benchmark for activity
before the implementation of programs and infrastructure.
Project staff and volunteers conducted bicycle and pedestrian audits at various locations around Culver City.
The audits serve two functions:
1. To examine the present conditions facing Culver City bicyclists and pedestrians.
2. To educate the PAC and volunteers on different physical improvements and how they apply to
specific areas of Culver City.
Often the most outspoken bicyclists during the planning process are the most experienced. It is important to
consider bicyclists of all skill levels in creating a bicycle plan. The skill level of the bicyclist greatly influences
expected speeds and behavior. There are several systems of classification currently in use within the bicycle
planning and engineering professions. These classifications can be helpful in understanding the characteristics
and infrastructure preferences of different bicyclists. However, these classifications may change in type or
proportion over time as infrastructure and culture evolve. Often times an instructional course can rapidly
change a less confident bicyclist to one that comfortably and safely shares the roadway with vehicular traffic.
Bicycle infrastructure should have plans and designs that accommodate as many user types as possible, with
decisions for separate or parallel facilities based on providing a comfortable experience for the greatest
number of bicyclists.
The following user types come from an excerpt from the 1999 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities:
“Although their physical dimensions may be relatively consistent, the skills, confidence and preferences of
bicyclists vary dramatically. Some riders are confident riding anywhere they are legally allowed to operate
and can negotiate busy and high speed roads that have few, if any, special accommodations for bicyclists. Most
adult riders are less confident and prefer to use roadways with a more comfortable amount of operating space,
perhaps with designated space for bicyclists, or shared-use paths that are away from motor vehicle traffic.
Children may be confident riders and have excellent bicycle handling skills, but have yet to develop the traffic
sense and experience of an everyday adult rider. All categories of rider require smooth riding surfaces with
bicycle-compatible highway appurtenances, such as bicycle-safe drainage inlet grates.
A 1994 report by the Federal Highway Administration used the following general categories of bicycle user
types (A, B and C) to assist highway designers in determining the impact of different facility types and
roadway conditions on bicyclists:
Advanced or experienced riders are generally using their bicycles as they would a motor vehicle. They are
riding for convenience and speed and want direct access to destinations with a minimum of detour or delay.
They are typically comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic; however, they need sufficient operating space
on the traveled way or shoulder to eliminate the need for either themselves or a passing motor vehicle to shift
position.
Basic or less confident adult riders may also be using their bicycles for transportation purposes, e.g., to get to
the store or to visit friends, but prefer to avoid roads with fast and busy motor vehicle traffic unless there is
ample roadway width to allow easy overtaking by faster motor vehicles. Thus, basic riders are comfortable
riding on neighborhood streets and shared-use paths and prefer designated facilities such as bicycle lanes or
wide shoulder lanes on busier streets.
Children, riding on their own or with their parents, may not travel as fast as their adult counterparts but still
require access to key destinations in their community, such as schools, convenience stores and recreational
facilities. Residential streets with low motor vehicle speeds, linked with shared-use paths and busier streets
with well defined pavement markings between bicycles and motor vehicles can accommodate children without
encouraging them to ride in the travel lane of major arterials.”
The AASHTO classifications above were the standard for at least 15 years, and can be helpful when assessing
existing bicyclists. However, these classifications do not accurately describe all existing types of bicyclists,
nor can they account for the population as a whole. For instance, they do not include potential bicyclists who
are interested in riding, but feel that existing facilities are unsafe.
Supported by data collected nationally since 2006, planners developed alternative categories to address the
Americans‘ =varying attitudes‘ towards bicycling. According to this recent data, less than two percent of
Americans comprise a group of bicyclists who are =Strong and Fearless‘. These bicyclists typically ride
anywhere on any roadway regardless of roadway conditions or weather. These bicyclists can ride faster than
other user types, prefer direct routes and will typically choose roadway connections – even if shared with
vehicles – over separate bicycle facilities such as bicycle paths. Approximately 13 percent fall under the
category of =Enthused & Confident‘ bicyclists who are confident and mostly comfortable riding on all types
of bicycle facilities but will usually prefer low traffic streets or multi-use pathways when available. These
bicyclists may deviate from a more direct route in favor of a preferred facility type. This group includes all
kinds of bicyclists including commuters, recreationalists, racers, and utilitarian bicyclists.
The remainder of the American population does not currently ride a bicycle regularly. Approximately 60
percent of the population can be categorized as =Interested but Concerned ’ and represents bicyclists who
typically only ride a bicycle on low traffic streets or bicycle paths under favorable conditions and weather.
These infrequent or potential bicyclists perceive traffic and safety as significant barriers towards increased use
of bicycling. These bicyclists may ride more regularly with encouragement, education and experience.
Approximately 25 percent of Americans are not bicyclists, and perceive severe safety issues with riding in
traffic. Some people in this group may eventually consider bicycling and may progress to one of the user types
above. A significant portion of these people will never ride a bicycle under any circumstances.
Like bicyclists, pedestrians vary greatly in habits, mobility, and skill. The BPMP addresses the needs of
all types of pedestrians by providing amenities and designs that cater to pedestrians of all types.
Pedestrians with different habits/needs include:
The elderly
Individuals with limited/impaired mobility
Recreational pedestrians
Children
Persons using mobility enhancing devices (Segways, scooters, etc.)
Most individuals, at the very least, require a flat walking surface. Cracks in sidewalks, curbs with no ramps,
and narrow or obstructed sidewalks all present serious limits to many of the individuals above. Ensuring
American‘s with Disability Act (ADA) compliance on all sidewalks is a priority of this Plan.
In some cases, ADA compliance represents the minimal effort in ensuring mobility for all pedestrians.
Pedestrian needs often go beyond curb ramps and a striped crosswalk. Crosswalks with extended crossing
times/countdowns can greatly benefit pedestrians of all types. The BPMP uses a catalogue of improvements
and recommendations to ensure that all Culver City residents can navigate their city on foot and at their
leisure.
The Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Initiative website (ccwalkbike.org) received over 170 responses to the
survey advertised by City staff, PAC members, and public workshops.
The survey asked respondents to list all purposes for which they choose walking as a mode of transportation.
Respondents checked off all applicable activities. Figure 4.2 presents the results.
In regards to work and school, the survey asked respondents about the frequency by which they commute via
walking:
6% reported that they ?always? commute by walking
13% reported that they ?often? walk to work
12% state that they ?seldom? walk for their commute
The remainder of respondents did not commute by walking.
Furthermore, the survey asked people to list their favorite places to walk in Culver City.
50% indicated Downtown Culver City
Other popular places included Carlson Park, Helms Bakery, Baldwin Hills, Ballona Creek, Westfield
Culver City, Target, and local neighborhoods
The survey also asked respondents to name places where walking conditions could improve. The following are
those ranked responses:
1. Downtown
2. Ballona Creek
3. Commercial Areas - Jefferson Boulevard, Culver Boulevard, Overland Avenue, Washington Boulevard,
and Sepulveda Boulevard
4. Westfield Culver City
Many of the areas listed as needing improvements were also the most popular places to walk. Of the popular
streets listed, many are major arterials. The survey shows that there is a demand for pedestrian
accommodations along streets designed to be automobile friendly (often at the expense of pedestrian use).
The survey asked respondents to mark how often they rode a bicycle in the last six months.
This data shows us that survey respondents tend to ride fairly regularly, with over 64% of respondents riding
their bicycle at least once a week.
The survey asked respondents to rate their level of comfort when bicycling.
60% are extremely comfortable, biking on any street necessary to reach their destination
23% are moderately comfortable, preferring neighborhood streets and bike lanes
17% consider themselves ?extremely cautious? (riding on sidewalks or bike paths)
There are various levels of proficiency and experience amongst bicyclists in a city. While it appears from the
survey that most bicyclists are regular riders, the results are probably not representative because public
involvement for bicycle and pedestrian planning tends to attract the ?strong and fearless? category of bicyclist.
The survey asked respondents to list the reasons they bicycle. Beyond recreational riding, the survey shows
high levels of utilitarian bicycling.
The survey asked people to rate the distance of their trip based on the purpose of the trip. The results show
that people are likely to bicycle for errands at distances under two miles. The data also shows that trips six
miles and up tend to be recreational in nature. This data is helpful when considering bicycle facilities aimed at
various types of bicycle trips.
Some individuals identified certain barriers that need removal for bicycling to be a more accessible
transportation option. The top three listed obstacles that prevent bicyclists from riding more often were:
Too many motor vehicles drive too fast
There are inadequate paths, lanes, or routes
Drivers do not share the road
Because the top concern among bicyclists was safety as it relates to motor vehicle speeds, the Plan
recommends considering traffic calming on certain streets after they undergo traffic engineering analysis. To
address other concerns mentioned in the survey, the Plan also identifies opportunities to install bicycle paths,
lanes, routes, and other bicycle facilities to support greater levels of bicycling.
The survey asked bicyclists where they wanted to see improvements for bicycling in Culver City. The top five
locations were:
1. Downtown
2. Culver Center Shopping Plaza
3. Westfield Culver City
4. Grocery Stores (Ralphs, Trader Joe’s, etc.)
5. Sepulveda Boulevard
Other popular areas included parks, schools, and the Helms Bakery area. Many of the destinations identified
in the survey are where people go to work, shop, or conduct errands. These trip types often occur using motor
vehicles. For residents who live within a comfortable distance to these destinations, improving bicycle facility
access and increasing the number of facilities will help individuals replace motor vehicle trips with bicycle
trips.
Generally, respondents favored installing bicycle paths and lanes over installing routes. Respondents also
stated that demand for rack space on buses often limits bicycle access to transit. Many Culver City bicyclists
expressed a desire for increased access to the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Count data provides a baseline estimate for existing bicycle and pedestrian activity in Culver City. The
City will also perform new counts after the completion of the Plan and implementation of Plan policies
to assess the bicycle/pedestrian activity along specific streets or areas. This section provides a brief
summary of the primary count methodology and findings.
Volunteers conducted the counts at 18 locations throughout
Culver City. Count locations accounted for geographic diversity
and intended to capture areas with anticipated high levels of
bicycle and pedestrian activity. Volunteers counted bicyclist and
pedestrians during peak hour travel during weekdays from 7-9
am and 4-6 pm, and on weekends from 12-2 pm.
The City required count volunteers to attend a training meeting
to ensure uniformity in recording results. Volunteers took
?screenline? counts – counting only pedestrians and bicyclists
that passed through an imaginary line on the street. Volunteers
received maps that instructed them to count at screenline
locations. For purposes of age distinction, the counts
classified as children individuals that appeared 16 years and
younger. The count totals combine three periods of observations, two peak-hour weekday counts and a
weekend midday count.
Screenline
Conducting the bicycle counts allows general conclusions about bicyclists‘ characteristics. The following
section is a summary of the count findings.
Overall, the count data reflects active levels of bicycling and walking in Culver City. Bicycle count results
indicate that male bicyclists outnumbered female bicyclists 4:1. The most popular location for female
bicyclists was the Ballona Creek Bike Path. However, the Culver Boulevard Bike Path on Saturday was the
only count location where female bicyclists outnumbered male bicyclists.
The counts recorded the highest concentration of bicyclists along the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane. The
Ballona Creek Bike Path had the second highest bicycle count totals. The count data shows high use along
existing facilities and makes the case for the installation of future bicycle facilities in Culver City.
Count data shows that the Ballona Creek Bike Path experiences heavier use in the afternoon and during the
weekend. The count data also shows that the Ballona Creek Bike Path caters to commuters as well as
recreational bicyclists. Figure 4.7 differentiates bicycle counts by time and location.
Overland Avenue showed an unexpectedly high amount
of bicycle use. Overland Avenue is a major arterial
within Culver City and connects to some of the City‘s
most popular venues, including Sony Studios, Veteran‘s
Park, Veteran‘s Center, Culver City Senior Center,
Ballona Creek, West Los Angeles College and the
Ralphs/Best Buy/Bally retail park. The Open Space Element
of the Culver City General Plan calls for a bike lane on
Overland Avenue and the count data confirms the need
for improved bicycle facilities on this street. The count
data at Overland Avenue and Culver Boulevard reported
150 bicyclists over the observation period, the third-
highest count totals in the City following of Venice Boulevard and Ballona Creek.
Map 4.1 shows bicyclist activity recorded during the counts. The arrows depict the direction of bicycle travel
counted. The count totals combine three observation periods – two peak-hour weekday counts and a
weekend midday count.
Count data also provide information on riding behavior in the City, including helmet use, sidewalk riding and
wrong-way riding. Forty-one percent of recorded bicyclists did not wear a helmet, twenty-five percent rode
on the sidewalk, and nine percent rode in the opposite direction of traffic Figure 4.8 disaggregates riding
behavior data based on count location. This data also shows the need for educating the public on bicycle
safety.
The following section summarizes the general findings of pedestrian activity in Culver City.
As opposed to counts showing males making up the greater proportion of bicyclists, the pedestrian counts
generally observed an equal gender distribution. Females represented forty-eight percent of pedestrians.
Female pedestrians outnumbered male pedestrians at several count locations, including Cardiff Avenue at
Culver Boulevard and Braddock Drive at Elenda Street.
Map 4.2 shows the number of pedestrians observed at each count location.
The Culver Boulevard and Cardiff Avenue location accounted for over 42 percent of all pedestrians counted.
Downtown Culver City has many elements that encourage and facilitate pedestrian travel, including human-
scale architecture, outdoor dining, benches and water fountains, retail and entertainment opportunities, and
shade
The second most popular pedestrian count location was the Culver Arts District (located along Washington
Boulevard east of National Boulevard). Results for counts taken at La Cienega Avenue and Washington
Boulevard indicated high levels of pedestrian activity. The Arts District continues to be a desirable place to
visit and affirms that pedestrian oriented retail/design can encourage this active and healthy transportation
option.
While many parts of Culver City have designs that accommodate pedestrians, other parts of the City have
fewer amenities. Active levels of walking occurred at many locations with few pedestrian amenities (e.g.
Washington Boulevard at Glencoe Avenue, Sepulveda Boulevard at Playa Street, etc.) possibly because they
connect to popular destinations. Generally, people choose to walk to retail, dining, and other
shopping/entertainment options. These streets connect to popular attractions in Culver City, without
providing commensurate pedestrian facilities.
As mentioned earlier, Bicycle & Pedestrian Initiative
held several public workshops. The public workshops
typically consisted of two parts. The first part of the
public workshop served as an organizational meeting
for the PAC. The second part allowed the public to
comment on parts of the Plan released for public review.
The meetings generally followed the following elements
of the Plan:
Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities in
Culver City
Needs Analysis
Proposed Network
Draft Document
The first meeting placed poster boards and maps of the street network of Culver City at three comment
stations. The workshop encouraged participants to write comments and stick notes on the boards at each
station. Participants interacted with Culver City staff and the project staff.
Project staff summarized the input collected at the conclusion of the workshop open comment period and
reported the findings to the group. The final portion of the workshop included PAC sub-committee selection
and organization. The following sections summarize the comments submitted under the various topics for
each station.
The Paths topic received the greatest number of comments during the initial public meeting. Comments
generally focused on the Ballona Creek Bike Path and the Culver Boulevard Bicycle Path. Comments regarding
the Ballona Creek Bike Path, mentioned access, signage, mode-separation, maintenance, safety, lighting and
landscaping. The Culver Boulevard Bicycle Path comments mentioned extending the facility, adding more
lighting, and improving crossings of major streets.
Meeting attendees suggested adding access points along
the Ballona Creek Bike Path. Access points can encourage
use and provide a safer contiguous network with more
connections to on-street facilities. The public also
suggested enhancing access points by restricting parking
where the path connects to streets, which allows easier
merging into traffic. Attendees also requested improving
entryways to allow bicycle trailers to enter onto the path.
With respect to signage, attendees suggested more way-
finding signage with mileage and directional information
to desirable destinations, along with bilingual signage for non-English speaking path users.
Regarding mode-separation, attendees commented that mixed-use paths could lead to bicycle and pedestrian
collisions; they preferred dividing users with striping or separate facilities.
Some attendees commented that path maintenance (both trash debris and pavement repairs) needed closer
monitoring.
The Ballona Creek Bike Path received frequent comments about safety concerns. Meeting attendees suggested
possible improvements, including better lighting, mileage markers for path orientation, more patrols to
monitor unlawful behavior, and emergency call boxes.
Some attendees also suggested improving landscaping using native plants, garden sites, and other path
amenities.
Workshop participants suggested extending the Culver Boulevard Bike Path to Downtown Culver City. They
also expressed a need for better lighting and better crossings at major streets.
Comments at the pedestrian facilities topic station
focused on locations with poor pedestrian facilities.
These included Jefferson Boulevard‘s lack of sidewalks
near Hetzler Road, the ?jail-like? pedestrian pathway
located at Farragut Drive and Jackson/Jasmine Avenue,
the fence in the middle of the parking lot between
Target Center and Studio Village Shopping Center, and
the poor connection between the Helms Bakery area and
Downtown along Washington Boulevard. Comments
also requested signs prohibiting sidewalk skateboarding
and bicycling in the Downtown area, particularly near
the movie theater in front of Town Plaza.
Under the topic of traffic calming, meeting attendees noted several roads that need improvements. Specific
suggestions included speed humps for Braddock Drive and a larger drop-off area at Irving Place near School
Street. Other suggestions included a need for general traffic calming measures on Ince Boulevard and Lucerne
Avenue.
Meeting attendees identified a number of difficult intersection crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists. The
primary concern for bicyclists at intersections was a need for traffic signal detectors that respond to the
presence of bicycles, rather than simply large motor vehicles. Attendees noted such an example at Berryman
Avenue and Washington Boulevard. Participants noted that the pedestrian signal timing of some intersection
crossings was too short—specifically at Ince Boulevard at Washington Boulevard, and Culver Boulevard at
Washington Boulevard. Attendees also cited several intersections as generally problematic. These included
Duquesne Avenue at the Ballona Creek Bike Path entrance, Washington Boulevard at McLaughlin Avenue,
and Mentone Avenue at Braddock Drive.
Meeting participants shared a number of comments
regarding specific roads, which they felt created difficult
conditions for bicycling. Key streets cited as
uncomfortable for bicycling included Jefferson
Boulevard, Washington Boulevard, Overland Avenue,
Braddock Drive, and Culver Boulevard. Participants
suggested the use of sharrows or ?Share the Road? signs
on Washington Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue.
Several comments also advocated for better lighting on
roads at underpasses for freeways, improved
maintenance, and replacing existing gutters with those
that have grates running perpendicular to the direction
of bicycle traffic.
Meeting participants also expressed some general overall needs within the City‘s road system. These included
calls for more north-south bikeway connections within the City limits, better coordination for connections to
bike facilities in neighboring cities and more routes off busy arterial roads.
This station encouraged the public to express their
needs for facilities that accommodated connections to
different transportation systems. For bicycling
connections to walking trips, this included requests for
bicycle parking facilities at popular destinations, like
the Veterans Memorial Auditorium. For connections to
transit, this included short and long-term parking
facilities (racks and storage lockers) at bus stops and
the future Exposition Light Rail station. One
commenter also suggested publishing a map of bicycle
parking facilities.
Although the general public sentiment encouraged more
bicycle racks, participants also expressed a need to
replace some existing racks near City Hall and
Downtown, which they felt were difficult to use and
discouraged some multi-modal trips.
A number of comments advocated for better driver and bicyclist education. One comment suggested
implementation of Safe Routes to School ?walking school bus? or ?bike bus? programs. Another suggested
implementing the innovative ?bike box? treatment at intersections to accommodate bicyclist lane positioning
at stoplights. And another suggested implementing the ?Idaho stop,? which allows bicyclists to simply yield at
stop signs with respect to cross traffic (not currently allowed by the California Vehicle Code), instead of
requiring a complete stop. Several bicyclists commented on the potential hazards presented to bicyclists from
road maintenance and the installation of utility cables. Often workers install utility cables in the same area of
the road as bicyclists travel. This practice needs review to determine ways to mitigate its effects on bicyclists
where possible.
The BPMP conducted two types of surveys, general and
focused. Workshop attendees took the ?focused? surveys,
which allowed the City to determine demographics at the
workshops and to determine outreach/advertising
effectiveness. The results concluded that most individuals
heard about the workshop by word of mouth.
Members of the public had several options for providing
feedback throughout the planning process. Participants
could submit additional comments using comment cards
distributed at the public workshops, or by email
submission through the Initiative‘s website at
www.ccwalkbike.org.
The comments often focused on increasing the numbers and coverage of bicycle facilities, and improving
conditions of existing facilities. Many comments focused on the Ballona Creek Bike Path, Culver Boulevard
Bike Path, and the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane. While opportunities for improving these facilities may be
limited, improving the connectivity of Culver City bikeways and adjacent areas is a primary focus of the Plan.
The following section summarizes the findings from the
audits conducted on May 9 and May 16, 2009. Planners
selected audit locations based on geographic diversity
and their strategic relationship to Culver City. The
Initiative website advertised the audits and staff sent
direct invitations to the PAC, TAC, and members of the
public expressing interest in attending future Initiative
events.
The audits had three major periods:
I. Introduction (15 minutes)
a. Explain process
b. Distribute map/materials
II. Active Observation (60 minutes)
a. Walk/bike route
b. Fill out observation sheet
III. Post Audit Discussion (45 Minutes)
a. Group observations
b. Capture feedback
c. Synthesis into recommendations/report
This audit focused on the connections to the Westfield
Culver City Mall Transit Center and the intersection of
Sepulveda Boulevard and Slauson Boulevard.
Major Findings included:
Utility boxes frequently obstruct sidewalk
users.
Intersection signals have short pedestrian
crossing times
Roadways need more prominent crossings
Participants noted that short signal countdown times,
coupled with a lack of crossing islands, are an issue for
those with impaired mobility. Because of Westfield
Culver City Mall‘s proximity to a major transit hub, audit
participants felt that focusing improvements on crosswalks would make the area more pedestrian friendly.
This audit focused on the future site of the Expo Light Rail Transit station and addressing increased
pedestrian access.
Major Findings included:
Pedestrians are uncomfortable due to high traffic speed, lack of buffer from the street while on the
sidewalk
The area needs pedestrian connectivity
The streetscape lacks pedestrian-oriented design or features
A review of completed worksheets from the audit participants revealed high levels of pedestrian discomfort
attributed to high traffic speeds. Auditors identified the need for more shade, landscaping and various
improvements that would enhance the aesthetics of the area. This area was undergoing redevelopment at the
time of the audit, and the City anticipates pedestrian improvements upon completion of the redevelopment
projects.
The Washington audit focused primarily on the stretch
of Washington Boulevard between McConnell Avenue
and Beethoven Street due to its proposed design as a
future pedestrian friendly zone.
Major Findings included:
The crossing at Washington Place at
Washington Boulevard needs improvement
Traffic cameras have a negative effect on
pedestrian environment
Participants noted that the intersection of Washington
Boulevard and Washington Place creates an uninviting
pedestrian environment. An issue that that arose at this
audit was the potential effect of traffic cameras on the pedestrian environment. This stretch of road has traffic
cameras installed to catch and enforce motor vehicles running red lights. Participants observed several
instances of loud screeching due to harsh braking and near-hit-accidents during the observation period. Audit
participants attributed this behavior to motor vehicles suddenly stopping to avoid getting tickets.
Participants also observed that bicycle parking was virtually non-existent, despite the many shops on
Washington Boulevard that cater to neighborhood commercial activity.
The Sepulveda Boulevard audit focused on the Culver Boulevard bicycle and pedestrian oriented path, and the
neighborhood commercial district south of Culver Boulevard along Sepulveda Boulevard.
Major Findings included:
The corridor needs additional shade
The Culver Boulevard Bike Path could benefit from more midblock crossings between Sepulveda
Boulevard and Elenda Street
Major findings of this audit focused on enhancing the pedestrian environment along Sepulveda Boulevard. In
general, a lack of shade was a major concern, as well the lack of prominent bicycle parking. Auditors approved
of the walking environment, especially along the planted median of the Culver Boulevard Bike Path.
Because residents and visitors consider Downtown Culver City as the most pedestrian-friendly part of Culver
City, this audit examined the positive aspects of Downtown that could be replicated elsewhere in Culver City.
Overall, auditors found an adequate supply of shade, rest areas, and bicycle parking. Auditors felt that some
aspects of Downtown need improvements.
Major Findings included:
The intersection between Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard (east) needs improvement
Downtown Culver City ?successes? can be replicated elsewhere
The area has a good supply of bike parking, but needs updated racks
Audit findings focused on the intersection between Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard.
Pedestrians navigating this intersection felt intimidated by the layout. Direct crossings at this intersection
would link the east and west sections of Downtown in a more convenient alignment. Participants also asked
for more signage and wayfinding tools.
The Downtown – East Culver City Connector is the proposed alignment of several residential streets (Wesley
Street, Lucerne Avenue, Irving Place, and Van Buren Place) that will connect the eastside of Culver City and
Expo Bike Path with Downtown and the rest of Culver City. The bike audit focused on the Downtown – East
Culver City Connector alignment, as well as Culver Boulevard and National Boulevard.
Major Findings included:
The City needs to create a Citywide route
system
The City needs to facilitate east-west travel
Schools need to address motor vehicle
congestion during student pick up times
Auditors generally approved of the road conditions
along Wesley Street, Lucerne Avenue, and Irving Place.
Irving Place and Van Buren Place have traffic calming
features that prohibit two-way traffic at points in the
road. Auditors observed bicyclists and pedestrians
along the route, and concluded that the Downtown – East
Culver City Connector is a convenient route.
Auditors advocated advertising the Downtown – East Culver City Connector as a part of a citywide route
system, with signage that could direct bicyclists through the City.
This section examines Culver City bicycle and pedestrian related incident data, collected from the Statewide
Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) over a five-year period (2002 – 2007).
Map 4.3 shows bicycle collisions. Some notable clusters emerge along Washington Boulevard, leading
eastward towards the Costco area and around the Westfield Culver City Mall Transit Center area.
Culver City had 94 reported bicycle-related incidents in the years between 2002 and 2007, an average 19
incidents per year and roughly .467 incidents per 1,000 persons per year. Culver City‘s bicycle collision rate is
higher than the State average of .327 incidents per 1,000 persons per year. During this five-year period, the
frequency of bicycle-related incidents remained relatively static. The Design Guide contained in the BPMP
will work towards reducing bicycle-related incidents in the City.
Map 4.4 maps pedestrian collisions. Some notable clusters emerge in the Downtown area, around the
Westfield Culver City Mall Transit Center and along Washington Boulevard, near the Costco area.
Culver City had 126 reported pedestrian-related incidents in the years between 2002 and 2007, an average of
25 incidents per year, and roughly .615 incidents per 1,000 persons per year. Culver City‘s pedestrian collision
rate is above the State average of .499 incidents. The level of pedestrian incidents increased slightly in the past
two years. The Design Guide contained in the BPMP will work towards reducing pedestrian-related incidents
in the City.
This page intentionally left blank.
This section describes the criteria used to develop the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facility maps for
Culver City.
The recommended Culver City bicycle and
pedestrian network includes the following types
of facilities:
1. Bike Paths (Class I)
2. Bike Lanes (Class II)
3. Bike Routes (with Sharrows) (Class
III)
4. Bike Routes (Signage only) (Class III)
5. Potential Bicycle Friendly Streets
(Bicycle Boulevards) (Class III)
6. Pedestrian Improvement Zones
7. Pedestrian Improvement Corridors
The Plan discusses each facility type‘s features, and explains how each facility type will function within the
bikeway and pedestrian network. The City will construct the network in stages as grant and other funding
becomes available, or as roads undergo scheduled resurfacing.
There are current plans to build a multiuse path running as part of the Metro Expo Line project. The path will
run parallel to National Boulevard, from the Ballona Creek Bike Path to Wesley Street. The Plan assumes a
twelve-foot, fully paved path that accommodates cyclists, pedestrians, and other users. Sidewalks on streets
intersecting this existing segment of National Boulevard will receive direct access to the new bike path.
The Plan recommends bike lanes for all major roadways within the City where feasible (i.e. without major
alterations to the current roadway configuration). The Plan uses the following lane width assumptions to
determine bike lane feasibility:
8-foot minimum width for street parking
5-foot minimum width for bike lanes
11-foot minimum width for travel lanes adjacent to bike lanes
At present, based on these assumptions, sections of Washington Place, Washington Boulevard, and Jefferson
Boulevard have sufficient curb-to-curb width to install bike lanes without removing other roadway features.
Note that installing bike lanes would require modifying the existing striping for the vehicle lanes. This related
striping work increases the total project cost. The widths provided above are guidelines only, and do not
prohibit installing facilities with smaller widths based on the Public Works Director/City Engineer‘s
discretion. Geometric design will determine bike lane configurations at intersections.
This Plan considered installing bike routes on major roadway segments (primary and secondary arterials)
within the City where bike lanes may not be feasible in the near term (e.g. bike lanes cannot be installed
without removing an existing travel or parking lane). On bike route segments where on-street parking is
present and the speed limits are appropriate, this Plan recommends using the California Manual on Uniform
Traffic Contrl Devices (CaMUTCD) ?Shared Roadway Bicycle Marking? (commonly referred to as a
?Sharrow? or ?Shared Lane Marking?).
This Plan recommends the bicycle route designation with signage on major roadway segments where (1) bike
lanes are not feasible in the near term, and (2) on-street parking is not present or the speed limit is not
appropriate. This Plan also considers signs such as the Bicycle Warning signs (W-11) and the Share the Road
signs (W-11 + W-16-1) to supplement the standard CaMUTCD ?BIKE ROUTE? (D-11) signage. The Design
Guide (Appendix 1) provides a more comprehensive list of signage options.
Bicycle Friendly Streets (BFS) are also referred to as
?Bicycle Boulevards.? Due to confusion caused by the term
Bicycle Boulevard and the differing levels of treatments
associated with this type of facility, we use Bicycle Friendly
Street as an alternative term.
The ?Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street? designation
identifies low-volume streets that can undergo enhanced
treatments after traffic engineering analysis. Streets will
receive the Bicycle Friendly Streets designation only after
the traffic engineering analysis and necessary
improvements.
In contrast to the previously described classifications, this Plan recommends the Bicycle Friendly Streets
designation only on predominantly residential streets with relatively low traffic volumes. Table 5.5 provides a
complete list of all Proposed Bicycle Friendly Streets. The table is listing and not a priority ranking. The Plan
uses the following criteria to differentiate Proposed Bicycle Friendly Streets from other residential streets
within Culver City.
This Plan selected facilities with minimal interruptions/breaks in their continuity. In some cases, the streets
selected provide continuity with existing or proposed bikeways in neighboring jurisdictions.
Crossing major streets at unsignalized intersections can be problematic for bicyclists. Project staff used
fieldwork to find streets with existing traffic signals at intersections with arterials. Some routes will require
intersection improvements. These improvements may include traffic signals or other crossing improvements,
such as ?crossing islands? or ?median refuges.?
Proposed Bicycle Friendly Streets should connect people with neighborhood amenities. Streets received
recommendations based on their proximity/connection to the existing bikeway network, schools, community
centers, recreation centers, parks, shopping/retail, employment hubs, and other desirable destinations.
The streets designated as Bicycle Friendly Streets will receive—at a minimum—standard bicycle route
signage. Bicycle Friendly Streets may also receive custom signage, sharrows, and traffic calming features,
where supported by future engineering analysis.
Map 5.1 displays the recommended bicycle network.
Field reviews and public input identified Pedestrian Improvement Areas as having high existing or potential
pedestrian demand. Identifying these zones will assist in prioritizing pedestrian improvements and
maintenance. Table 5-7 lists Pedestrian Improvement Areas in order of priority score.
Pedestrian Improvement Corridors are streets in Culver City significant to pedestrian travel. As pedestrian
corridors, these streets will receive priority attention with respect to maintenance, amenities and
improvements.
Table 5-8 lists the Pedestrian Corridors in order priority order.
Map 5.2 displays the recommended pedestrian network.
This chapter provides the methodology for the prioritization of bicycle and pedestrian projects in Culver City.
The improvements called out in this chapter are for on street facilities. Improving the bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure in Culver City will allow residents and visitors to use motor vehicles less and live healthier
lifestyles.
Members of the TAC and feedback from the PAC combined to create project criteria. Each criterion contains
valuable information about a facility and its ability to address an existing or future need in Culver City.
Existing facilities promote and support walking and bicycling, but their failure to connect to larger systems
leaves gaps in the network. These gaps discourage walking/biking because they limit route continuity and
prevent direct connections to desirable destinations. Projects that extend or connect to the Ballona Creek
Bike Path, the Culver Boulevard Bike Path, and Venice Boulevard Bike Lane qualify for this prioritization
criterion.
Activity centers are the major trip-driving destinations within the City (e.g. Helms Bakery, Downtown,
Culver Studios, Target, Parks, etc). Increasing bicycle and pedestrian accessibility to major Activity Centers
can reduce traffic congestion and support residents and visitors who choose to bicycle or walk. Projects that
connect to these centers qualify for this prioritization criterion.
Bicycle and pedestrian accessibility to transit hubs is essential for longer multimodal trips. Facilities within ¼
mile of the Westfield Culver City Transit Center, West LA Transit Center, the Exposition Light Rail Station,
and other transit hubs qualify for this prioritization criterion.
School children typically have higher rates of bicycling and walking than adults for transportation. To
encourage more students to bike and walk to school, proposed facilities within ¼ mile of K-12 schools (public
and private) and West LA College qualify for this prioritization criterion.
New facilities can reduce the frequency of bicycle/pedestrian collisions with motor vehicles. Projects that
serve areas with concentrated amounts of bicycle/pedestrian collisions qualify for this prioritization criterion.
The City solicited public input using a website survey, comment cards (electronic and printed), and public
workshops. Feasible projects with demonstrated public endorsement qualify for this prioritization criterion.
Each of the criteria in Section 6.1 contains elements of a project‘s value to the bicycle and pedestrian network
of the City.
In the summer of 2009, members of the TAC and PAC provided input concerning each of the criteria and
ranked them from one to six in order of their importance to Culver City bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The
ranking exercise resulted in the following prioritization:
1. System Gaps & Connectivity to Existing Facilities
2. Connections to Activity Centers
3. Proximity to Transit Hubs
4. Proximity to Schools
5. Collisions & Public Input (tie)
The extent to which proposed projects address these criteria determines the project‘s prioritization in
construction and funding. Based on the above results, the criterion that will have the most impact on project
implementation is System Gaps & Connectivity to Existing Facilities.
Table 6.1 shows how the PAC and TAC ranking exercise translated into weights for project prioritization.
Weights are based on direct, secondary, or no service at all. Direct service means that a facility intersects with
a facility, whereas secondary access occurs through connecting to a proposed facility or area in the network
that meets the criteria.
The following tables present the proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects in the City, ranked according to the
weighted criteria. The First Tier Projects are the five highest-ranked bicycle and five highest ranked
pedestrian projects. The Second Tier and Third Tier Projects are lower-priority projects that the City can
implement upon completing the First Tier projects or if provided the opportunity and funding.
The City will try to implement these projects in the rough order of their prioritization, tier, and availability of
full funding. These rankings are not the final implementation order, but a guide to direct the City as funding
and opportunities arise.
SLM – Sharrow (Shared Lane Marking), BFS – Bicycle Friendly Street, BL – Bike Lane, BR – Bike Route, PA – Pedestrian Area, PC – Pedestrian Corridor
PA – Pedestrian Area, PC – Pedestrian Corridor
Planning level cost estimates include both capital and maintenance costs as shown in Table 6-4. Cost
assumptions include capital costs, but do not include maintenance. The cost estimates do not include some
supplemental facilities that may depend on site-specific conditions. For instance, bicycle lane costs do not
include treatments at intersections, which may depend on the presence of traffic signals and loop detectors.
The City will refine the cost estimates during a project design phase.
The primary component of Chapter 6 is ten (five bicycle, five pedestrian) high priority project sheets. The
Plan highlights the following ten projects because of their importance to the network.
One project rose to the top of Culver City‘s bicycle and pedestrian connections through the public input
process: establishing a major bikeway along one of the major arterials (Culver Boulevard or Washington
Boulevard) accessing Downtown and continuing on to the Expo station. This Plan analyzed both Culver and
Washington Boulevards for bike lane and sharrow feasibility. Due to the current State design guidelines,
Culver Boulevard and sections of Washington Boulevard cannot accommodate bike lanes or sharrows without
significant physical modifications and/or roadway striping changes to the current road configurations. Plans
to implement such a project in the future are in development as a commitment to the values expressed in the
vision statement of this Plan and as a result of strong public support.
The high priority project sheets include a description of the project area and issues, a listing of specific
improvement recommendations, a cost estimate, an overview map of the project area, and conceptual designs
of each of the bicycle/pedestrian improvement recommendations. The cost estimates provided are based on
preliminary planning-level concepts. The City will refine the cost estimates during a project design stage.
The City will try to implement these projects in the rough order of their prioritization, tier, and availability of
full funding. The BPMP recognizes that funding, and other factors like future development may allow some
projects to finish sooner than others. These rankings are not the final implementation order, but a guide to
direct the City as funding and opportunities arise.
Washington Boulevard is the longest (5.6 miles) continuous road in Culver City. It provides direct
connectivity to many of Culver City‘s most frequently visited destinations. In most segments,
Washington Boulevard is a four lane road with street parking and center turn lane. Some minor
segments drop street parking or the center turn lane converts to a median or is dropped completely.
The speed limit on Washington Boulevard is 35 mph. Challenges for bicyclists include deteriorated
pavement in some areas and a lack of designated bicycle facilities. This high priority project ranked #1
(tie) out of 50 bicycle projects, and received 22 points out of 24 possible points in the priority ranking
process.
Stripe bike lanes where recommended (see project extent map)
Stripe sharrows on applicable segments where road width does not
accommodate bike lanes
Install signage/wayfinding
Add bicycle route signage where sharrows and lanes cannot be
installed
Intersection improvement at McLaughlin
Cost estimate $153,000
Bike Lanes – Design Guide, Section 1.3
Sharrows – Design Guide, Section 1.6.1
Bike Route – Design Guide, Section 1.6
This photo simulation depicts a portion of Washington Boulevard as
it may appear with bike lanes striped. Some portions of Washington
Boulevard have enough width to stripe bicycle lanes as they are.
Due to road width or other restrictions, bike lanes are not
recommended on all sections of Washington Boulevard. Where
permanent street parking exists, the City may install sharrows.
Overland Avenue tied for the top ranking with Washington Boulevard and scored 22 out of 24 in the priority ranking
process. Overland Avenue serves Sony Studios, Veteran‘s Park/Senior Center, Teen Center, Culver City Library, and
other major employment areas. Overland is a five lane road (with center turn lane [CTL] or median) for the most part
between Venice Boulevard and Freshman Drive. South of Freshman Dr. it becomes a four lane road with no
CTL/median. The speed limit on Overland is 35 mph except in school zones. Most of Overland allows on-street
parking.
Stripe sharrows
Install signage/wayfinding
Cost estimate: $56,000
Sharrows – Design Guide, Section 1.6.1
Bike Route – Design Guide, Section 1.6
Overland Avenue does not have the road width for bike lanes to
be striped. Where permanent street parking exists, the City
should install sharrows.
Farragut Drive/Franklin Avenue is one of the more significant residential roads in Culver City with respect to
connectivity and continuity. Farragut/Franklin provides direct access to Culver City High School, Middle School and
Farragut Elementary. Retrofitting the Jackson-Jasmine pathway provided access to bicycles and improved
Farragut/Franklin as a medium distance route for bicyclists and pedestrians. The speed limit along Farragut Drive is
25 mph. The Jackson-Jasmine gate needs further improvement to enable better movement of bicyclists and
pedestrians. The intersection at Overland Avenue needs bicycle detection. Farragut/Franklin ranked #3 on the
priority list and scored 20 out of a possible 24 points in the priority ranking process.
Jackson-Jasmine pathway improvement
Bicycle-sensitive detection at Overland
Avenue intersection
Install signage/wayfinding
Cost Estimate: $27,000
Bicycle Friendly Street – Design Guide, Section
1.6.2
Bicycle Detection – Design Guide, Section 1.1.2
Farragut/Franklin is a comfortable road segment for bicyclists and, with a few
small improvements, will be considerably more enjoyable for bicyclists to use.
One primary obstacle for bicyclists wanting to use Farragut is the access gate
between Jackson Avenue and Jasmine Avenue. The pathway has recently been
updated, with two of the poles being removed. This is a step in the right
direction. Ultimately, the pathway should be fitted with bollards for a more
modern approach.
Jefferson Boulevard is a high-speed arterial road serving north and south Culver City. Jefferson is a primary access point
to West Los Angeles College, Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook Park and the Target/Bed Bath & Beyond, Ross shopping area.
Speed limits vary between 30-40 mph on Jefferson. Jefferson is a five lane road with street parking intermittently
permitted throughout its length in the City. On some portions of Jefferson the outside lane is wide enough to be shared
by motor vehicles and bicyclists, but in other areas bicyclists must position themselves towards the center of the lane to
discourage motor vehicles from passing them at an unsafe distance. Obstacles on Jefferson include pavement conditions
in some locations, lack of bicycle facilities and signage, and traffic speeds. Jefferson ranked #4 on the priority list and
scored 19 out of a possible 24 points in the priority ranking process.
Stripe bike lanes
Stripe sharrows
Install signage/wayfinding
Add bicycle route signage Lighting
at Slauson underpass
Cost estimate: $68,600
Bike Lanes – Design Guide, Section 1.4
Sharrows – Design Guide, Section 1.6.1
Bike Route – Design Guide, Section 1.6
Jefferson Boulevard is a good street for more focused signage to promote
?Share the Road? because of its diversity of land uses and road widths.
Braddock Drive is the longest, uninterrupted residential street in Culver City. Because of its length, it is
commonly used by motor vehicles as an alternative to Washington Boulevard, Culver Boulevard, or
Jefferson Boulevard. The City implemented traffic calming measures in the past (e.g. installation of speed
humps) to dissuade this behavior, but may do more to reprioritize the street and further discourage spill-
over traffic. The speed limit on Braddock is 25 mph. Obstacles to bicyclists on Braddock include lack of
bicycle detection at its intersections of Sepulveda Boulevard and Overland Avenue, and spill-over traffic.
Wide portions (e.g. Carlson Park) leave room for improvement. Braddock ranked #5 on the priority list
and scored 17 out of a total 24 points in the priority ranking process.
Bicycle-sensitive detection at Overland
Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard intersections
Install signage/wayfinding
Install sharrows
Traffic calming where appropriate
Cost estimate: $51,000
Bicycle Friendly Street – Design Guide, Section 1.6.2
Sharrows – Design Guide, Section 1.6.1
Braddock Drive can be improved for bicyclists by adding bicycle detector
loops at its intersections with major arterials. The image to the left shows
where bicycle detection loops can be installed to allow bicyclists shorter
waiting periods at major intersections. The City may analyze additional
traffic calming measures as part of a future traffic engineering study to
determine possible treatments to support designation as a Bicycle-
Friendly Street.
As the longest residential street in Culver City, Braddock Drive is one of the most popular corridors in
the pedestrian network. Much of Braddock‘s current configuration makes it a comfortable place to
walk. Braddock provides access to the City‘s high school, middle school, several elementary schools,
and community-oriented commercial corridors on Sepulveda and Overland and Downtown. Because
of its continuity, motorists use it as an alternate road to avoid Washington, Culver or Jefferson
Boulevards. The net-effect of this spillover traffic can make Braddock an uninviting environment.
Braddock is a major pedestrian route for school-bound children, making its intersections at major
arterials a place of special consideration. Braddock‘s intersections with Overland and Sepulveda will
be considered for signal and marking improvements. Braddock ranked #1 among pedestrian projects,
scoring 22 out of a total 24 points in the priority ranking process.
At Huron Avenue, Elenda Street and Irving Place
(school intersections) – install high visibility
crosswalk
Crossing improvements at Overland and Sepulveda
Boulevards
Install a curb ramp at Le Bourget (on east side of
intersection) at Carlson Park
Stripe crosswalk at southeast side of Motor
intersection
Cost estimate: $17,200
Crosswalks – Design Guide, Section 1.10.11
Curb Ramps – Design Guide, Section 1.11.4
Braddock Drive can be improved for pedestrians by enhancing crosswalks at high traffic areas.
The picture to the left shows the intersection of Braddock Drive and Huron Avenue, which is a
main point of pedestrian access to the high school and middle school.
At present, the crosswalk features the minimum yellow transverse line striping. With an
upgrade to high visibility striping, the crosswalk would become more prominent and vehicles
would have an easier time recognizing the crosswalk as a pedestrian space.
Overland Avenue services major areas of employment, and commercial
and civic activity in Culver City. At its intersections with Washington
Boulevard and Culver Boulevard, crossing may be difficult for some
users due to the width of the road, traffic volumes, and pedestrian
conditions in general. Overland also serves a significant portion of
Culver City‘s senior population, including the Senior Center and
private-assisted living residences. Overland tied with Braddock as the
#1 pedestrian project, scoring 22 out of a total 24 points in the priority
ranking process.
At Culver - Move light/ped actuator closer to ramp. Split ramps
At Culver - Increase crossing distance time/pedestrian lead time
At Braddock – Covered bus shelter
At Washington - Higher visibility crosswalks
At Washington – Install pedestrian countdown
At Washington - Upgrade pedestrian actuators to latest approved
designs
Cost Estimate: $18,900
Crosswalks – Design Guide, Section 1.10.11
Pedestrian Countdown Signals – Design Guide,
Section 1.11.1
Bus Shelter – Design Guide, Section 1.10.10
Overland is a heavily used street by pedestrians and motor vehicles
alike. It connects some of Culver City‘s more bustling civic
destinations.
To enable expedited crossing by those with mobility impairments,
pedestrian crossing actuators could be located closer to the ramp and a
split ramp should be provided to shorten the street-crossing distance.
The Expo Light Rail Station may quickly become an area with one of the highest concentrations
of pedestrian activity in all of Culver City. As the physical landscape changes to accommodate
the light rail, Culver City needs to improve the built environment around the station to meet the
needs of the pedestrians accessing the station. The Expo Light Rail Station ranked #3 on
pedestrian projects, and scored 21 out of a total 24 points in the priority ranking process.
Install signage, wayfinding, and High Visibility
Crosswalks up to ¼ mile radius from the Expo
Light Rail Station to encourage/promote
pedestrian connectivity to the Station
Cost Estimate: $14,650*
*Includes signage, wayfinding, and crosswalks
Crosswalks – Design Guide, Section 2.5 Signage – Design Guide, Section 1.5.5
The Costco Shopping area has the highest concentration of bicycle and
pedestrian collisions as reported through the years 2002-2007 (SWITRS). The
area includes Albertsons, In-N-Out, and Starbucks and commercial corridor. The
Costco Shopping area represents the western-most border of Culver City,
terminating just half a block from Lincoln Boulevard. Improvements to the
pedestrian environment in this area will help mitigate the effect of high traffic
volumes along this portion of Washington Boulevard. The Costco Shopping
area ranked #4 on pedestrian priority areas and scored 20 out of a total 24
points in the priority ranking process.
Re-align ramps to coincide with crosswalks.
Consider separate pedestrian crossing signal
Establish high visibility crosswalk
Install pedestrian-scale street light
Install advanced stop bar at Glencoe and west shopping center
entrance
Cost Estimate: $65,000
Crosswalks – Design Guide, Section 1.10.11 Street Lighting - Design Guide, Section 1.10.9 Curb Ramps – Design Guide, Section 1.11.4
Washington Boulevard is the longest arterial road in Culver City and
connects many important destinations, such as Downtown, the Expo Light
Rail Station, Costco, etc. As a major arterial, its intersections are frequently
wide, which may create crossing challenges for some pedestrians.
Pedestrian crossings can be improved with several options, including
modifying signal phases. Though generally not used for traffic efficiency, in
high pedestrian areas ?automatic green? may be explored after traffic
engineering analysis. Field review found a great need for continued
maintenance and debris removal. Some sections of Washington Boulevard
are undergoing separate review/update through the Culver City
Redevelopment Agency to become more pedestrian oriented. Washington
Boulevard ranked #5 among all pedestrian projects and scored 19 out of a
total 24 points in the priority ranking process.
At Sony Studios:
Explore placing planter boxes to
provide buffer in between street
trees from vehicular traffic
At Washington Place and Tilden
Increase crossing time
At Sepulveda
Curb extension
Pedestrian lead times on crossing
At Inglewood
Widen curb ramps and realign
crosswalks with ramps
Improve pavement
At Centinela
Repair pavement
Add additional signage
Cost Estimate: $17,300
Planter Boxes – Design Guide, Section 1.10.5 Curb Ramps – Design Guide, Section 1.11.4
This page intentionally left blank.
This section summarizes lower-priority projects included in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The City
can implement these improvements upon completing the Tier 1 projects or if provided the opportunity and
funding.
Culver Boulevard will become a bike route between Huron Avenue and Overland Avenue, and from Duquesne
Avenue to Washington Boulevard. Culver Boulevard will add sharrows between Overland Avenue and
Duquesne Avenue. Currently, Culver Boulevard serves bicyclists along the Culver Boulevard Bike Path (on the
median east of Elenda Street and west of Sawtelle Boulevard). This bike route will serve as an extension of
that bike path.
Higuera Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard.
Higuera will act as an important connector between the popular Washington and Jefferson Boulevard
arterials, the Ballona Creek Bike Path, and Expo Light Rail Transit Station. Higuera currently features some
elements of traffic calming and plays a small part of the proposed connection between East Culver City, the
Expo Bike Path, and Downtown.
Van Buren Place is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between A Street and Lucerne Avenue. Van Buren is a
part of a one-way couplet with Irving Place that enables bicycle and pedestrian traffic between Downtown,
East Culver City, and the Ballona Creek Bike Path. This route serves as an alternative route for individuals
wishing to travel on roads with lower vehicle volumes.
Duquesne Avenue will add sharrows between Braddock Drive and Jefferson Boulevard. This corridor serves as
a primary way for cyclists to move to and from the Ballona Creek Bike Path, Downtown, and to those
accessing West LA College and Culver City Park.
Sawtelle Boulevard will add sharrows and bike lanes between Venice Boulevard and Overland Avenue.
Sawtelle Boulevard is a secondary arterial that connects to Braddock Drive, the Culver City terminus of the
Culver Boulevard Bike Path and the Ballona Creek Bike Path (in the City of Los Angeles).
Playa Street will become a bike route as it extends south from Overland Avenue to Slauson Avenue. This
corridor accesses residential and commercial areas.
National Boulevard will receive a Class I bike path as a part of the Expo Light Rail Transit project. The street
will become a bike route from Washington Boulevard to Wesley Street, and will accommodate a bike lane
between Washington Boulevard and Venice Boulevard. As the Expo project develops, National Boulevard will
be a critical right of way for bicyclists, as it connects the Expo Bike Path to the Venice Boulevard Bike Lane,
serving much of West Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Culver City.
Washington Place will add a bike lane between Washington Boulevard and Albright Avenue (east end) and
Washington Boulevard and Grandview Boulevard (west end). Washington Place is a corridor that essentially
parallels Washington Boulevard, but traveling in a more direct route. This makes it a desirable alternative
route for those travelling along the Washington Boulevard corridors and between east-west Culver City.
Helms Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and the Expo Bike Path.
This small segment of the bikeway network will connect the sharrows on Washington Boulevard with the
Expo Bike Path and the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Wesley Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between National Boulevard and Higuera Street. Wesley
is an important connector between East Culver City, the Expo Bike Path, and Downtown Culver City. During
the school year, Wesley sees increased car traffic in the mornings and afternoons from student drop-off and
pick-up, resulting in car queuing. At other times of day, Wesley is a low-volume street and ideal for bicyclists
looking to avoid Washington, National, and Culver Boulevards.
Slauson Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Jefferson Boulevard and McDonald Street. This
portion of Slauson will serve as a residential route for the surrounding neighborhood
Irving Place is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street as a one-way street between Lucerne Avenue and Culver
Boulevard. The street will move cyclists from the Ballona Creek Bike Path via Duquesne Avenue to Downtown
Culver City. Irving experiences increased traffic volumes during student drop-off and pick up at Linwood
Howe Elementary School. Irving Place is also the terminus of Culver City‘s longest Proposed Bicycle Friendly
Street, Braddock Drive.
Elenda Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and Farragut Drive.
Elenda is the primary bikeway providing access to Culver High School, Culver Middle School, and Farragut
Elementary School. Elenda also provides bikeway proximity to the Culver Boulevard Bike Path.
Lucerne Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Higuera Street and Duquesne Avenue. Lucerne
is a low-volume street and is part of a series of other low-volume streets providing an alternative to
Washington and Culver Boulevards between East Culver City and Downtown.
Hannum Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Sawtelle Boulevard and Playa Street. At its
intersection with Playa, improvements to the current cul-de-sac permit through-traffic for bicycle connection
and include a bicycle/pedestrian actuator. South of Playa Street, Hannum becomes a bike route until the State
Route 90 freeway overpass, after which it will have either bike lanes or sharrows based on the road
configurations. Hannum serves commercial, residential, and school-bound traffic.
Harter Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between the south city limit and Washington Boulevard.
The road provides access to schools, the Culver Boulevard Bike Path, the Ballona Creek Bike Path via
Sepulveda Boulevard, and Tellefson Park. At its intersection with Washington Boulevard, Harter Avenue
continues north and becomes Tilden Avenue This intersection will require improvements for the route to be a
viable cross town option. Linking to the bike lane on Venice Boulevard is important for regional bikeway
connectivity.
Huron Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Braddock Drive and Venice Boulevard. The road
connects to many major arterials and allows access to the Culver Boulevard Bike Path. At Washington
Boulevard, the Huron Avenue Bicycle Friendly Street will require intersection improvements to facilitate
north/south bicyclist movement.
Kinston Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Rhoda Way and Flaxton Street. The Kinston
Avenue bikeway takes advantage of a current cul-de-sac with bollards that restricts vehicle movement at its
intersection with Flaxton Street. Currently, the bollards permit pedestrian through traffic, but need
retrofitting to facilitate bicyclists moving eastward on Flaxton Street. To the south the road connects to El
Rincon Elementary School and Blanco Park. The recreational path at Blanco Park is currently closed during
school hours.
Irving Place/Van Buren Place will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between A Street and Lucerne
Avenue. These corridors will receive sidewalk maintenance, and a high visibility crossing and appropriate
traffic calming signage added at Linwood Howe Elementary School, subject to traffic engineering analysis.
These recommendations come as a collaborative effort through a separate Safe Routes to School planning
process.
Farragut Drive will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Duquesne Avenue and Elenda Street.
Farragut Drive provides direct access from Duquesne Avenue to Culver City High School, Culver City Middle
School, and Farragut Elementary School along a low-volume street.
Sepulveda Boulevard will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Venice Boulevard and Jefferson
Boulevard/Sawtelle Boulevard. The Sepulveda Corridor provides access to community servicing businesses.
Huron Avenue will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Venice Boulevard and Braddock
Drive. Huron Avenue provides a controlled pedestrian crossing with Culver Boulevard, which benefits
students walking from nearby school.
Sawtelle Boulevard will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Venice Boulevard and Braddock
Drive. Sawtelle Boulevard serves as a low-volume alternative to Sepulveda Boulevard.
Washington Place will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Albright Avenue and
Washington Boulevard. This corridor provides access to Tellefson Park, residential areas, and commercial
areas.
Wesley Street will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between National Boulevard and Higuera
Street. Wesley Street provides an alternative route to Washington Boulevard. Via other streets, Wesley
provides the most direct pedestrian access from East Culver City to Culver City High School, Culver City
Middle School, and Farragut Elementary School.
Lucerne Avenue will receive the Pedestrian Corridor designation between Higuera Street and Duquesne.
Standard improvements include signage and sidewalk improvements.
The Shopping Area will receive the Pedestrian Area designation between Walnut Avenue and Glencoe
Avenue. This extended area needs pedestrian enhancements to promote walking from and to the adjacent
residential neighborhoods and between commercial businesses.
The Target/Bed, Bath & Beyond Shopping Area (Jefferson/Sepulveda Boulevards) will receive the Pedestrian Area
designation between Kinston Avenue and Playa Street. This extended area needs pedestrian enhancements to
promote walking from and to the adjacent residential neighborhoods and between commercial businesses.
Downtown Culver City will receive the Pedestrian Area designation between Madison Avenue and Main
Street. As the primary pedestrian destination in Culver City, Downtown will continue to undergo
observation for increased pedestrian friendliness and accessibility.
The public identified the Jefferson Boulevard at Overland Avenue intersection as requiring specific attention
for pedestrian enhancements. This Plan will evaluate that the intersection for opportunities to enhance
pedestrian convenience.
This section summarizes the lowest-priority projects included in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The
City can implement these improvements upon completing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects, or if provided the
opportunity and funding.
Centinela Avenue will add sharrows between Washington Place and Washington Boulevard, which will
connect its two limits while providing accessibility to neighboring residential and commercial areas. As a
major arterial within the region, placing sharrows on this section of Centinela may encourage the City of Los
Angeles to install bicycle facilities in their jurisdiction. Centinela Avenue will be a bike route from Mesmer
Avenue to south of Bristol Parkway, and will receive a bike lane from south of Bristol Parkway to Green Valley
Circle. This segment connects to activity centers and a transit hub.
Sepulveda Boulevard will become a bike route between Jefferson Boulevard/Playa Street and Centinela
Avenue. The City will add sharrows along Sepulveda Boulevard from Jefferson Boulevard/Playa Street to
Venice Boulevard (within City limits) where allowed by CaMUTCD, e.g. segments within allowable speed
limits with on-street parking. Sepulveda Boulevard is a major arterial that connects to some of Culver City‘s
most prominent commercial areas and recreational opportunities. Current conditions make it a more viable
option for confident bicyclists.
Green Valley Circle will add a bike lane between Centinela Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard. This bike lane
allows bicyclists to avoid Centinela Ave when accessing the newly refurbished Westfield Culver City
shopping area and Westfield Culver City Transit Center.
Fox Hills Drive is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Hannum Avenue and Green Valley Circle. This
small Bicycle Friendly Street will provide signage and bikeway access to the Westfield Shopping center and
Westfield Culver City Transit Center.
Madison Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and Farragut Drive.
This short bikeway will connect two of Culver City‘s most important arterial roads (Washington and Culver
Boulevards) and neighborhood connectors (Braddock Drive) with the Bicycle Friendly network.
Rhoda Way is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Cota Street and Ocean Drive. Rhoda Way provides
residential connectivity to the Ballona Creek Bike Path and Lindberg Park.
Cota Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Ocean Drive and Jefferson Boulevard. Cota Street
provides residential connectivity to the Ballona Creek Bike Path, Lindberg Park, and the Target/Bed Bath &
Beyond commercial shopping area.
McDonald Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Emporia Avenue and Sawtelle Boulevard.
McDonald Street serves the residential neighborhood by connecting to Slauson Avenue and the Sawtelle
Boulevard Bikeways.
Girard Avenue will become a bikeway continuation of the Elenda Street Bicycle Friendly Street. Extending
Elenda through Washington Boulevard will provide important connectivity from the Venice Boulevard bike
lane to Culver High School and Middle School. This route also serves La Ballona Elementary school, making it
a valuable bikeway for parents and students going to school by bicycle.
Malat Way is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Sawtelle Boulevard and Bush Way. This short, one
block route provides route connectivity. Malat Way will become an alternative route to the Sepulveda
Boulevard and Overland Avenue bikeways when the Blanco Park Bike Path opens to the public during non-
school hours.
Buckingham Parkway will add a bike lane between Hannum Avenue and Green Valley Circle. This bike lane
provides nearby residential access to Fox Hills Park, Westfield Shopping Area, and the Westfield Culver City
Transit Station.
Adams Boulevard will become a bike route from the north city limit to Fairfax Avenue. This short segment
provides regional bikeway connectivity for cyclists between Culver City and the City of Los Angeles.
Flaxton Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Overland Avenue and Kinston Avenue. Flaxton
picks up from the Kinston cul-de-sac planned for improvements, which will allow bicyclists through-
movement to Overland Avenue, or south on Kinston towards Blanco Park.
Reid Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and Syd Kronenthal Park.
This short bikeway will connect the recommended sharrows on Washington Boulevard with the park, the
Expo Bike Path and Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Ocean Drive is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Cota Street and Overland Avenue. Ocean Drive
provides residential access to Lindberg Park and the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Matteson Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Tilden Avenue and Girard Avenue. This short
bikeway will serve parents and students accessing La Ballona Elementary School and provide neighboring
residential neighborhood a short alternative to Washington Boulevard.
Hayter Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Berryman Avenue and Sawtelle Boulevard. This
short segment provides access to El Marino Elementary School and connects to an I-405 freeway crossing at
Port Road.
Bristol Parkway will become a bike route between Slauson Avenue and Centinela Avenue. This road accesses
several shopping centers and connects with public transit service.
Jacob Street is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Helms Avenue and Reid Avenue. This is a
residential alternative for bicyclists who do not want to travel along Washington Boulevard. Jacob Street will
provide secondary access to the Expo Bike Path.
Lenawee Drive is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Rodeo Road and Wrightcrest Avenue. The road
passes through a residential and industrial area, and serves as a lower-volume alternative route to La Cienega
Boulevard. Lenawee Drive provides access to Blair Hills Park via Wrightcrest Drive.
Wrightcrest Drive is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Lenawee Drive and Blair Hills Park. The road
passes through a residential road and provides access to the park.
Bush Way is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Malat Way and Hannum Avenue. Bush Way is a
short connector for bicyclists traveling on Hannum Avenue and is an alternate connection between Sepulveda
Boulevard and Overland Avenue.
McLaughlin Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street from its extents at the City‘s north and south limits.
This short segment is a part a cooperative effort between Culver City and the City of Los Angeles to provide
regional bikeway connectivity for cyclists.
Segrell Way is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Sawtelle Boulevard and Slauson Avenue. Segrell
provides residential connectivity to El Marino Elementary School and is a low-volume alternate route to a
segment of Sepulveda Boulevard.
A Street will add a bike lane between Irving Place and Van Buren Place. A Street is a short one-way connector
between Irving and Van Buren, which run in opposite directions.
Canterbury Drive is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Hannum Avenue and Green Valley Circle.
This bikeway connects the multi-family residential neighborhood with the larger city network via Green
Valley Circle and Hannum Avenue.
Tilden Avenue is a Proposed Bicycle Friendly Street between Washington Boulevard and Venice Boulevard.
This bikeway provides a low volume alternative to Sepulveda Boulevard.
Creating a city that supports and encourages its residents to bicycle and walk involves more than just
infrastructure and amenity improvements. This chapter contains a discussion of enforcement, education &
awareness policies and programs for Culver City.
The programs and policies discussed in this chapter require additional funding for implementation, as they are
supplemental to the current City budget. Furthermore, staff cannot currently support these endeavors, and so
these efforts must happen primarily through volunteers or supported through other means, such as grant
funding. In some cases, these programs may expand the role of City staff if policies and programs fall within
their purview upon implementation. Either current staff may take on more responsibilities or the City must
hire additional staff to address the additional workload.
Motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists alike are sometimes
unaware of each other’s rights as they travel city streets.
Educating the public through enforcement policies will
supplement the physical improvements made in Culver City.
The California Vehicle Code (CVC), as enforced by the
CCPD, protects pedestrians and bicyclists in the public
right-of-way. For a review of Culver City Municipal Code
(CCMC) affecting bicyclists and pedestrians, please refer to
the existing conditions discussion in Chapter 3.
Targeted enforcement action along streets should focus on
areas with high volumes of bicycle, pedestrian, and other non-
motorized traffic (e.g. Downtown, Ballona Creek Bike Path,
East Washington Boulevard and Culver Boulevard Bike Path, etc.). Law enforcement efforts could target
locations where motorists and the public will become aware of bicycle/pedestrian laws and their penalties for
violations.
Culver City may explore with CCPD, local businesses and neighborhood groups opportunities to establish
local Bicycle Patrol Units. Culver City‘s size and topography make many parts of it highly accessible by
bicycle. A Bicycle Patrol Unit could be an official law enforcement unit, a private security guard patrol, or an
expanded volunteer program. Bicycles are an excellent community-policing tool, as the public views officers
on bikes as more approachable, thus improving trust and relations between the citizens and police.
Bicycle Patrol Units can work closely with citizens to address
concerns before they become problems. Bicycle Patrol Units can
have a direct impact on bicycle safety by enforcing bicycle traffic
laws (e.g. wrong-way riding, sidewalk riding, obeying traffic
controls, children wearing helmets, etc.), and providing bicycle
safety education.
Participants at the second public workshop expressed concern
about high motor vehicle speeds. City staff can work with police to
enforce speed limits on designated streets with bikeways, near
schools, and in response to bicyclist/pedestrian complaints. This
increases safety and may reduce crashes, which improves walking
and bicycling conditions.
Speed Radar Trailers can help reduce speeds traffic and may help
enforce speed limits in areas with speeding problems. Police set up
an unmanned trailer that displays the speed of approaching motorists
along with a speed limit sign. Speed trailers may be effective on
busier arterial roads without bikeway facilities (Washington
Boulevard, Jefferson Boulevard, Overland Avenue, etc.), or near
schools with reported speeding. Speed trailers should be located in a
position that mitigates its influence on bicycle traffic when placed
on the road.
Speed trailers work as both an educational and enforcement tool. By
itself, the unmanned trailer educates motorists about their current
speed in relation to the speed limit. As an alternative enforcement
measure, the CCPD may choose to station an officer near the trailer
to issue citations to motorists exceeding the speed limit. Radar
trailers can transport easily to streets where local residents complain
about speeding problems. However, motorists may not obey the
speed limit without an officer present for enforcement.
Public Works Department staff may provide the management role for
this program, working with the public and determine which
locations are in most need. This program can administer randomly,
cyclically, or as demand necessitates because of the speed trailers‘ portability.
The following section outlines the variety of education programs that can contribute to a bicycle and
pedestrian community.
School-based bicycle and pedestrian education programs teach students about the
rules of the road, proper use of bicycle equipment, bicycling skills, street crossing
skills, and the benefits of bicycling and walking. These education programs
typically receive support from a joint City/school district committee that includes
appointed parents, teachers, student representatives, administrators, active
bicyclists, CCPD and the Public Works Department. These programs can also
incorporate into a Safe Routes to School Program, which Chapter 8 discusses in
further detail.
Safety handbooks are part of a school-based bicycle and pedestrian safety program.
These handbooks may include a circulation map of the campus and immediate
neighborhood, suggested routes to school, crosswalk and crossing guard locations,
signalized intersection locations, bicycle maintenance and use instructions, helmet
wear instructions, street crossing instructions, and emergency and school numbers.
The City or school district can publish the handbook for use at each school, in
conjunction with a school-specific map.
Parent and neighborhood volunteers can escort children
walking to school together in a ?Walking School Bus? if
parents are uncomfortable allowing their children to
walk or bicycle alone to or from school. Children can join
the ?Walking School Bus? if the home runs along the
route or at designated staging areas. The parents offer
supervision and protection, and the group size makes
the children more visible to traffic. Usually, one parent
acts as the organizer and recruits other parents,
neighbors, seniors or community volunteers to walk
with the children. As in a motor carpool, the
participants need to coordinate schedules and meeting
places. Adults and children can wear safety vests or use
other means to enhance visibility. Sometimes the adult pulls a wagon to carry the children‘s books and
projects.
Certified Safe Routes to School Instructors can train volunteers. Supplemental training materials are available
through the National Safe Routes to School partnership at www.saferoutes.org.
Bike trains work exactly like the Walking School Bus program, but with children on bicycles. Parents and
volunteers should select residential and low-traffic volume streets to get to school if sidewalks cannot
accommodate multiple children.
Most bicyclists learn to ride when they are children and do not have the opportunity to learn riding skills or
safe road positioning. Adult bike skills training are an excellent way to improve both cyclist confidence and
safety.
The League of American Bicyclists developed a comprehensive bicycle skills curriculum considered the
national standard for adults seeking to improve their on-bike skills. The classes available include basic and
advanced on-road skills, commuting, and driver education. Local League of American Bicyclist Certified
Instructors offer ?StreetSmarts Cycling? classes that teach participants how to operate a bicycle under various
conditions, and about bicyclists‘ rights and responsibilities. There are currently eleven League-Certified
Instructors in the Culver City area. More information on this program is available online at:
www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/courses.php.
Other organizations such as the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC), Cyclists Inciting Change
through Live Exchange (CICLE), and Sustainable Streets provide regular training classes that instruct
individuals on safe bicycle operations.
Motorists have limited education on the rights of bicyclists and pedestrians. Many motorists mistakenly
believe that bicyclists do not have a right to ride in travel lanes, and that bicyclists should ride on sidewalks.
Education about the rights and responsibilities of pedestrians and cyclists can include:
Incorporating bicycle and pedestrian safety into traffic school curriculum
Producing a brochure on bicycle and pedestrian safety and laws for public distribution
Instructing of law enforcement officers on laws that pertain to bicyclists
Providing bicycle and pedestrian awareness training for all City staff who work within the public
right-of-way
Working with contractors, subcontractors and city maintenance and utility crews to ensure they
understand the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians and follow standard procedures when working on
or adjacent to roadways and walkways
Additional resources for a police education course include:
www.bicyclinginfo.org/enforcement/training.cfm
www.massbike.org/police
Awareness and encouragement programs play a critical role in growing bicycling and pedestrian activity in a
city. The programs listed in the following section will help walking and bicycling grow in Culver City.
One main request from the public is for more motorist education on bicyclists and pedestrians‘ rights to the
road. A Share the Road campaign educates motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians about their legal rights and
responsibilities on the road, and the need for increased courtesy and cooperation among all users.
Share the Road campaigns often hold periodic traffic checkpoints along roadways with concentrated bicycle
and pedestrian activity. Motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians stop at these checkpoints to receive a Share the
Road flyer and can give feedback to officers regarding the campaign. Checkpoints can also occur along local
bikeways and paths. Public service announcements on radio and television can help promote the Share the
Road campaign.
The Marin County Bicycle Coalition offers an example of a successful Share the Road campaign at
www.marinbike.org/Campaigns/ShareTheRoad/Index.shtml.
California Vehicle Code (CVC) §21201 requires bicycles to mount a front white light and red rear reflectors.
Bicycle lights are more visible than reflectors at night. A Bike Light campaign in Culver City could promote
cooperation with the CVC and increase safe riding habits.
The Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC) administers a program called ?City Lights? that features
free bicycle lights in conjunction with educational materials. Culver City can tailor this program to fit its
unique needs.
Portland, Oregon developed a ?See and Be Seen? public safety campaign to encourage bicyclists to use lights
and to remind motorists to watch for bikes. Campaign elements included coupons for bike lights and other
reflective gear, and a parade to celebrate bright bikes. More information on Portland‘s program is available at:
www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?&c=deibb&a=bebfjh.
The BPMP aims to support healthier lifestyles by encouraging and enabling bicycling and walking. Obesity
and sedentary lifestyles are on the rise for both adults and children in America, and one way to combat this is
to integrate daily exercise into the American lifestyle.
A Bike-to-Health marketing campaign may include:
Websites with information on getting started, event calendars, advice from health professionals, and
safety information for adults and children
Print ads in community newspapers to increase the exposure of the campaign
Community events and rides. These rides occur during the summer and early fall months.
Participants earn prizes and attain better health through reaching mileage goals. Campaigns
encourage families to bike to better health together.
Providing safe and secure bicycle parking helps encourage individuals to bicycle. Many individuals during the
public input process expressed interest in seeing a ?bike valet? program at Culver City events. San Francisco
passed a city ordinance that requires all major city events to provide bike parking and pioneered an innovative
tool for stacking hundreds of bicycles without racks
(www.sfbike.org/?valet). Culver City should consider
temporary bicycle parking for events with expected large
attendance and at regularly occurring events like the
Farmer‘s Market.
Community Bikeway/Walkway Adoption programs
resemble the widely instituted Adopt-a-Highway
programs throughout the country. These programs
identify local individuals, organizations, or businesses
interested in ?adopting? a bikeway, walkway, or shared-
use path. ?Adopting? a facility means that person or
group is responsible for the facility‘s maintenance, either through direct action or funding the City‘s
maintenance of that facility. For example, members of a local recreation group may volunteer every other
weekend to sweep a bikeway and identify larger maintenance needs. Alternatively, a local bike shop may
adopt a bikeway by providing funding for the maintenance costs. Some adopted bikeways post sponsors‘
names on bikeway signs to display their commitment to bicycling.
A multi-modal access guide provides information on accessing specific destinations using bicycling, walking
and public transit. Simple access guides are maps printed on the back as a business card, or while complex
guides can be multi-page packets distributed to employees. Items commonly included in access guides are:
An area map depicting bus stops, recommended walking and bicycling routes, landmarks, facilities
such as restrooms and drinking fountains, bicycle and vehicle parking, and major roads
Information on transit service, including frequency, fares, accepted payment methods, first and last
runs, schedules, and contact information for transit service providers and taxis
Information on walk or bike travel time from a transit center to a destination
Accessibility information for people with disabilities
Wayfinding and local advertisements
Best practices include using graphics, providing specific step-by-step travel directions, providing parking
location and pricing information, and providing information about the benefits of walking and bicycling.
High quality access guides should be concise and accurate, and incorporate input from key stakeholders
including public transportation operators, public officials, public and private employees, guide distributors,
and those with disabilities.
First implemented in Bogota, Colombia, the Ciclovia is a community event based around a street closure.
Ciclovias provide local recreational and business opportunities for the community and are increasingly
popular citywide events. Ciclovias can combine with other popular community events to promote walking
and bicycling as a form of viable transportation. The
public workshops discussed Ciclovias several times and
participants requested holding Ciclovias during the
public input process.
Ideally, Ciclovias should provide access to civic, cultural,
or commercial destinations. Culver Boulevard may be an
ideal candidate for a Ciclovia.
More information is available at:
www.healthystreets.org/pages/sunday_parkways.htm
Community walks and tours are healthy ways to promote
historical and cultural aspects of the City. Groups that
can organize community tours include Culver City staff, neighborhood organizations, schools, and other
groups that want the public to interact with the physical environment. Community walks and bike tours are
effective tools for examining potential improvements to the physical environment and educating participants
on resources/amenities available within the City.
Discussed earlier in this Plan, Culver City should develop
a uniform signage concept and plan for on/off-street
bikeways and pedestrian corridors. The Plan should
include uniform sign design(s), placement guidelines
(where and how often), and a map of proposed bikeways
and corridors to receive signage, and guides on avoiding
places too many signs or ?sign clutter.?
Culver City can support individuals choosing to make
non-motorized trips within Culver City by advertising
routes and destinations to bicyclists and pedestrians.
Signage posted along bikeways and pedestrian corridors
should advertise linkages to popular destinations, and be in harmony with other Culver City signage
standards. Sign placement should be strategic and thoughtful to have the greatest impact and to avoid the
?clutter? of over-signing.
The Ballona Creek Bike Path is a valuable public resource. Many Culver City residents‘ expressed concern
about the Path‘s safety. Path volunteers are one way to improve Path safety. These trained volunteers would
station at access points or ride along the path in a non-enforcement role, providing information to the public.
Path volunteers could station at access points during peak-use, typically weekends and holidays.
The goals of the Path volunteers should include:
Educating users on sharing the Path
Providing information on Path resources in the
area
Maintaining proper Path conditions by
informing responsible agencies of hazards
Acting as a crime deterrent by observing Path
activity
Toronto‘s Trail Ambassadors program provides
helpful information for developing this program:
www.toronto.ca/cycling/ratsa/index.htm.
A variety of federal, state, and local sources can provide funding for the recommended projects and programs
identified in the BPMP. Staff will need to apply for these grants. Table 8.3 provides additional information
about the following funding sources:
The LWCF program provides matching grants to State and local governments for the acquisition and
development of public outdoor recreation areas and facilities. The program aims to create and maintain a
nationwide legacy of high quality recreation areas and facilities, and to stimulate non-federal investments in
the protection and maintenance of recreation resources. The LWCF could fund Ballona Creek-adjacent
bicycle facilities.
PVEA funds come from fines paid by oil companies in the 1970‘s for violating oil price caps set by the federal
government. The Department of Energy‘s State Energy and Weatherization Assistance Program distributes
the money at the state level through grants. PVEA funds projects with an emphasis on energy saving,
including public transportation and bridge construction or maintenance. PVEA funds could assist with
building the Ballona Creek bridges.
Safe Routes To School (SRTS) began under Section 1404 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). SRTS aims to encourage children in grades
Kindergarten through Eighth (K-8) to walk and bike to school. Consistent with other federal-aid programs,
individual State Departments of Transportation (DOT) are responsible for the development and
implementation of grant funds. The Federal SRTS program is separate from the State funded Safe Routes to
School Program, described later in the document. Some expected outcomes of the program include:
Improved bicycle, pedestrian, and traffic safety around schools
Increased numbers of children walking and bicycling to and from schools
Decreased traffic congestion around schools
Reduced childhood obesity
Improved air quality, community safety and security, and community involvement
Improved partnerships among schools, local agencies, parents, community groups, and nonprofit
organizations
A minimum of 70 percent of each year‘s apportionment is available for infrastructure projects, with up to 30
percent for non-infrastructure projects.
Infrastructure projects are engineering projects or capital improvements that improve safety and the ability of
students to walk and bicycle to school. They typically involve the planning, design, and construction of
facilities within a two-mile radius of a grade school or middle school. The maximum funding cap for an
infrastructure project is $1 million. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) does not set minimum
caps. The project cost estimate may include eligible direct and indirect costs. Direct costs include the cost of
construction and materials. Indirect costs may include salaried employees or staff time allotted to the project.
Infrastructure projects should directly support increased safety and convenience for K-8 children to walk and
bicycle to school, including children with disabilities.
Eligible projects include:
Bicycle projects such as new bicycle trails and paths, bicycle racks, bicycle lane striping and
widening, new sidewalks, widened sidewalks, sidewalk gap closures, curbs, gutters, and curb ramps
Pedestrian projects such as new pedestrian trails, paths, and pedestrian over and under crossings,
roundabouts, bulb-outs, speed bumps, raised intersections, median refuges, narrowed traffic lanes,
lane reductions, full or half-street closures, and other speed reduction techniques
Traffic control devices such as new or upgraded traffic signals, crosswalks, pavement markings,
traffic signs, traffic stripes, in-roadway crosswalk lights, flashing beacons, bicycle-sensitive signal
actuation devices, pedestrian countdown signals, vehicle speed feedback signs, and pedestrian
activated upgrades
Non-infrastructure projects are education/encouragement/enforcement activities intended to change
community behavior, attitudes, and social norms to make it safer for children in grades K-8 to walk and
bicycle to school. Non-infrastructure projects should increase the likelihood of programs becoming
institutionalized once in place. The application for a non-infrastructure project must be clearly state the
deliverables and the final invoice or Progress Report must attach tangible samples, e.g., sample training
materials and promotional brochures. The funding cap for a non-infrastructure project is $500,000. Multi-year
funding allows the applicant to staff up and deliver their project over the course of four (4) years, thereby
reducing overhead and increasing project sustainability.
Non-infrastructure projects must fall into one or more of the following categories:
Education – Teaching children about the broad range of transportation choices, instructing them in
important lifelong bicycling and walking safety skills, and launching driver safety campaigns near
schools
Enforcement – Partnering with local law enforcement to ensure traffic laws compliance nears
schools (this includes enforcement of speeds, yielding to pedestrians in crossings, and proper walking
and bicycling behaviors), and initiating community enforcement such as crossing guard programs or
pedestrian right-of-way sting programs
Encouragement – Using events and activities to promote walking and bicycling
Evaluation – Monitoring and documenting outcomes and trends by collecting data before and after
the intervention(s)
Engineering – Creating improvements near schools to reduce speeds, alleviate conflicts with motor
vehicle traffic, establish safer and fully accessible crossings, and provide walkways, trails and
bikeways
Note: While typical non-infrastructure projects fall under one or more of the top four E‘s listed above, some
non-infrastructure activities may involve design. For that reason, Engineering is included as the fifth E above.
Eligible projects may target a single local school or school district, or an entire State. The most effective non-
infrastructure activities occur within the framework of a community coalition. Thus, the Plan strongly
supports establishing a SRTS community coalition. A community coalition begins by convening community
stakeholders at a walkable/bikeable Community Workshop. The coalition works to pursue concrete steps to
make the community more walkable and bikeable. The workshop serves as the impetus to bring together key
partners, including schools, elected officials, local government, parks and recreation, law enforcement,
emergency services, public health, business owners, residents, advocacy groups and other organizations.
Participants in the community coalition design and implement a Plan that incorporates the five Es.
Implementation grants under the TCSP Program provide financial resources to States, metropolitan planning
organizations, local governments and tribal governments to enact activities that address transportation
efficiency, while meeting community preservation and environmental goals. Policy and program examples
include spending policies that direct funds to high-growth regions; urban growth boundaries to guide
metropolitan expansion; and ?green corridor? programs that provide access to highway corridors in areas
targeted for efficient and compact development.
The Recreational Trails Program provides funds to states to develop and maintain recreational trails and trail-
related facilities for both non-motorized and motorized recreational trail uses. Examples of trail uses include
hiking, bicycling, in-line skating, equestrian use, and other non-motorized as well as motorized uses.
Recreational Trails Program funds may be used for:
Maintenance and restoration of existing trails
Development and rehabilitation of trailside and trailhead facilities and trail linkages
Purchase and lease of trail construction and maintenance equipment
Construction of new trails (with restrictions for new trails on federal lands)
Acquisition of easements or property for trails
State administrative costs related to this program (limited to seven percent of a State's funds)
Operation of educational programs to promote safety and environmental protection related to trails
(limited to five percent of a State's funds)
The State of California Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) is an annual statewide discretionary program
that funds bicycle projects through the Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit. Available as grants to local
jurisdictions, the program emphasizes projects that benefit bicycling for commuting purposes. As of 2009, the
BTA makes $7.2 million available each year. The local match is a minimum of 10% of the total project cost.
BTA projects intend to improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters and can include:
New bikeways serving major transportation corridors
New bikeways removing travel barriers to potential bicycle commuters
Secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park-and-ride lots, rail and transit terminals, and ferry
docks and landings
Bicycle-carrying facilities on public transit vehicles
Installation of traffic control devices to improve the safety and efficiency of bicycle travel
Elimination of hazardous conditions on existing bikeways
Planning
Improvement and maintenance of bikeways
Eligible project activities include:
Project planning
Preliminary engineering
Final design
Right-of-way acquisition
Construction and/or rehabilitation
Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program Funds support projects that offset environmental
impacts of modified or new public transportation facilities. These projects can include highway landscaping
and urban forestry projects, roadside recreation projects, and projects to acquire or enhance resource lands.
EEMP grant funding supports only mitigating transportation projects beyond mitigation originally required
of the project. State gasoline tax monies fund the $10 million EEMP.
The Hazard Elimination Safety Program (HES) is a state safety program that funds safety improvements on all
public roads and highways. These funds attempt to reduce the number and severity of traffic accidents at
improved locations.
Local agencies compete for HES funds each year by submitting candidate safety projects to Caltrans for
review and analysis. Caltrans prioritizes these projects statewide and releases an annual HES Program Plan
that identifies the approved projects. The State disperses funding annually following the federal fiscal year.
Approximately $27 million dollars were available in the 2007 funding cycle.
The HES considers funding two project types: Safety Index and Work Type. Safety Index Projects qualify for
funding based on a State-calculated safety index. These projects receive a statewide priority with this index.
A project that fails to receive funding under the Safety Index category automatically moves into the Work
Type category and competes for funding with other projects in this category. Work Type projects receive
approximately 75 percent of the available HES funds, while Safety Index projects receive about 25 percent.
Projects in the Safety Index category include installing raised median islands, protected left-turn phasing, and
widened roadways. Work Type Projects include curb ramps, crosswalks, installation of right turn lanes and
construction of new bus stop aprons.
Office of Traffic Safety Grants (OTS) fund safety programs and equipment. Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety is a
specifically identified priority. This category of grants includes enforcement and education programs, which
can encompass a wide range of activities, including bicycle helmet distribution, design and printing of
billboards and bus posters, other public information materials, development of safety components as part of
physical education curriculum, or police safety demonstrations through school visitations.
The grant cycle typically begins with a request for proposals in October due the following January. In 2006,
OTS awarded $103 million to 290 agencies.
The State-legislated Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program began in 1999. Since then, seven funding cycles
have been completed. The State typically announces the list of awarded projects in the fall.
Although both the federal and state programs have similar goals and objectives, they have different funding
sources, local funding match requirements, and other program requirements (see previous section).
The SR2S program aims to reduce injuries and fatalities to schoolchildren and to encourage increased walking
and bicycling among students. The program achieves these goals by constructing facilities that enhance safety
for students in grades K-12 who walk or bicycle to school. Enhancing the safety of the pathways, trails,
sidewalks, and crossings also attracts and encourages other students to walk and bicycle.
The SR2S program is primarily a construction program. Construction improvements must occur on public
property. Improvements can occur on public school grounds providing the cost is incidental to the overall
project cost. Statewide, the program typically provides approximately $25 million annually. The maximum
reimbursement percentage for any SR2S project is ninety percent. The maximum amount that SR2S funds to
any single project is $900,000.
Eligible project elements include bicycle facilities, traffic control devices and traffic calming measures. Up to
ten percent of project funding can go toward outreach, education, encouragement, and/or enforcement
activities. The 2009 cycle provided $48.5 million in funding.
The State of California distributes Transportation Development Act Article 3 funds for application at the
county level. Locally, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) administers
this program and establishes its policies. Cities can use the funds for planning and constructing bicycle and
pedestrian facilities
Fund allocation to cities and the County of Los Angeles occurs on an annual cycle based on population. Local
agencies may either draw down these funds or place them on reserve. Agencies must submit a claim form to
Metro by the end of the allocated fiscal year. Failure to do so may result in losing the allocated funds.
TDA Article 3 funds may go towards the following activities related to the planning and construction of
bicycle and pedestrian facilities:
Engineering expenses leading to construction
Right-of-way acquisition
Construction and reconstruction
Retrofitting existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including installation of signage, to comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Route improvements such as signal controls for bicyclists, bicycle loop detectors, rubberized rail
crossings and bicycle-friendly drainage grates
Purchase and installation of bicycle facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, benches, drinking
fountains, changing rooms, rest rooms and showers which are adjacent to bicycle trails, employment
centers, park-and-ride lots, and/or transit terminals (must be accessible to the general public)
Metro is responsible for allocating discretionary federal, state and local transportation funds to improve all
modes of surface transportation. Metro also prepares the Los Angeles County Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP). A key component of TIP is the Call for Projects program, a competitive process that
distributes the discretionary capital transportation funds to regionally significant projects.
Every other year (pending funding availability), Metro accepts Call for Projects (CFP) applications in several
modal categories. The Metro Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) determines funding levels based on
mode share. As of the writing of this Plan, the Call is currently on an odd-year funding cycle with applications
typically due early in the odd years (next anticipated call is in 2011). Local jurisdictions, transit operators, and
other eligible public agencies may submit applications proposing projects for funding. Metro staff ranks
eligible projects and presents preliminary scores to Metro‘s Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of
members of public agencies, and the Metro Board of Directors for approval. Upon approval, SCAG updates
and formally transmits the TIP to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the
California Transportation Commission (CTC). The TIP becomes part of the five-year program of projects
scheduled for implementation in Los Angeles County.
The modal categories relevant to the implementation of bicycle projects and programs are Bikeway
Improvements, Regional Surface Transportation Improvements (RSTI), Transportation Enhancements
Activation (TEA), and Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Typically funding provided for bicycle
improvements include the deferral transportation fund, currently SAFETEA-LU, TDA and CMAQ categories.
Some intersection improvements or grade-separated crossing projects in the BPMP may provide an equal or
greater benefit to pedestrians. In these cases, the City should consider applying for funding within the
Pedestrian Improvements modal category. Wherever possible, BPMP projects should be included as part of
larger arterial improvement projects and submitted under the RSTI category.
The following table provides information on each of the relevant modal categories within the Metro Call for
Projects as of 2009.
Metro‘s 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan identifies funding totaling $287 million over the next 30 years
in the pedestrian mode through the Call for Projects program. Eligible projects under the Pedestrian
Improvements category include pedestrian improvements that promote walking for utilitarian travel,
pedestrian safety, and linkages to the overall transportation system.
*Funding estimate is bi-annual (every other year) based on the approved funding from the 2009 Call.
**The discussion of eligible projects is based on 2009 CFP requirements and assumes all eligibility requirements are met and the
questions in the CFP application are adequately addressed. These requirements are subject to change in future cycles. City staff
should refer to the latest CFP Application Package for detailed eligibility requirements.
The following section lists fees that Culver City could collect through its discretionary permit process or
other local processes:
One potential local funding source is developer vehicle trip impact fees, typically tied to trip generation rates
and traffic impacts produced by a proposed project. A developer may reduce or mitigate the number of trips
(and hence impacts and cost) by paying for on- and off-site bikeway improvements that encourage residents
to bicycle rather than drive. Establishing a clear nexus or connection between the impact fee and the project‘s
impacts is critical.
Community Facilities District Act (more commonly known as Mello-Roos) was a law enacted by the
California State Legislature in 1982. The Act enables local government agencies to establish Community
Facilities Districts (CFDs) as a means of obtaining community funding. A CFD is an area where an additional
tax on property is imposed on those real property owners within the CFD. This local assessment can fund
bicycle paths and bicycle lanes. Defining the boundaries of the benefit district may be difficult unless the
facility is part of a larger parks and recreation or public infrastructure program with broad community
benefits and support. Establishing CFDs requires detailed analysis and outreach, and CFDs may have limited
application in Culver City.
The New Development Impact Fee is assessed on non-residential developments that exceed a certain
threshold for increased square footage through new construction or change of use. This fee is used for funding
capital improvements.
The following are funding sources capable of supporting bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs from
private and non-profit sources.
The American Bicycle Industry sponsors the Bikes Belong Coalition, which encourages people to ride bicycles
throughout the United States. The coalition administers grants of up to $10,000 to develop bicycle facilities
through the Federal Transportation Act.
The RWJF funds aim to improve health and health care in the United States. RWJF funds approximately 12
percent of unsolicited projects with grant funds ranging from $2,000 to $14 million. Bicycle and pedestrian
projects applying for RWJF funds qualify under the program‘s goal to ?promote healthy communities and
lifestyles.?
* Metro Call for Projects funding levels may vary greatly from cycle to cycle. Approved funding from the 2007 CFP provided the basis for this table‘s
annual estimates.
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Agency (Metro) Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance Document (BTA Document, 2006) contains
an inventory of existing bikeway facilities, past expenditures, proposed bikeways, and proposed costs for cities within Metro jurisdiction. Table 3 of the
BTA Document (pp. 17-21) shows that Culver City has past expenditures of $160,377, which covers 3.16 miles of Class I and 0.45 miles of Class II
Bikeways
This page intentionally left blank.
Grant funding is critical to implementing this plan. The most important step is securing funding for a
mobility coordinator as the main contact for bicycle and pedestrian related issues. However, the Public
Works Department‘s Administration Division will have the primary responsibility for implementing and
evaluating the BPMP until the City fills the mobility coordinator position.
Evaluation is an important component of a comprehensive BPMP. The definition of a project‘s success can
take on many forms, but this Plan‘s ultimate goal is to make bicycle and pedestrian more convenient and
comfortable. Regular evaluations in the form of bike/pedestrian counts and surveys can assess bicyclist and
pedestrian convenience and comfort. Counts and surveys administered after completing a project can find
effective project features and areas still needing improvement. Other evaluations, such as accident data, will
also provide important information about the Plan‘s success.
Counts of non-motorized activity at key project locations will help the City evaluate project use, and to
understand bicycle and pedestrian activity throughout the City.
Annual counts at various points within the City can help gauge bicycle and pedestrian activity on a regular
basis.
A comparative analysis of 2000 and 2010 Census Journey to Work data can provide baseline understanding for
the changes in non-motorized transportation in Culver City. Though Census data has its limitations, it can
provide a starting point for planning and programming purposes.
This page intentionally left blank.
The BPMP concludes with a summary of the Plan‘s principal goal, as well as the identification of specific
objectives, policies and actions for achieving this goal. This goal and its associated objectives, policies and
actions relate to all the issues addressed in the BPMP, from vision, to policy changes informed by the existing
conditions, to expanding the City‘s network of facilities and creating non-infrastructure programs to
encourage cycling and walking.
As previously stated, in creating its first ever Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the City is embracing the
concept of Complete Streets, recognizing that it is essential to enhancing the quality of life not only for
residents and visitors, but also the broader community and world. This form of transportation planning
emphasizes a balanced transportation system that considers all users of the road when planning development
and transportation projects, whether cyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, or vehicles. In doing so the City is
transforming itself into a place with an extensive bicycle and pedestrian network that allows travelers of all
levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and biking to their destinations. The following principal goal,
identified earlier in this document, provides the overarching guidance to attain this transformation:
Transform the City into a place with an extensive bicycle and pedestrian network that allows
travelers of all levels and abilities to feel comfortable walking and biking to their destinations.
In so doing, encourage more people to forgo car trips, when possible, in favor of alternative
forms of transportation and become truly bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
In order to attain this goal the following objectives, policies and actions will provide guidance to the
implementation of the BPMP. Adopting this Plan establishes and implements some of the actions identified in
this Plan. In most instances, however, implementation will depend on obtaining grant funding.
Policy 1a – Update the Plan periodically as necessary to be current with changing policies and/or requirements
for grant funding.
Action 1a – Continue to monitor state and regional bicycle and pedestrian related policy and funding
discussions to ensure the BPMP is current or amended in order to take advantage of all applicable
funding opportunities.
Policy 1b – Coordinate with state, regional and local agencies on bicycle and pedestrian related issues.
Action 1b – Continue to coordinate with. City and County of Los Angeles, Culver City Unified School
District, Metropolitan Transportation Authority and other community/regional serving agencies to
work cooperatively on bicycle and pedestrian issues of mutual concern
Policy 1c – Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Networks identified in the BPMP.
Action 1c.1 – Develop a comprehensive implementation strategy to identify funds and construct Tier 1
Bicycle and Pedestrian Network projects by 2015.
Action 1c.2 – As funding is identified and in order to initiate the educational process of motorist,
implement the BPMP Bicycle Network by placing Class III Bike Route and ?Share the Road? signage
along all Tier 1 Bicycle projects until funding to implement Bike Lane striping projects can be
implemented, where appropriate.
Action 1c.3 – As funding becomes available, implement the Tier 1, 2 and 3 projects indentified in the
BPMP to improve Bikeway and Pedestrian Networks‘ access to community and citywide amenities,
such as Downtown, regional and community recreation centers, and commercial destinations.
Action 1c.4 – Establish Bicycle Friendly Streets through the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program process as necessary, to encourage bicycling on ?bicycle friendly? local and ?Neighborhood
Feeder? streets, with low traffic volumes and slow speeds, in order to enhance access to community
and regional centers/amenities.
Action 1c.5 – Explore the potential for additional Ballona Creek Bike Path access points.
Policy 1d – Continue to explore/pursue opportunities and funding to expand and/or enhance the City‘s
Bikeway and Pedestrian Networks beyond the facilities identified in the BPMP.
Action 1d.1– Continue to analyze the City‘s roadway network to identify opportunities to expand
and/or enhance the City‘s Bikeway and Pedestrian Network and facilities, and to pursue grant
funding for the design and/or construction of these facilities.
Policy 2a – Recognize that bicyclists and pedestrians are users of all City streets and that the design of future
street projects should accommodate bicycle and pedestrian travel.
Action 2a.1 – Adopt a ?Complete Streets? policy requiring that bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users
needs are analyzed as part of all discretionary development review processes and capital improvement
project design phases.
Action 2a.2 - Prepare a plan surveying/analyzing existing sidewalk facilities at high pedestrian volume
intersections and at all bus stops to identify accessibility barriers and needed improvements, and
develop an implementation strategy.
Action 2a.3 – Revise the City‘s Traffic Study criteria to ensure that bicycle and pedestrian movements
are counted along with other vehicle movements counts and that the analysis shall include a weighing
of the merits of the motor-vehicle related improvements against the needs of accommodating bicyclist
and pedestrian movements.
Action 2a.4 – Consider adopting a mechanism for project related vehicle trips to be mitigated through
funding of BPMP projects and/or programs or the provision of end-of-trip amenities, such as
additional bicycle parking and shower and clothing locker facilities to be located at transit centers
and new employment sites to promote bicycle commuting.
Action 2a.5 – Consider establishing a trip-mitigation fee or expanding/increasing the New
Development Impact Fee to fund BPMP project and program implementation.
Action 2a.6 – Consider establishing a process for payment of an in-lieu fee for use to fund BPMP
projects and/or programs as a trip reduction credit.
Policy 3a – Establish a Mobility Coordinator function within the Public Works Department to oversee
implementation of the BPMP and future updates.
Action 3a.1 – Pursue funding for a Mobility Coordinator responsible for managing the implementation of
the BPMP. Until a Mobility Coordinator is funded and the position filled, the Public Works
Department‘s Administration Division will implement and evaluate the BPMP.
Policy 4a – Pursue a program to enhance the cycling and pedestrian safety of the City‘s roadways through:
education efforts for all roadway users; increasing awareness of bicyclists‘ rights and responsibilities;
enhanced enforcement efforts for all roadway users; improvements to existing facilities; and continued regular
maintenance of facilities.
Action 4a.1 – Periodically each year review cyclist and pedestrian crash reports to identify any potential
problem areas and potential improvements.
Action 4a.2 – Identify streets without sidewalks or with partial sidewalks and, where appropriate,
construct sidewalk improvements.
Action 4a.3 – Continue to enforce traffic laws by consistently citing bicyclists, pedestrians and motor
vehicle operators for violations in order to enhance bicyclist and pedestrian safety.
Action 4a.4 – Pursue funding to conduct targeted enforcement activities, at least four times per year
and lasting one week. Focused enforcement should be along streets in areas with high bicycle and
pedestrian volumes or where non-motorized traffic is particularly high (e.g. Downtown, Ballona
Creek Bike Path, East Washington Boulevard and Culver Boulevard Bike Path, etc.).
Policy 4b – Pursue implementing child/adult educational programs to provide cycling and pedestrian safety
and skills courses.
Action 4b.1 – Pursue and promote funding programs for child and adult bicycle and pedestrian safety
and education programs and the provision of information to bicyclists, motorists and the general
public to improve bicycle safety.
Policy 4c – Pursue enhancing training of City staff, including Culver City Police Department (CCPD) officers
on bicyclist rights and responsibilities.
Action 4c.1 – Develop and conduct a City-approved training program to educate City staff involved in
decisions regarding transportation projects such as, traffic engineers, civil engineers, field inspectors,
street maintenance personnel, planners, and parks and recreation staff.
Action 4c.2 – Pursue funding to provide additional training for CCPD officers regarding bicyclists‘
rights and responsibilities, pursuant to the California Vehicle Code and the Culver City Municipal
Code.
Policy 4d – Assure a safe bicycling environment for riders of all experience levels.
Action 4d.1 – Consider establishing a Bicycle Patrol Program in conjunction with CCPD, local
businesses and neighborhood groups to establish local Bicycle Patrol Units in order to enhance
bicycle safety by enforcing bicycle traffic laws (e.g. wrong-way riding, sidewalk riding, obeying traffic
controls, children wearing helmets, etc.), and providing bicycle safety education.
Action 4d.2 – Consider forming a City sponsored Ballona Creek Bike Path Volunteer Program to
provide enhanced safety along the Ballona Creek Bike Path, through the use of trained volunteers
stationed at access points or riding along the path (in a non-enforcement role) providing information
to the public during times of peak-use, typically weekends and holidays.
Policy 4e – Conduct routine maintenance of the City's public rights-of-way to eliminate hazards to all users.
Action 4e.1 – Continue to provide regular maintenance and repairs for integral portions of the bicycle
and pedestrian networks. Enhance awareness of the City hotline and website for the public to report
facility maintenance and repair issues.
Action 4e.2 – Explore implementing a bikeways sponsorship program to provide additional revenue for
maintenance costs and security improvements of bikeway facilities.
Action 4e.3 – Formalize and expand the City's sidewalk inspection and maintenance program in order
to enhance and coordinate maintenance of public sidewalks.
Policy 5a – Continue to explore opportunities and funding to expand and/or enhance the City‘s Bicycle and
Pedestrian Networks.
Action 5a.1 – Purse funding to enhance transit stations and high use bus stops to facilitate multi-modal
trips by adding facilities/amenities.
Action 5a.2 – Explore installing/enhancing pedestrian facilities in areas with high pedestrian activity
(where appropriate), especially Downtown, in commercial areas and adjacent to schools, such as
widen sidewalks, lengthen crosswalk times, bulbouts, high visibility crosswalks, split curb-ramps,
benches, street trees, water fountains, enhanced maintenance schedules, etc.
Action 5a.3 – Actively pursue grant funding opportunities for the implementation of the BPMP projects
and programs, including federal and state Safe Routes to School programs, to make the City more
bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
Action 5a.4 – Pursue grant funding to design and construct public sidewalks on residential and non-
residential street segments that require sidewalk improvements.
Action 5a.5 – Pursue grant funding for design/community outreach and construction for a separate
walking path along Ballona Creek, and enhancements to the Bike Path.
Action 5a.6 – Pursue grant funding for design and construction of a ramp at the Higuera Street Bridge
to the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Action 5a.7 – Pursue grant funding for bicycle and pedestrian improvements near Jefferson Boulevard
and Hetzler Road.
Action 5a.8 – Develop and pursue grant funding to implement an improvement plan for the intersection
of the Ballona Creek Bike Path entrance with Duquesne Avenue.
Action 5a.9 – Conduct traffic engineering analysis and if warranted purse grant funding to install a
bicycle/pedestrian traffic signal in the area of the Ballona Creek Bike Path and Overland Avenue.
Action 5a.10 – Conduct a traffic engineering analysis and evaluation of facilities that best provide
access to/from Downtown from an area bounded by Venice Boulevard, Jefferson Boulevard, Overland
Avenue, and National Boulevard. After completing the analysis and evaluation, identify specific
priority projects and pursue funding for construction of these projects.
Policy 5b – Increase the number of bicycle and walking trips through the provision of public and private end
of trip facilities.
Action 5b.1 – Pursue funding to encourage bicycling and walking for everyday trips by providing
convenient and secure public bicycle parking and support facilities at all public building, parks,
Downtown and destination centers.
Action 5b.2 – Amend the Municipal Code to allow a citywide program to modify parking meter poles
to serve as bicycle racks in order to increase the supply of quality bicycle parking in the public rights
of way and pursue funding to implement a program.
Action 5b.3 – Consider the feasibility of placing bicycle parking corrals in on-street parking spaces in
commercial areas of potential high demand in conjunction with local businesses.
Action 5b.4 – Explore increasing the City‘s Transportation Demand Management requirements for
bicycle racks, lockers, and shower amenities for non-residential projects.
Action 5b.5 – Adopt design standards for all bicycle racks on public property, right-of-way, and design
requirements for private development.
Action 5b.6 – Develop a Bicycle Parking Plan to inventory all current bicycle parking facilities in
Downtown and at all City facilities and provide a specific set of recommendations for type, design,
and location of bicycle parking facilities.
Policy 5c – Implement encouragement programs to increase bicycling and walking the City.
Action 5c.1 – Pursue funding for awareness and encouragement programs in collaboration with the
community, though educational campaigns like Share the Road, community events like Ciclovias, or
programs to make biking more comfortable like bike valets and signage.
Policy 5d - Develop a comprehensive signage program to aid cyclists and pedestrians.
Action 5d.1 – Develop a bicyclist oriented signage plan for Culver City incorporating a unique City logo,
identifying alternative Route Signage, destination/bike parking signage and identify signage
locations.
Action 5d.2 – Develop and install a bicycle wayfinding signage program to provide clear and accurate
information as to best way to navigate the City and indicate route turns, the presence of intersecting
bikeways and streets and nearby local and major destinations.
Policy 5e – Continue to explore/pursue opportunities and funding to convert adopted Bike Routes on the
City‘s Bicycle Network to bike lanes.
Action 5e.1 – Pursue grant funding for design/community outreach and construction of bike lanes along
Washington Bl., from National Boulevard to Fairfax Avenue.
Policy 6a – Support implementation of BPMP, though amending and updating the Municipal Code.
Action 6a.1 – In coordination with appropriate City Departments, conduct a review and process
amendments of the Municipal Code and any related development standards and review criteria to
ensure their provisions are consistent with the BPMP Policies.
Action 6a.2 – Adopt Municipal Code provisions for regulating bicyclists and pedestrian behavior on the
Ballona Creek and Culver Boulevard Bike Paths and public sidewalks and plazas, such as:
Ballona Creek and Culver Boulevard Bike Paths
The Ballona Creek and Culver Boulevard Bike Paths are valuable public resources. Currently neither
the CVC nor the Municipal Code includes regulations for the use of the Paths. In order to enhance
safety along the Paths, it could be beneficial adopt regulations governing the use of the Paths.
Bike Path Regulations
Always show courtesy to other trail users
Travel at speeds which are safe and appropriate
Travel in the right hand lane and allow faster path users to pass safely
Pass on the left
Give audible warning when passing other path users
Move off the path when stopping
Pay attention for other path users
Keep dogs on leash, and clean up after your pet
Bicyclists on Sidewalks
Yield to pedestrians at all times
Give audible warning when passing other sidewalk users
Ride speeds which are safe and appropriate
Policy 7a – Determine if the BPMP is succeeding in the identified Goal and Objectives.
Action 7a.1 – Use a combination of before & after counts, annual counts, census data analyses and
accident rates to help gauge the City‘s effectiveness in increasing bicycle and pedestrian activity and
safety.
DRAFT
Prepared for:
City of Culver City
Prepared by:
Alta Planning + Design October, 2010
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
MASTER PLAN
DESIGN GUIDE
Attachment 1 & 2Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This Design Guide provides informational assistance to Culver City. It does not include design requirements,
as Culver City will follow design guidance as mandated in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (CaMUTCD) and Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM). At the time of writing, the national
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM), and the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities are undergoing updates to incorporate revised and new bicycle facility standards. The City
may revise this guide after the MUTCD, HDM, and AASHTO finish their updates.
This document has two components (bicycle and pedestrian) with individual sections. Sections 1.2-1.9 relate
primarily to cyclists. Section 1.2 covers the design needs of different types of cyclists to create a basis for a
variety of accommodation strategies. Section 1.3 discusses the design of off street multiple-use paths. Section
1.4 covers the design of on-street bicycle lanes. Section 1.5 covers the design of bicycle routes. Section 1.6
discusses specific types of bicycle facilities applicable to the City of Culver City, including sharrows, Bicycle
Friendly Streets, and bicycle intersection treatments. Section 1.7 includes considerations for cyclists at
signalized intersections. Section 1.8 addresses bicycle parking facilities. Section 1.9 provides an image and
description of temporary traffic control devices. Sections 1.10-1.11 relate primarily to pedestrians. Section 1.10
describes pedestrian design guides. Section 1.11 discusses specific enhancements for pedestrians at signalized
intersections.
The design sections include a tabular format relaying important design information, example photos,
schematics (if applicable), and existing summary guidance from current, or upcoming draft standards.
Schematics and other illustrations in this document convey design concepts and are not necessarily drawn to
scale. Guidance is only referenced if it explicitly covers the full use of the treatment. Some treatments provide
additional discussion on a following page to provide additional design detail.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The purpose of this section is to provide the facility designer with an understanding of how cyclists operate
and how their bicycle|1010| influences that operation. Cyclists, by nature, are much more sensitive to poor facility
design, construction and maintenance than motor vehicle drivers because they are physically exposed and lack
the protection provided by the vehicle’s structure and numerous other safety features. By understanding the
unique characteristics and needs of cyclists, the facility designer can provide the highest quality facilities and
minimize risk to the cyclists using them.
1 By CA law, the bicycle is a “device”, not a vehicle; this distinction is intended to include all pedal cycles, including tricycles, bicycles
with trailers, recumbent cycles, etc. However, cyclists are considered drivers and subject to motor vehicle law
Figure 1-1 Standard Bicycle Rider Dimensions
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Similar to motor vehicles, cyclists and their bicycles come in a variety of sizes and configurations. This
variation can occur in the types of vehicle (such as a conventional bicycle, a recumbent bicycle, or a tricycle),
and behavioral characteristics (such as the comfort level of the cyclist). Any bikeway undergoing design
should consider reasonably expected bicycle types on the facility and design with that set of critical
dimensions in mind.
The figure below shows the operating space and physical dimensions of a typical adult cyclist, which is the
basis for typical facility design. The cyclist requires clear space to operate within a facility; this is why the
minimum operating width is greater than the physical dimensions of the cyclist. Cyclists prefer five feet or
more operating width, although four feet is minimally acceptable. The graphic below includes other pertinent
dimensions.
Outside the design dimensions of a typical bicycle, there are many commonly used pedal driven cycles and
accessories to consider when planning and designing bicycle facilities. The most common types include
tandem bicycles, recumbent bicycles, and trailer accessories.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The table below summarizes the typical dimensions for common bicycle designs:
*AASHTO does not provide typical dimensions for tricycles. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The speed that various types of cyclists can be expected to maintain under various conditions can also
influence the design of facilities such as shared use paths. The following table provides typical cyclist speeds
for a variety of conditions.
*Tandem bicycles and cyclists with trailers have typical speeds equal to or less than upright adult cyclists.
Cyclists have legal access to all city streets. While the BPMP identifies a specific subset of streets to be
included in the Culver City Citywide Bikeway System, many cyclists will need to use streets outside of the
bikeway network in order to reach their destinations. Therefore, it is important that all roadways be designed
as feasible to accommodate cyclists. The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358) mandates that
cities plan for all users of roadways.
Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantive revision of the circulation element,
the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced,
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and
highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural,
suburban, or urban context of the general plan….
For purposes of this paragraph, "users of streets, roads, and highways" means cyclists,
children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians,
users of public transportation, and seniors.
California Complete Streets Act of 2008
As called out in the 2008 Complete Streets Act, circulation elements should provide a “balanced”
transportation network. The adoption of the BPMP is consistent with this effort, laying the groundwork for
better bicycling and walking in Culver City. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
THE CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATED IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE NOT
INTENDED AS STANDARDS. THEY ILLUSTRATE SOME EXAMPLES THAT MAY
ACCOMODATE BICYCLE TRAFFIC WITHIN EXISTING, STANDARD-WIDTH CITY
RIGHTS-OF-WAY. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
A bicycle path (Caltrans designation Class I) allows for two-way, off-street bicycle use. Other non-motorized
users may legally use the bicycle path in California if there is no parallel pedestrian path. Culver City has these
facilities along Ballona Creek and Culver Boulevard, west of Elenda Street. Class I facilities can also include
amenities such as lighting, signage, and fencing. Chapter 1000 of the HDM dictates the design of Class I
facilities in California.
Bicycle paths can provide a desirable facility for novice riders and children, recreational riders, and long
distance commuter cyclists of all skill levels preferring separation from traffic. Bicycle paths should generally
provide directional travel opportunities not provided by existing roadways. Some of the elements that
enhance off-street path design include:
Frequent access points from the local road network. If access points are spaced too far apart, users may
have to travel out of their way to enter or exit the path, which can discourage use
Grade-separated crossings with streets or driveways
Wayfinding signs that direct users to and from the path and major roadway crossings
Appropriate pavement load thresholds to allow heavy maintenance equipment to use the path without
causing damage
Intersection designs that alert motorists to the presence of cyclists, and that alert cyclists to the
presence of motor vehicles
Security prevention measures
Separate pedestrian paths to reduce conflicts with bicycles
Landscape designs to accommodate bicycles and discourage loitering
Both the California HDM Chapter 1000 and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
generally recommend against developing bicycle paths directly adjacent to roadways. Also known as “side
paths”, these facilities create a situation where a portion of the bicycle traffic rides against the normal flow of
motor vehicle traffic and can result in wrong-way riding when either entering or exiting the path. This can
also result in an unsafe situation where motorists entering or crossing the roadway at intersections and
driveways do not notice cyclists coming from their right, as they are not expecting traffic coming from that
direction. In addition, stopped cross-street motor vehicle traffic or vehicles exiting side streets or driveways
may frequently block paths or pull out unexpectedly. Cyclists traveling from an unexpected direction also go
unnoticed, especially when sight distances are poor.
Agencies should consider bicycle paths along roadways under the following conditions:
The path will separate users from all motor vehicle traffic with few intersections with motor vehicles
The corridor anticipates high bicycle use or the corridor demonstrates a need for facilities for novice
cyclists
The path provides continuity with an existing path through a roadway corridor
The path can terminate at each end onto streets with good bicycle facilities, or onto another well-
designed path
There is adequate access to local cross-streets and other facilities along the route
Grade separation structures do not add substantial out-of-direction travel
California Vehicle Code §21208 requires cyclists to ride in an on-road designated bicycle lane with exceptions
but does not require cyclists to ride on paths. Roadway design parallel to bicycle paths should still allow
cyclists to use the road as provided by law using appropriate bicycle design. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Bicycle lanes, Caltrans designation Class II bicycle facilities, are portions of the roadway designated by
striping, signage, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of cyclists. Bicycle lanes provide
cyclists with a designated space on the roadway and enable them to ride at their preferred speed without
interference from prevailing traffic conditions. Bicycle lanes facilitate predictable behavior and movements
between cyclists and motorists. Cyclists may leave the bicycle lane to pass other cyclists, make left turns,
avoid obstacles or debris, merge with traffic at intersections, and to avoid conflicts with other roadway users.
Varies depending on roadway configuration; but are at least 5’ wide.
Line separating vehicle lane from bicycle lane: 6 inches
Line separating bicycle lane from parking lane: 4 inches
Dashed white stripe when:
Vehicle merging area - Approximately 50 feet to 200 feet
Delineate conflict area in intersections (optional) - Length of conflict area
Use R81 (CA) Bike Lane Sign at:
Beginning of Bicycle Lane
At approaches and at far side of all arterial crossings
At major changes in direction
At intervals not to exceed ½ mile
Pavement markings for bicycle lanes shall be the ‘BIKE LANE’ stencil or graphic
representation of a cyclist with directional arrow (preferred) to be used at:
Beginning of Bicycle Lane
Far side of all bicycle path (Class I) crossings
At approaches and at far side of all arterial crossings
At major changes in direction
At intervals not to exceed ½ mile
At beginning and end of bicycle lane pockets at approach to intersection.
R81 (CA) Sign
California
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Preferred Design (if space is available)
Minimum Design
Bicycle Lane Width:
12’6” minimum (14’ preferred) for a shared bicycle/parking lane
adjacent to a curb face, or 11’ minimum where parking is permitted
but not marked on streets without curbs.
5’ minimum recommended when parking stalls are marked
7’ maximum
Bicycle lanes adjacent to on-street parallel parking are common in
the United States. One hazard for cyclists using this type of facility
is a crash onto a suddenly-opened vehicle door. Providing wider
bicycle lanes is one way mitigate against potential cyclist collisions
with car doors. However, if the outer edge of the bicycle lane abuts
the parking stall, cyclists may still ride too close to parked cars.
Bicycle lanes that are too wide may also encourage vehicles to use
the bicycle lane as a loading zone in busy areas where on-street
parking is typically full. Some motorists may try to drive in overly-
wide bicycle lanes. Encouraging cyclists to ride farther away from
parked vehicles will increase the safety of the facility.
If sufficient space is available, the preferred design (upper right)
provides a buffer zone between parked cars and the bicycle lane.
This could be accomplished by using parking “T’s” to increase
separation; Culver City typically installs parking ‘T’s adjacent to
metered parking.
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Bike Routes – Caltrans designation, Class III are roadway facilities shared between cyclists and motor
vehicles. Agencies typically install bicycle routes on roads with low speeds and traffic volumes; however,
agencies can install bicycle routes on higher volume roads with wide outside lanes or with shoulders. A motor
vehicle driver will usually have to cross over into the adjacent travel lane to pass a cyclist, unless the road
provides a wide outside lane or shoulder.
From Caltrans HDM Chapter 1000:
“Class III bikeways (bicycle routes) are intended to provide continuity to the bikeway system. Bicycle
routes are established along through routes not served by Class I or II bikeways, or to connect
discontinuous segments of bikeway (normally bicycle lanes). Class III facilities are shared facilities, either
with motor vehicles on the street, or with pedestrians on sidewalks, and in either case bicycle usage is
secondary. Class III facilities are established by placing Bicycle Route signs along roadways.”
Bicycle Routes can employ a large variety of treatments from simple signage to complex treatments
including various types of traffic calming and/or pavement stenciling. The level of treatment to be
provided for a specific location or corridor depends on several factors.
Varies depending on roadway configuration; but they are used when there is not sufficient roadway width to
provide a bike lane.
If shoulder is present, the design should use a 4-inch edge line separating vehicle lane from shoulder for
bicycle use.
Use D11-1 “Bicycle Route” Sign at:
Beginning or end of Bicycle Route (with applicable M4 series sign below)
Entrance to bicycle path (Class I) - optional
At major changes in direction or at intersections with other bicycle routes (with
applicable M7 series sign below)
At intervals along bicycle routes not to exceed ½ mile
Agencies may apply Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) to Bicycle Routes per the CaMUTCD.
D11-1 Sign Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
There are several types of bike routes recommended for use in Culver City.
Some bike routes are located on arterial streets and are designated by signage/wayfinding only. Signage and
wayfinding are minimal measures along streets that cyclists are currently using. This type of route serves as
means of closing a gap in the bikeway network. Examples of this facility can be found along segments of
Washington Boulevard, Culver Boulevard, and Adams Boulevard.
In addition to routes with signage and wayfinding, some streets will have Shared Lane Markings (SLM or
“Sharrows”). Sharrows intend to educate cyclists on ideal lane position, and remind motorists of cyclists’
right to use the road. Agencies typically use sharrows on roads with high cyclist demand and that are critical
to the overall network. The BPMP recommends these facility types on Duquesne Avenue and segments of
Washington Boulevard.
Streets with low traffic volumes, and high connectivity to schools, parks, commercial destinations and other
activity centers may receive the Bicycle Friendly Streets designation. These streets could feature any of the
above-mentioned design features, as well as traffic calming/diverting measures. Proposed Bicycle Friendly
Streets include Braddock Avenue, Elenda Street, and Farragut Avenue, pending a traffic engineering analysis
and possible improvements, like traffic diverters and roadway striping. A traffic engineering analysis and, if
necessary, the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) process, will determine whether a street
meets criteria to become a Bike Friendly Street.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
16
1.6.1. Sharrows (Shared Lane Markings, SLMs)
Design Summary
Minimum Design
*Per MUTCD
Door Zone Width:
The width of the door zone is generally assumed to be 2.5 feet from
the edge of the parking lane.
Recommended SLM placement:
Minimum of 11’ from edge of curb where on-street parking is
present but may be placed more than 11 feet as conditions support.
If parking lane is wider than 8’, the SLM should be moved further
out accordingly.
Discussion
California recently introduced Sharrow stencils as an additional
treatment for Class III facilities. Sharrows are currently only
allowed in conjunction with on-street parking.
The stencil can serve a number of purposes, such as reminding
cyclists to ride further from parked cars to reduce potential
“dooring” collisions, making motorists aware of bicycles potentially
in their lane, and showing cyclists the correct direction of travel.
Caltrans officially adopted the use of SLMs with the 2003
CaMUTCD.
Agencies may consider placing the SLM between vehicle tire tracks
(meeting CaMUTCD guidance) as it will increase the life of the
markings and the long-term cost of maintenance.
Design Example
Guidance
CaMUTCD
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Potential Design Elements of a Bicycle Friendly
Street
Bicycle Friendly Streets (BFS) generally are installed on minor or
local roadways. There are currently no design standards. See
following pages for additional information. A traffic engineering
analysis and, if necessary, the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program (NTMP) process may determine the need for additional
traffic calming measures.
It is important to provide a benefit to the cyclist choosing to ride
on Bicycle Friendly Streets. Frequently these benefits are reduced
travel time, lower motor vehicle traffic volumes and/or reduced
motor vehicle speeds. Ideally, the cyclist should not stop
frequently. The City should closely monitor a Bicycle Friendly
Street or bicycle route following treatment to see if there is an
increase in vehicle trips along the bicycle route, as some motorists
may take advantage of fewer stops and reduce the facility’s
effectiveness for bicycles. If motor vehicle ADT increases, a traffic
engineering analysis may recommend treatments such as diagonal
diverters, one-way closures, chicanes, chokers and other
applicable treatments to preserve bicycle permeability and limit
through vehicle access.
See following pages for additional discussion.
No explicit guidance in State or Federal manuals
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This section describes various treatments commonly used for developing Bicycle Friendly Streets. The treatments fall within five main
“application levels” based on their level of physical intensity, with Level 1 representing the least physically-intensive treatments that the
City could implement at relatively low impact on roadways that already function well for cyclists. Identifying appropriate application
levels through traffic engineering analyses for individual Bicycle Friendly Street corridors provides a starting point for selecting
appropriate site-specific improvements. The five Bicycle Friendly Street application levels include the following:
Level 1: Signage
Level 2: Pavement markings
Level 3: Intersection treatments
Level 4: Traffic calming
Level 5: Traffic diversion
It should be noted that corridors targeted for higher-level applications would also receive relevant lower-level treatments (as illustrated
below). For instance, a street targeted for Level 3 applications should also include Level 1 and 2 applications as necessary. Some
applications may be appropriate on some streets while inappropriate on others. In other words, not “Level 2” applications are appropriate
or necessary on a Level 2 street. Furthermore, several treatments could fall within multiple categories as they achieve multiple goals. To
identify and develop specific treatments for each Bicycle Friendly Street, the City may involve the bicycling community and neighborhood
groups. Further traffic analysis and engineering work may also be necessary to determine the feasibility of some applications.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Potential Signage/Wayfinding Options
(not comprehensive)
Design varies; see following page for additional discussion.
Bikeway signage is a cost-effective yet highly-visible treatment that
can improve the riding environment on a Bicycle Friendly Street
network. Described in this section, signage can serve both
wayfinding and safety purposes.
See following page for additional discussion:
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities Chicago's
Bikeways Signage System -
www.bikewalk.org/2006conference/vconference/presentati
ons/GrantDavisChicagosBikewaysSignageSystem.pdf Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Shown on the previous page, wayfinding signs denote key locations leading to and along Bicycle Friendly Streets, including where multiple
routes intersect and at key cyclist “decision points.” Wayfinding signs displaying destinations, distances and “riding time” can dispel
common misperceptions about time and distance while increasing users’ comfort and accessibility to the Bicycle Friendly Street network.
Wayfinding signs also visually cue motorists that they are driving along a bicycle route and should correspondingly use caution. However,
overusing road signs may clutter the right-of-way and be aesthetically displeasing.
Warning signs advising motorists to “share the road” and may also improve bicycling conditions on a Bicycle Friendly Street network.
These signs are especially useful near major bicycle trip generators such as schools, parks and other activity centers. Major streets
approaching Bicycle Friendly Streets should have warning signs to alert motorists of bicycle crossings.
Pavement marking techniques may also improve bicycling conditions along a Bicycle Friendly Street network, which may include Shared
Lane Markings and loop detector markings. Sharrows (SLMs – See Section 1.6.1) are appropriate on streets where dedicated bicycle lanes
are desirable but not feasible due to physical or other constraints. They may also designate Bicycle Friendly Street on streets with curbside
parking.
Delineating on-street parking spaces with parking Ts clearly indicates where a vehicle should be parked, and can discourage motorists
from parking their vehicles too far into the adjacent travel lane. This helps cyclists by maintaining a wide enough space to safely share a
travel lane with moving vehicles while minimizing the need to swerve farther into the travel lane to maneuver around parked cars and
opening doors. In addition to benefiting cyclists, delineated parking spaces also promote the efficient use of on-street parking by
maximizing the number of spaces in high-demand areas.
At signalized intersections with in-pavement detection, loop detector stencils should indicate where cyclists should wait to activate a
green light. (See Section 1.7.3)
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design varies; see below.
Mini Round About
Roundabouts can be effective in several scenarios when used along a
Bicycle Friendly Street and cross-streets. Typically mini roundabouts
may be considered where the Bicycle Friendly Street intersects a local
street or even a collector if the ADT is less than 2,000. Signage and
striping treatments should be implemented based on traffic volumes and
may be appropriate for local/local intersections with very low ADT,
while increased signage and splitter striping may be appropriate for
larger ADTs and intersections with collector streets. Mini roundabouts
can be landscaped with drought tolerant plants that do not impact sight
lines for added visual impact and traffic calming effect. Treatment
should be designed with the input of CCPD and CCFD for emergency
vehicle access.
Very effective at reducing through bicycle and cross vehicle
conflicts
Adds overall traffic calming in all directions
Use where unwarranted stop signs exist
Moderate cost (approx $20,000 per intersection)
Requires approval of neighborhood for installation
Requires neighborhood support and adoption for maintenance
of landscaping if installed
Automobiles must yield to pedestrians rather than explicitly
stop, as with stop-sign control.
Can create auto-bike conflicts.
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities Berkeley Bicycle
Boulevard Design Tools and Guidelines
FHWA Roundabouts: An Informational Guide
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design varies; see below and following pages for
additional discussion.
Stop Signs on Cross Streets
The installation of a stop sign on cross streets along the
Bicycle Friendly Street or bicycle route maximizes
through bicycle connectivity and speed and forces
motorists crossing the facility to stop and proceed when
safe. This treatment may be unwarranted and should be
considered a traffic calming tool rather than a traffic
control device.
Inexpensive installation
Effective at reducing though bicycle and cross
vehicle conflicts
May be unwarranted as traffic control device
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
Berkeley Bicycle Boulevard Design Tools and Guidelines
http://webserver.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Pu
blic_Works/Level_3_-_General/ch4_.pdf
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design varies; see below and following pages for
additional discussion.
Curb Bulbouts and High-Visibility Crosswalks
This treatment may be appropriate for Bicycle
Friendly Streets or bicycle routes near activity
centers that generate large amounts of pedestrian
activity, such as schools or commercial areas. The
bulbouts should only extend across the parking lane
and should not obstruct cyclists’ travel paths or the
travel lane. The City would typically combine this
treatment with a stop sign or other traffic control
device.
Traffic calming device
May impact on-street parking
Moderate cost (approx $5,000-$15,000 per
intersection)
May impact bus/truck turning movements
May cause wider right-turn movement
May constrict auto and bike traffic
May impact emergency vehicles
May impact drainage
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Pedestrian
Facilities
Berkeley Bicycle Boulevard Design Tools and
Guidelines
http://webserver.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFile
s/Public_Works/Level_3_-_General/ch4_.pdf
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design varies; see below and previous pages for additional
discussion.
Diagonal Diverter
This treatment prevents through vehicle traffic and is appropriate
for Bicycle Friendly Streets or Bicycle Routes where there are high
amounts of undesired through vehicle traffic. The diverter should
allow emergency vehicles to permeate the diverter with a minimum
amount of delay. The diverter design can include landscaping with
features to enhance the greenspace of the neighborhood, but that
do not impact sight lines.
Traffic calming device
Reduces through vehicle movements along BFS
May slightly slow emergency responders
Moderate cost (approx $4,000-$10,000 per intersection)
May impact street maintenance and, if landscaped, may
require neighborhood landscape maintenance
Traffic will divert onto other nearby streets
Berkeley Bicycle Boulevard Design Tools and Guidelines
http://webserver.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Public_Wo
rks/Level_3_-_General/ch4_.pdf
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Special Considerations for Cyclists at
Local/Major Signalized Intersections
A signalized intersection that properly accounts for cyclists
crossing a major roadway should consider the following:
Easy and accurate detection by the traffic signal
controller by one of the following:
o Embedded loops with placement and
sensitivity to detect a bicycle. Identify loop
with the standard “Bicycle Detector Symbol”
shown in Figure 9C-7(CA) in the CaMUTCD
o Cyclist-activated push buttons, as long as they
do not require cyclists to dismount or make
unsafe leaning movements. These devices
should be as close to the street as possible in a
location unobstructed by parked vehicles or
motorists making right-hand turns.
o Video detection technology
Safe location to wait for green signal – Cyclists awaiting
a green light should not block vehicle right turns (if
allowed). Sufficient lane width or stenciling can help
with lane positioning and traffic flow
Signal timing providing adequate time for cyclists to
safely cross the intersection
In situations with few crossable gaps and where vehicles on the
major street do not stop for pedestrians and cyclists waiting to
cross, “half signals” that stop traffic only along one of the streets
could be installed to improve the crossing environment. Half
signals include bicycle activation buttons and may also include
bicycle loop detectors on the Bicycle Friendly Street approach.
Many of these models have been used successfully for years
overseas, and their use in the U.S. has increased dramatically over
the last decade.
Design varies; see following page for additional discussion.
Signalized intersections at Bicycle Friendly Street must detected
cyclists in order to be effective.
The photo below depicts an intersection of a Bicycle Friendly
Street at a major street with embedded loop detection.
See adjacent column for additional discussion:
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank.Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
As the needs and characteristics of bicycles and motor vehicles vary greatly, adequately accommodating
cyclists at traffic signals can be challenging for traffic engineers. This section contains guidance on bicycle
detection at signals, bicycle pavement markings at signals, and bicycle signals.
Bicycles typically travel much slower than motor vehicles and can find themselves without an adequate time
to clear an intersection. The duration of the amber phase of signals is typically sufficient to allow motor
vehicles to clear an intersection at the prevailing speed; however, cyclists typically average only 10 mph
through intersections. Adjustments to signal timing must meet Caltrans standards for interval duration.
Methods for accommodating cyclists include:
Lengthening the amber phase of the intersection slightly to allow for the slower speed of cyclists:
Longer amber phases can also encourage motor vehicles to enter intersections under this phase.
Lengthening the ‘all red’ phase of the intersection. This allows vehicles or cyclists to clear the
intersection before opposing traffic receives a green phase. The maximum length of the ‘all red’ phase
should not generally be greater than two seconds. Under no circumstances should this time extend
beyond three seconds.
Coordinating signals to allow for the 10-15 mph propagation speed of cyclists. Sometimes it is possible
to alter signal timing to provide ‘green waves’ for cyclists without significantly impeding motor vehicle
flow. These improvements may slow other motorized traffic including buses.
Increasing the minimum green interval: Cyclists have slower speeds and accelerations than motor
vehicles and even if they are at the stop line when a green light is given, the cyclist may still lack
sufficient time to clear the intersection before a conflicting green phase.
Using signal detection to detect moving cyclists: Some video detection technology may detect cyclists
with adjustments to programming, and alter the minimum green phase or the clearance interval based
on their presence.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Diagonal “Quadracircle” – Type “E”
Loops can detect metallic objects, with the signal
strongest when passing near the loop edges and weakest
when passing through the loop center.
Loops can detect wide objects but have difficulty
detecting narrow objects like bicycles.
Pavement markings can note loop edges and guide
bicyclists on proper positioning.
Bicycles increasingly use non-metallic materials, e.g.
carbon fiber frames and wheels.
In order to minimize delay to cyclists, it is recommended to install
one loop about 100 ft from the stop bar within the bicycle
lane, with a second loop located at the stop bar.
Details of saw cuts and winding patterns for inductive detector
loop types appear on Caltrans Standard Detail ES-5B.
The Type E loop, or Diagonal “Quadracircle”, is the standard auto
detection device at signalized intersections in the City of Culver
City
CaMUTCD
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
Caltrans Standard Plans (1999) ES-5B
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Figure 9C-7 – CA MUTCD
Accompanying Signage (R10-22)
Locate Bicycle Detector Pavement Marking where bicycle can be
detected in a shared lane by loop detector or other detection
technology.
Bicycle Detector Pavement Markings guide cyclists into optimal
position to trigger an actuated intersection signal. Signal detection
devices may require adjustments before they are capable of
detecting a bicycle. Detectors for traffic-actuated signals must pass
through the cyclist’s expected path, including left-turn lanes and
shoulders. Video detection is an effective alternate technique to
loop detection.
CaMUTCD
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design Example
Instruction Sign
Signal Detection with Pavement Marking
Part 4 of the CaMUTCD covers bicycle signals.
A bicycle signal is an electrically powered traffic control device that may only
be used in combination with an existing traffic signal. Bicycle signals shall
direct cyclists to take specific actions and may be used to improve an
identified safety or operational problem involving bicycles.
Only green, yellow and red lighted bicycle symbols shall be used to
implement bicycle movement at a signalized intersection.
A separate signal phase for bicycle movement shall be used.
Alternative means of handling conflicts between bicycles and motor vehicles
should be considered first. The City will apply bicycle signals only at
locations that meet CaMUTCD Bicycle Signal Warrants.
Two alternatives to consider include:
1. Striping to direct a cyclist to a lane adjacent to a traffic lane such as a
bicycle lane to left of a right-turn-only lane
2. Redesigning the intersection to direct a cyclist from an off-street path to a
bicycle lane at a point removed from the signalized intersection
The City should consider a bicycle signal phase only after a trial with these or
other less restrictive remedies does not show a reduction in collision
frequency.
Bicycle signals are an approved traffic control device in the State of California
following an experiment in the City of Davis.
Bicycle signals can be actuated with bicycle sensitive loop detectors, video
detection, or push buttons.
Instructional and regulatory signage should be considered with installation
of new bicycle signals. This signage is not standard and will have to be
created for the installation.
See images at right for examples and see the following page for additional
discussion.
Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)
CaMUTCD
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Bicycle signals are effective in locations with heavy bicycle traffic combined with significant conflicts with motor vehicles, at intersections
with unique geometry, or at the interface between busy roads and off-street bicycle facilities. Bicycle signals have a demonstrated positive
effect at situations that include:
High volume of cyclists at peak hours
High numbers of bicycle/motor vehicle crashes, especially those caused by crossing paths
T-intersections with major bicycle movement along the top of the T
The confluence of an off-street bicycle path and a roadway intersection
Separated bicycle paths that run parallel to arterial streets
While California approves using bicycle signals, the local municipal code should clarify that cyclists should only obey the bicycle signal
heads at intersections when it conflicts with vehicular signalization.
Separates conflicting movements
Provides cyclists priority movement at intersections
Protects cyclist movements in an intersection, which may improve real and perceived safety at high conflict areas
Alternates right-of-way between different road users
May result in additional delay for motorists and loss of vehicular capacity, particularly where a scramble phase is employed
May create a false sense of security for cyclists because they believe the bicycle signal phase will protect them
Unfamiliar drivers may become confused or uncertain about the signal’s intended purpose
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank.Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Bicycle parking is a support facility that allows cyclists to store their bicycles upon reaching a destination.
Bicycle parking has two general categories: short term and long term. Short term bicycle parking
accommodates users running errands or quick activities. Long term bicycle parking accommodates users
parking for extended periods, such as at the end of a work commute or during an overnight stay.
Bicycle parking should locate as close as possible to the main entrance of a building/establishment. Racks
should be no farther than 50 feet away from the primary entrance. Bicycle parking should be visible to cyclists,
building security, foot traffic, and anyone approaching the building. Making bicycle parking visible to foot
traffic reduces the incidents of theft and vandalism. Prominent bicycle parking also advertises bicycling as a
viable travel option to cyclists and non-cyclists alike.
If possible, provide lighting for bicycle parking areas. Cyclists, like motorists, prefer to park in a well-lit place.
If possible, provide situate the rack in an area covered from the elements. Cyclists do not want to sit on a wet
seat or leave their bicycle out in the rain.
Install parking devices that support the bicycle frame at two points, and not only at the wheel. Bicycle parking
devices that do not support the frame may allow the bicycle to fall and bend the wheel or damage the bicycle
in some other way.
The Public Works Department should determine where to locate bike parking in the public right-of-way.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Sample Design
Rack Dimensions: 35” high by 30” long.
Construction: 2 3/8" x 2" x .188" wall single Schedule 40 ASTM A53
Steel pipe, constructed of a single 180 degree bend.
Base Plate is ASTM A36 with a thickness of 3/8” welded onto the
steel pipe. The base plate should accommodate mounting hardware
with three 0.50” diameter holes at 120 degrees of each plate.
Mounting Hardware: Mushroom Head, Stainless Steel Spike. 2 ¾”
long by ½” diameter or equivalent vandal resistant hardware.
Unacceptable fasteners include “Threaded Spike” or anything
containing sharp edges or that can be vandalized.
Coating Material Finish: Long wearing, mildew and ultraviolet ray
resistant coating made of polyester, polyvinyl, thermoplastic or
TGIC Powder Coating. Coated in the factory prior to delivery. Any
damaged surface area resulted from the Contractor’s operation
shall be repaired with approved materials in accordance to the
manufacturer’s specifications.
These racks are common in many cities. Agencies should take care
to place and install the racks correctly. The rack shall not obstruct
access to/from parked vehicles nor be within 15 feet of fire
hydrants.
Association of Bicycle and Pedestrian Professionals (APBP) Bicycle
Parking Guidelines
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Design Examples
Alternate parking devices must meet the following criteria:
Support the bicycle frame at two points, and not only by
the wheel
Must accept a variety of bicycle sizes and styles including
various frame types and sizes, wheel sizes, and tire
widths
Must allow for the use of a cable as well as a U-shaped
lock
Allow for the bicycle frame and at least one wheel to
locked to the rack
Must be tall enough to be visible to pedestrians and the
visually impaired, yet not monumental in scale compared
to parked bikes
Must be maintenance free or fabricated from materials
which wear in an aesthetically pleasing manner
Must have a simple design. Cannot use moving parts
Must not require the user to lift the bicycle onto the
parking device
While the Inverted-U design is the accepted standard for bicycle
parking in the public right-of-way, the City may allow other rack
designs at its discretion.
APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Inadequate bicycle parking facilities can discourage bicycling. The City should not use racks with the following characteristics:
Support bicycles at only one point of contact
Support bicycles by one wheel
Allow bicycles to fall, which could bend the wheel and block the pedestrian right-of-way
Has sharp edges that can be hazardous to pedestrians
Suspends the bicycle in the air in any way
These photos are examples of unacceptable bicycle racks.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Additional Discussion – Rack Installation
The City will affix racks to City sidewalks or other concrete pad location using vandal-resistant hardware provided by the installer and
approved by the Public Works Department (PWD).
The City will install or remove racks in locations designated by the PWD.
All installations shall conform to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
All bolt holes shall be clear from dust or debris. The anchoring bolts should pass vertically through the support plate into the bolt holes
until the bolt head is firmly seated against the support plate.
Use washers to level the rack and support plate on uneven pavement surfaces. Fill with non-shrinking grout after mounting the bicycle
rack to the concrete.
Do not place bicycle rack over any access box, pavement expansion or control joint. Bicycle rack shall be placed at least 3 inches away
from any expansion and or control joints in the cement.
Place bicycle racks perpendicular or parallel to a building.
Provide ample room between bicycle rack and structure, at least 24 inches from the wall.
Separate racks placed side by side at least 30 inches from one another, measured from the center of the rack.
Provide at least five feet total width in the bicycle parking aisle, which is generally sufficient room for a rider and a bicycle. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This page intentionally left blank. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The City may use PEDESTRIAN / BICYCLE DETOUR (M4-
9a) to establish a pedestrian/bicycle detour route when
closing a pedestrian/ bicycle facility to through traffic.
Standard: The Pedestrian/Bicycle Detour sign shall have an
arrow pointing in the appropriate direction.
Bicycle Path
Class I
M4-9a
The City may use BICYCLE DETOUR (M4-9c) when
establishing a pedestrian or bicycle detour route (not both)
when closing a bicycle facility to through traffic.
Bicycle Lane
Class II; or
Bicycle Route
Class III
M4-9c
The City may use several standard signs [W21-5, W21-5a,
W21-5b, C24 (CA), C30A (CA), C31A (CA)] to warn cyclists
of changing roadway shoulder conditions.
Bicycle Route
Class III or other
Shared Roadway
W21-5a
C24 (CA)
Consider the following factors when planning for cyclists in TTC zones on highways and streets:
Provide a travel route that replicates the most desirable characteristics of a wide paved shoulder or
bikeway through or around the traffic control zone.
Provide signs directing cyclists through or around the zone and back to the bikeway if the traffic
control zone interrupts the continuity of an existing bikeway system.
Provide adequate roadway lane width to allow cyclists and motor vehicles to travel side by side through
or around the zone unless there is a separate bicycle path through or around the traffic control zone.
Do not lead cyclists into direct conflicts with mainline traffic, work site vehicles, or equipment moving
through or around the traffic control zone.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Road work and the associated TTC will frequently affect pedestrian or bicycle facilities, particularly in urban
areas. It is essential to consider in TTC zones the needs of all road users, including pedestrians with
disabilities.
In addition to specific provisions identified in CaMUTCD sections 6G.06, 6G.07, 6G.08, 6G.10, 6G.11, 6G.12,
and 6G.13, there are several applicable provisions for all activity types identified in this section.
The City should modify typical applications where pedestrian or bicycle usage is high, giving particular
attention to the provisions set forth in Chapters 6D and 6G, Section 6F.68, and other Sections of Part 6 related
to accessibility and detectability provisions in TTC zones.
Do not expose cyclists and pedestrians to unprotected excavations, open utility access, overhanging
equipment, or other such conditions.
Place a SHOULDER WORK sign in advance of the activity area when a highway shoulder is occupied, except
for short duration and mobile operations. Place channelizing devices on a taper with a length that conforms to
the requirements of a shoulder taper when performing work on a paved shoulder 8 or more feet wide.
The City must decide how to control vehicular traffic in urban TTC zones, such as determining the required
number of lanes, whether to prohibit turns at intersections, and how to maintain access to business,
industrial, and residential areas.
Provide adequate access to the roadway or shared-use paths if the TTC zone affects cyclist movement.
Provide a signed alternate route if work closes a designated bicycle route. Cyclists should not be directed onto
the path used by pedestrians.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Planning documents historically neglect the pedestrian environment or place pedestrian needs beneath those
of motorists. This neglect yields a hierarchy in which car trips are more convenient and encouraged, and other
transportation modes less so. This design guide attempts to re-prioritize the hierarchy to place the needs of
pedestrians first.
Pedestrian design guides are one effective strategy for improving the overall urban and suburban environment
for walking. The BPMP addresses other strategies, such as enforcing existing traffic laws and educating the
public. The following guidance recommended for the City of Culver City primarily address issues of
pedestrian safety. The guidance does not thoroughly address issues of urban design, design character, or other
amenities that make streets and sidewalks attractive places to travel and spend time as a pedestrian. Because
safety concerns clearly and significantly influence a person’s decision to walk or use other modes of
transportation, design guides for creating a safe pedestrian environment are important for all communities.
The quest to build more sophisticated transportation systems may overlook pedestrians as legitimate roadway
users. Whether building new infrastructure or renovating existing facilities, cities should assume that people
will walk, and plans should accordingly accommodate pedestrians. Drivers, transit users and cyclists are all
pedestrians at the beginning and end of every trip. When people do not walk, it is often because there are
factors preventing or discouraging them from doing so. The infrastructure may be insufficient, have serious
gaps, or contain safety hazards.
The guidance included in this section is a supplement to the City of Culver City’s currently adopted
development policies, as well as State and Federal standards. The purpose of this chapter is to provide general
design suggestions for pedestrian facilities that go above minimum standards. Implementation of guides
shown herein requires Public Works Director / City Engineer approval.
State and federal law regulates the design of many streetscape elements. Traffic control devices must follow
the procedures set forth in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD), while elements such as sidewalks and curb cuts must comply with guidelines
implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The City of Culver City follows the procedures and policies set out in the CaMUTCD (state) and MUTCD
(federal). Traffic control devices include traffic signals, traffic signs, and street markings. The manual covers
placing, constructing, and maintaining devices. The CaMUTCD emphasizes uniformity in traffic control
devices to protect the clarity of the message. A uniform device conforms to regulations for dimensions, color,
wording, and graphics and minimizes confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the roadway user.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), signed into law in 1990, is a civil rights act that
prohibits public entities from discrimination on the basis of disability. Newly constructed and modified
existing facilities must not have architectural barriers that restrict access or use by individuals with
disabilities. Cities in California use two technical standards for accessible design: the Americans with
Disability Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), adopted by the Department of Justice for places of public
accommodation and commercial facilities covered by Title 3 of the ADA, and the California Title 24 State
Accessibility Standards, State Architectural Regulations for Accommodation of the Physically Handicapped in
Public Facilities.
The following design principles represent a set of ideals, which should be incorporated, to some degree, into
every pedestrian improvement. The order roughly corresponds to relative importance.
Sidewalks, walkways, and crossings should be free of hazards and minimize conflicts with external factors,
such as vehicular traffic and protruding architectural elements.
Sidewalks, walkways, and crosswalks should ensure the mobility of all users by accommodating people’s
needs regardless of age or ability.
The pedestrian network should provide continuous direct routes and convenient connections between
destinations, including homes, schools, shopping areas, public services, recreational opportunities and transit.
Sidewalks, walkways, and crossings should allow people to easily find the most direct route to a destination
while experiencing minimal delay.
Good design should enhance the look and feel of the pedestrian environment. The pedestrian environment
includes open spaces such as plazas, courtyards, and squares, as well as the building facades that give shape to
the space of the street. Amenities should promote a sense of place through the use of seating, street furniture,
banners, art, plantings, shading, special paving treatment, historical elements, and cultural references,
The pedestrian environment should encourage public activities. Cities should permit commercial activities
such as dining, vending, and advertising when they do not interfere with safety and accessibility.
Culver City’s history must be preserved in the public space. Where applicable, pedestrian improvements
should restore and accentuate historical elements of the public right-of-way. Good design will create a sense
of time that underscores the history of Culver City. Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Pedestrian improvements should achieve the maximum benefit for their cost, by accounting for including
initial cost and maintenance cost, as well as reduced reliance on expensive transportation modes. Where
possible, improvements in the right-of-way should stimulate, reinforce, and connect with adjacent private
improvements.
The width and zone guides presented in this sidewalk section apply to sidewalks adjacent to new
development, redevelopment, remodeled buildings, and in areas implementing street reconstruction.
Sufficient right of way must exist to implement the appropriate sidewalk width. If the right of way does not
exist, the Public Works Director / City Engineer, or designer may approve modifications or exemptions.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Sidewalks in commercial corridors should be ten feet wide or eight
feet wide if adjacent to public accessible walkway or plaza running
parallel to the sidewalk.
The proposed sidewalk guides apply to new development and
depend on available street width, motor vehicle volumes,
surrounding land use, and pedestrian activity. Standardizing
sidewalk guidelines for different areas of the City, dependent on
the above listed factors, ensures a minimum level of quality for all
sidewalks.
The City of Culver City currently requires a minimum five-foot
wide sidewalk. These dimensions conform to the Americans with
Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), which call for
minimum four-foot wide sidewalks for passage. Four foot
sidewalks are not the ADAAG recommended sidewalk width.
The discretionary review process should require dedicated space
for sidewalks.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommends
planning all sidewalks to include a minimum width of five feet (60
inches) with a planting strip of two feet (24 inches) in both
residential and commercial areas. Culver City has not adopted the
ITE recommendation.
ITE
ADAAG
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
See width specifications below.
Sidewalks are the most important component of the City’s
pedestrian circulation network. Sidewalks provide pedestrian access
to virtually every activity and provide critical connections between
other modes of travel, including the automobile, public transit, and
bicycles. The Sidewalk Corridor is lies within the public right-of-
way, between the curb or roadway edge and the property line. The
Sidewalk Corridor contains four distinct zones: the Curb Zone, the
Furnishings Zone, the Pedestrian Travel Zone, and the Frontage
Zone.
See following page for additional discussion:
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Curbs prevent water in the street gutters from entering the pedestrian space, discourage vehicles from driving over the pedestrian area,
and make it easy to sweep the streets. The curb helps to define the pedestrian environment within the streetscape, although other designs
can also achieve this purpose. The curb is an important tactile element at corners for sight-impaired pedestrians using canes for
wayfinding. Straight curbs rather than rolled curbs provide stronger pedestrian protection because they prevent cars from parking on or
obstructing the sidewalk.
All streets require a utility zone to accommodate above ground public infrastructure, signage, and street trees. Locating this
infrastructure in the furnishings zone prevents it from encroaching on the through passage zone, where it may cause accessibility issues.
The furnishings zone also creates an important buffer between pedestrians and vehicle travel lanes by providing horizontal separation.
Elements like utility poles, sign posts, and street trees improve pedestrian safety and comfort by separating the sidewalk from moving
vehicles. Section 1.10.5 presents guides for furnishings zone widths.
Most residential areas in the City are low to medium density and therefore have low pedestrian volumes compared to more urban areas.
This design guide recommends a four foot through passage zone for these conditions. Some commercial areas, school zones, and other
public areas generate greater pedestrian volumes; the City should consider a wider through zone in these areas. Section 1.10.7 presents
recommended standards for the through zone width for each of the predominant land uses in Culver City.
The frontage zone lies between the pedestrian through zone and the adjacent property line. Pedestrians tend to avoid walking close to
barriers at the property line, such as buildings, storefronts, walls or fences, in the same way that they avoid walking close to the roadway.
The frontage zone should be at least 12 inches in most cases. Areas may eliminate the frontage zone if the sidewalk is adjacent to a wide
open or landscaped space without fences. Section 1.10.8 presents guides for frontage zone widths.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The Furnishings Zone buffers pedestrians from the adjacent
roadway, and accommodates elements such as street trees, signal
poles, utility poles, street lights, controller boxes, hydrants, signs,
parking meters, driveway aprons, grates, hatch covers, and street
furniture. The Furnishing Zone is where people load/unload from
parked cars.
The Furnishings Zone should include street trees if there is
adequate sidewalk width. Commercial areas may have paved zones
with tree wells and planting pockets for trees, flowers, and shrubs.
Residential zones generally do not pave these zones except for
access walkways. Residential Furnishings Zones generally receive
landscaping with a combination of street trees, shrubs, ground
cover, lawn, or other treatments. Non-residential areas should
provide a Furnishings Zone.
Separating pedestrians from travel lanes greatly increases comfort
when using the Sidewalk Corridor. The Furnishings Zone buffering
function is especially important on streets with heavy traffic, yet
many of these streets have narrow existing Sidewalk Corridors.
Cities should devote additional width to these zones on streets
with traffic speeds over 35 mph (55 km/h).
See following page for additional discussion.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
All grates within the sidewalk shall be flush with the surrounding sidewalk surface and located outside the Pedestrian Travel Zone.
Ventilation grates and tree well grates shall have openings no greater than 1/2 in (13 mm) in width.
Designers should use tree well grates in high pedestrian use areas.
The Furnishings Zone should enclose access hole covers. Access hole covers must have a rough surface texture, with a slightly raised
pattern. The surface should be slip-resistant even when wet. The cover should be flush with the surrounding sidewalk surface.
Street furniture includes benches, mailboxes, trash and recycling receptacles, bike racks, newspaper boxes, drinking fountains,
information boards, kiosks, parking meters, artwork, public phones, signs, bus shelters, and other items used by pedestrians. These
features humanize the street scale and encourage pedestrian activity. Street furniture should sit in the furnishings zone to maintain
through passage zones for pedestrians and to buffer the sidewalk from the street. Bus shelters are an exception to this principle, as they
must fit site conditions and meet ADA accessibility requirements. Bus bulb-outs may provide additional space in areas with crowded
sidewalks and/or high speed/high volume street. A bus shelter placed at the back of the sidewalk area would similarly provide adequate
room to meet ADA requirements. (See the explanation of bulb-outs on page 23.) Bus shelters should have clear bus schedules displays and
city maps for way-finding. Pedestrian facilities around all street furniture should meet accessibility requirements and pedestrian walk
clearance zones.
The City’s underground and overhead service utility network greatly impacts sidewalks. Utility poles, traffic signals/equipment, and fire
hydrants should sit outside the pedestrian travel zone or the furniture zone. Electrical boxes should sit on utility and traffic signal poles
prevent creating unexpected pedestrian hazards. Utility vaults and access boxes should sit outside the pedestrian travel zone, flush with
the sidewalk, in conformance with ADA requirements. Their construction should use non-slip materials.
Non-Residential Utility Poles and Structure Placement*
*As determined by the Public Works Director Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
.
The Pedestrian Travel Zone is intended for pedestrian travel. If
possible, this zone should be entirely free from permanent and
temporary objects.
For sidewalk infill projects in areas with some existing sidewalks,
the new sidewalk should match the existing width or meet the
recommended width, whichever is larger.
Driveway aprons should not intrude into the Pedestrian Travel
Zone.
ADA Accessibility Guidelines specify that the minimum clearance
required for through passage is 36 inches. The ADAAG permits a
minimum clearance of 32 inches, but only up to a length of 24
inches.
Surfaces
Walking surfaces shall be firm and stable, resistant to slipping, and
allow for easy passage by people using canes, wheelchairs, or other
devices to assist mobility.
Sidewalks are generally constructed of Portland cement concrete.
The City may also consider alternative pavement and/or
treatments, at the discretion of the Public Works Director / City
Engineer, particularly in the Furnishings Zone or around mature
trees where sidewalk lifting is a problem.
The surface of concrete sidewalks should match historic patterns
within a neighborhood or district where appropriate.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The Frontage Zone is the area between the Pedestrian Travel Zone
and the property line. This zone allows pedestrians a comfortable
“shy away” distance from the building fronts, in areas where
buildings are at the lot line, or from elements such as fences and
hedges on private property.
Where no Furnishings Zone exists, elements such as bus shelters
and benches, telephone kiosks, signal and street lighting poles and
controller boxes, traffic and parking signs, and utility poles, may
occupy the Frontage Zone. In some cases, easements or additional
right-of-way may be required to allow for these items. Residential
and mixed-use buildings built to the right-of-way line should not
site these elements in the Frontage Zone, as they could block
access to an existing or future building.
Private temporary uses such as sidewalk cafes (where allowed by
Code) may occupy the Frontage Zone, so long as it maintains a
Pedestrian Travel Zone.
Fences and walls, when permitted, should be at least 1 ft (300 mm)
behind the back of the sidewalk (or the future sidewalk, if none
exists). Encroachments into the right-of-way are not permitted
where the existing sidewalk corridor is less than the recommended
width except as allowed through an encroachment permit issued
by the Public Works Director / City Engineer.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Pedestrian District
Lighting Placement
Improving street lighting makes locations appear more inviting and
will encourage people to use pedestrian areas at night. Increasing
the number of people using a particular area reinforces general
safety by eliminating opportunities for crimes to occur.
Street lighting serves a variety of purposes. Some designers use
lamp styles to provide a sense of neighborhood continuity or
preserve the atmosphere of an historic district. Others use lights to
improve visibility for motorists at a particular intersection.
This section specifically addresses pedestrian scale lighting, as
typical roadway right-of-way lighting designed for motorists
provides little value to pedestrians. Pedestrians prefer frequent
lampposts at lower height and illumination over fewer lampposts
at taller height and that are brighter.
The City should implement pedestrian scale lighting in areas of
high pedestrian activity and where feasible based on available right
of way, utilities and cost. Pedestrian scale lighting is a significant
capital improvement, and operating and maintenance expense. The
City should install pedestrian scale lighting only where it will have
maximum benefit. Culver City areas that may benefit from
increased pedestrian lighting are areas active during the evening,
such as entertainment districts that include theatres, restaurants,
bars, and parks with evening programs. Pedestrian scale lighting
may also benefit the pedestrian districts where they do not exist
already.
The City can install pedestrian scale lighting between existing
lampposts to obtain the frequencies given in the adjacent diagram.
They should locate at least ten feet from the full growth canopy of
adjacent trees.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Bus stops should provide safe access to transit passengers. Culver
City bus stops sit in red-curb zones that allow buses to park
parallel to the sidewalk. The bus stop zone needs to allow the bus
to pull into the bus stop zone adjacent to the sidewalk and deploy
the wheelchair lift.
The bus shelter should provide an adequate bus stop pad to allow
wheelchair users to access the shelter and board the bus. ADA
Guidelines define the space necessary to facilitate lift operations for
passengers in wheelchairs. Lift operations require adequate space
for individuals with wheelchairs to wait while deploying the
automatic lift or ramp. In most instances the ramp is between 2.5
and 3 feet long and wide.
The ADA minimum requirements for the wheelchair waiting zone
at the bus shelter are 60 inches wide (as measured along the curb)
by 96 inches deep (as measured from the curb). Outside of the
wheelchair waiting zone, the minimum passing space may be three
feet.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The California Vehicle Code Section 275 defines a crosswalk as either:
(a) That portion of a roadway included within the prolongation or connection of the boundary lines of sidewalks at
intersections where the intersecting roadways meet at approximately right angles, except the prolongation of such lines
from an alley across a street.
(b) Any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, the City shall not install a crosswalk where local
authorities placed signs indicating no crossing.
A crosswalk is effectively a legal extension of the sidewalk across the roadway at intersections. Crosswalks
are present at all intersections, whether marked or unmarked, unless the local jurisdiction specifically
prohibits pedestrian crossing. Crosswalks exist at mid-block locations only when marked.
According to the CaMUTCD, crosswalk markings provide guidance for pedestrians who are crossing
roadways by defining and delineating paths on approaches to and within signalized intersections, and on
approaches to other intersections where traffic stops.
As noted in the 2005 FHWA report “Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled
Locations,” the CaMUTCD does not provide specific guidance relative to the site condition (e.g., traffic
volume, pedestrian volume, number of lanes, presence or type of median) whether to use marked crosswalks
at uncontrolled locations. Nor does the MUTCD give specific guidance on whether to apply crosswalk
enhancement features such as high-visibility striping, advanced warning signage, or flashing beacons. While
the CaMUTCD allows the use of these devices, it defers decisions to the judgment of local traffic engineers on
specific applicability at a given location. This section summarizes the various types of crosswalk-related
markings, signage and enhancement treatments available for use in Culver City, discusses policies and
procedures already in use, and provides more information to assist City traffic engineers with future
implementation.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Marked crosswalks alert drivers to expect crossing pedestrians and
direct pedestrians to desirable crossing locations. Culver City
utilizes two different marking styles for pedestrian crosswalks: the
standard “transverse” style, consisting of two parallel lines; and the
“ladder” style consisting of the two parallel lines with
perpendicular ladder bars striped across the width of the
crosswalk.
Crosswalks should extend across the full width of intersections, or
to the edge of the intersecting crosswalk, to encourage pedestrians
to cross perpendicular to the flow of traffic.
The City can use advanced “Stop Bars” on intersections with high
pedestrian activity, at the discretion of the Public Works
Department.
Crosswalk markings can be applied with paint or thermoplastic.
Crosswalk markings are sufficient treatments at controlled
crosswalk locations with STOP signs or traffic signals, given the
presence of a traffic control device.
Deciding whether to install standard or ladder crosswalk markings
depends on a variety of factors, such as the number of pedestrians
crossing, traffic speeds/volumes, number of lanes to cross, presence
of nearby schools or senior centers, and history of collisions. In
general, standard transverse markings are appropriate at controlled
intersections, minor uncontrolled intersections, and other crossing
locations with low traffic volumes/speeds, short crossing distance,
and good visibility. High visibility ladder markings are more
appropriate on major streets with high pedestrian volumes, heavy
traffic volumes and speeds, and more than one lane in each
direction.
Design Pavement Treatments or Textured Concrete may provide
added visibility to a crosswalk. Cities often use textured concrete
treatments to reflect cultural or historical traits of the city.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The City should minimally stripe crosswalks with transverse lines at all controlled intersection legs. The City should use high-visibility-
style crosswalks at major intersections, where pedestrian activity is high, where significant pedestrian-vehicle conflicts may occur, or
where crosswalk visibility is a concern.
Culver City has many locations where major arterials intersect one or more
minor residential streets on one side, forming a “T” shaped intersection or a
series of offset intersections. At locations with STOP or traffic signal controls
at each intersection leg, marked crosswalks should follow the guides for major
intersections above. The City should use engineering judgment to decide
whether to mark a crosswalk at intersections.
The decision to mark a crosswalk should relate to the presence of pedestrian-
generating activity centers along a particular roadway. Some locations may
need frequently marked pedestrian crosswalks, while others may only
infrequently need marked crosswalks.
Using of standard transverse lines to mark the crosswalk is generally
appropriate at minor intersections. Crosswalks should align with curb ramps
such that wheelchair users can stay within the crosswalk to access the
sidewalk on either side of the roadway. Marking crosswalks should occur at
uncontrolled locations only following an appropriate engineering study.
All crosswalks within the designated school zone must have yellow stripes
rather than white. A school zone can extend up to 500’ feet’ in advance of the
school boundary. Special signage should locate near school crossings in
accordance with the guidelines provided in Chapter 7 of the CaMUTCD. This
document provides guidance for enhancing crossings with school-aged
children present.
Source: Portland Pedestrian Design Guide
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Crosswalk Markings Used in Culver City
Style Sample
Standard – Two solid white lines, 12 to 24 inches
wide, spaced at least 6 feet apart (refer to CA
MUTCD Sec. 3B.17). Also called “transverse.”
Example: Sepulveda Blvd and Washington Blvd
Ladder – Adds cross bar “rungs” to the standard
crosswalk marking described above. Width of ladder
lines should be 1 foot, with minimum spacing of
ladder lines 1.5 feet.
Example: Culver Blvd and Washington Blvd
Standard with Colored Concrete – Two solid white
lines 12 inches wide and at least 6 feet apart.
Concrete pad given color to provide heightened
daytime visibility.
Example: Culver Blvd and Overland Ave
School Crosswalks – Crosswalks within the
designated school zone must be yellow, per
CaMUTCD. Can be marked either standard or
ladder. The school zone can extend up to 500 feet
from the school boundary.
Example: College Ave and Matteson Ave
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
The CaMUTCD provides guidance on installing supplemental
warning signage and pavement stencils at and in advance of
uncontrolled crosswalks. These signs are for uncontrolled
locations, because locations with STOP signs, YIELD signs, or
traffic signals already have traffic controls that regulate the
crosswalk. Signs and stencils to supplement crosswalks are not
necessary in these locations. The CaMUTCD warns against
installing such signs in locations with unexpected or non-apparent
crossing activity.
The Pedestrian Crossing sign plate (W11-2) sits in advance of the
unmarked crosswalk. The Pedestrian Crossing sign plate and a
downward arrow sign indicate the exact crosswalk location.
Agencies may install white “PED XING” pavement markings in
each approach lane to a marked crosswalk, except at intersections
controlled by traffic signals or STOP or YIELD signs.
The CaMUTCD requires special signage at and in advance of all
school crosswalks. Unlike the crosswalk warning signage for a
normal (white) crosswalk, school crosswalk signage is mandatory.
The CaMUTCD requires the School Crosswalk Warning Assembly
B at each yellow school crosswalk. It consists of a School Warning
plate (S1-1) plus downward arrow. Agencies must use a School
Advance Warning Assembly D, consisting of a school crossing plate
plus “AHEAD” in advance of each yellow school crossing. Agencies
may use yellow “SLOW SCHOOL XING” markings at least 100 feet
in advance of uncontrolled school crosswalks.
One way of increasing the visibility of pedestrian-related signage is
by using a Fluorescent Yellow-Green (FYG) background. The
CaMUTCD approves using FYG signage for pedestrian, bicycle and
school signs. The City should use a systematic approach for
corridor or school-area signing to avoid mixing standard yellow and
fluorescent yellow-green.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
CaMUTCD Sec. 3B.16 guides the use of Stop Lines (commonly referred to as limit lines or stop bars) and Yield Lines. Stop lines are solid
white lines 12 inches to 24 inches wide that indicate where to stop at STOP-controlled or signalized intersections. Crosswalks can
function as the stop line. Therefore, agencies should install stop lines only at controlled locations where no marked crosswalk exists. The
MUTCD permits jurisdictions to install a stop line in advance of a marked crosswalk. Installing stop lines in advance of crosswalks
discourages vehicle encroachment into the marked crosswalk, particularly at right-turn-on-red situations where vehicles creep forward to
gain visibility. One solution is to stripe a stop line on the left lanes farther back than the right lanes, which allows better left-side visibility
for right-turning vehicles. This also allows more clearance for vehicles turning from perpendicular streets. A supplement to Stop Lines is a
“STOP HERE ON RED” sign with a down arrow indicating the stop line as the proper stopping location.
Yield lines (also called yield teeth or
shark’s teeth) indicate where traffic
should yield at uncontrolled locations.
These lines comprise of white triangles
three feet high by two feet wide, spaced
one foot apart. California requires
vehicles to “YIELD” to pedestrians in
uncontrolled crosswalks; yield lines
indicate where vehicles should stop in
advance of an uncontrolled crossing.
These markings are most effective in
mid-block locations, where there is no
intersection to give a motorist cues on
where to wait for a crossing pedestrian.
The CaMUTCD recommends placing
yield lines 20 to 50 feet ahead of
uncontrolled mid-block intersections. Yield lines can counter risks for a “multiple-threat” collision on multi-lane roadways, which is where
a car in one lane stops and screens the pedestrian from the view of the adjacent lane. Installing yield lines 40-50 feet back (two car lengths)
gives both pedestrians and motorists a better view during the crossing. “YIELD HERE FOR PEDESTRIANS” signs with a down arrow can
indicate where vehicles should yield in advance of the crosswalk.
Culver City has Stop Lines or Yield Lines at several locations with marked crosswalks. The City may consider installing stop lines at least
four feet back from the crosswalk at locations with a history of vehicle encroaching into the crosswalk, or where vehicles fail to stop for
pedestrians at right-turn-on-red situations.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Crosswalk warning signs are not permissible at crosswalks
controlled by a traffic signal, as the traffic control serves to regulate
vehicles at the intersection. Installing stop lines as described above
is one way of reducing vehicles from encroaching into the
pedestrian crosswalk at signalized intersections, particularly
intersections that permit right turn on red. Another way to remind
turning drivers to yield to pedestrians is by installing a “TURNING
TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS” (R10-15) sign.
In-street Yield to Pedestrian Signs are flexible plastic signs installed
in the median to enhance a crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing
locations. These signs communicate variations of the basic message
‘State Law: Yield to Pedestrians’. A “SCHOOL” plate can
supplement these signs when at school crosswalks. School staffs
sometimes install these signs on a portable base and bring them out
when children are out in the morning and afternoon. This may
reduce chances that the sign will become less visible to motorists by
being left out continuously. Maintenance can be an issue for
permanently installed signs, as the signs may be run over by vehicles
and need occasional replacement. Installing the signs in a raised
median can help extend their lifetime.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
For aesthetic reasons, crosswalks are sometimes constructed with
distinctive paving materials such as colored pavement or special
decorative pavers meant to look like brick. Brick should be avoided
for use in crosswalks, as it tends to wear down quickly, becoming
uneven and slippery causing difficulties for pedestrians, especially
persons with disabilities. Any use of unique materials or colored
pavement should use concrete pavers or asphalt, and textures
should maintain a smooth travel surface and good traction. It is
important to note that these decorative pavement treatments
frequently do not enhance the visibility of the crosswalk location,
and in many cases make the crossing more difficult for persons with
disabilities to navigate, and make the crosswalk less visible to
motorists at night. Regardless of any colored or unique pavement
treatment used, marked crosswalk locations should always be
marked with parallel transverse lines at a minimum.
Traffic control signals minimize conflicts between motorists and
pedestrians by giving clear direction about the proper use of the
right-of-way. Section 4E of the CaMUTCD outlines the standards
for the use and design of pedestrian signals, including the warrants
for locations where pedestrian signals may be provided. All new
pedestrian signal installations shall consist of pedestrian signal
head with international symbols, rather than textual “walk” and
“don’t walk” messages. Engineering judgment should be used in
determining the specifics of pedestrian signal design at different
crossing locations.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Curb extensions, also called “bulb-outs” to describe their shape, are
engineering improvements that reduce pedestrian crossing distance
and increase visibility. Curb extensions typically sit at corners and
extend out to align with the edge of the parking lane. In addition
to shortening the crosswalk distance, curb extensions serve to
increase pedestrian visibility by allowing pedestrians to safely step
out to the edge of the parking lane to see into the street; this also
makes them more visible to oncoming drivers. At corners, curb
extensions serve to reduce the turning radius, and provide space for
perpendicularly-aligned curb ramps. Bulb-outs can provide
additional space for passenger queuing and loading at bus stops.
Despite their advantages, curb extensions can require major re-
engineering of the street and are not appropriate for all situations.
Installing curb extensions can require costly modifications and
increased maintenance where there are existing storm drain catch
basins. Curb extensions may not be possible in some locations due
to existing driveways or bus pull-out areas. Curb extensions
designs need to avoid conflict with bicycle facilities and should
never extend into a bicycle lane. Bulb-outs impede traffic and
should only be installed when based on engineering judgment.
Given their relatively high cost and challenges of implementation,
curb extensions may not be suitable for widespread
implementation. The City must evaluate each potential curb
extension location on a case-by-case basis, taking into account
factors such as crossing volumes, parking lane widths, drainage,
driveways, effects on large vehicle movement, and bus stops.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
*The City may consider a median refuge if it does not preclude
existing or future bike lanes, or if City selects the island over
placing bike lanes.
The City should consider installing pedestrian refuge islands at
intersections where a pedestrian must cross a street with four or
more lanes, with traffic volumes higher than 7,500 vehicles per day
(VPD), and traffic speeds greater than 35 mph.
At street crossing locations with vehicle speeds higher than 35 mph
and traffic volumes more than 15,000 VPD, the City should offset
“corral-style” pedestrian refuge islands so that pedestrians must
face opposing traffic before crossing the second half of the street.
Refuge islands should be a minimum of four feet wide by eight feet
long. These dimensions are an absolute minimum and should not be
used at multi-use trail crossings or other locations anticipating
bicycle traffic.
Pedestrian refuge islands should be well illuminated.
Islands should contain vertical elements like trees, landscape
features, bollards, or sign posts.
Pedestrian refuge islands must be ADA compliant; waiting areas
should be at-grade with the roadway where it is not possible to
include ramps and waiting pads.
Pedestrian refuges in wide or busy streets improve safety for
pedestrians and vehicles. They are areas within an intersection or
between lanes of traffic where pedestrians may safely wait until
vehicular traffic clears, allowing them to cross the street. These
islands are particularly helpful for seniors, the disabled, and
children unable to cross the street during the available signal time.
Islands can significantly reduce delay when crossing un-signalized
intersections since the pedestrian need only watch for gaps in one
direction at a time.
Installing an island nose can help to provide additional protection
for pedestrians at intersections. Island noses can reduce vehicles
encroaching into the refuge area when making left turns. However,
island noses may not be feasible because they restrict turning
movement from side streets. Neither the MUTCD nor the ADA
Access Board Guidelines have any requirement for installing island
noses at intersection refuge islands. The City of Culver City should
consider island nose installation on a case-by-case basis.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Intersections with high vehicular traffic volumes and pedestrian
traffic.
Wide roadways where a two legged crossing will increase
pedestrian ability to cross roadways, taking advantage of traffic
gaps without modifying adjacent intersection signal timing.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Safety barrels and bollards can be effective in preventing vehicles from entering the pedestrian right-of-way. They are also an inexpensive
way to test more permanent intersection improvements such as curb extensions. The placement of these vertical elements must ensure
that they do not block the travel path of pedestrians, particularly those who are sight or mobility impaired. The creative use of bollards to
create combination curb bulbs/bicycle parking areas can be effective in improving pedestrian safety while enhancing the aesthetic quality
of an intersection and providing bicycle parking.
Multi-use trails provide pedestrian and bicycle travel ways that are separated from automobile traffic. Trail crossings must be safe for
pedestrians and cyclists alike, and should also provide convenient connections to the City’s street network. In general, trail crossings
should be treated just like other intersection types, oriented at 90 degree angles whenever possible ensuring safety for all trail and road
users. In addition to typical intersection lighting, signage, and traffic control features, trail crossings should include design features that
warn both trail and roadway users of the crossing. Restricting parking near trail crossings, as at typical intersections, enhances sight
distance.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This section discusses specific pedestrian enhancements for use at signalized intersection locations.
Countdown pedestrian signals provide information on the time
remaining in the pedestrian interval, which can assist pedestrians
in crossing safely. The CaMUTCD now includes guidance on using
these devices.
Traffic signal timing can affect the ability of slower-moving
pedestrians to safely cross the street. Agencies calculate the length
of the pedestrian clearance phase by calculating a clearance
interval, which is the time it takes a person to walk from the curb
on one side to the center of the farthest travel lane on the other
side. The CaMUTCD recommends a standard walking speed for
four feet per second to calculate pedestrian clearance intervals,
which is what Culver City uses.
However, the City should consider using a lower walking speed for
calculating the pedestrian clearance time where there are
populations of slow-walking pedestrians. The MUTCD
recommends a walking speed of 2.8 feet per second for seniors or
persons with disabilities. The City of Culver City should consider
utilizing a walking speed of 2.8 ft/sec to allow for longer crossing
times where signalized crossings are near senior centers, senior
housing, elementary schools, or centers generating significant
volume of pedestrians with disabilities. This recommendation may
also apply to locations adjacent to elementary schools, as young
children walk more slowly than adults.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
There are several simple design considerations that greatly enhance
the safety and comfort of pedestrians at signalized intersections:
Areas with high pedestrian use (over 100 persons per hour) may
incorporate a pedestrian phase into the signal sequence instead of
using an on-demand signal phase.
Place pedestrian push-buttons in easily-reached, ADA compliant
locations facing the sidewalk and clearly inline with the direction
of travel. This will improve operations, as many pedestrians push
all buttons to ensure that they hit the right one.
Adjust the signal timing to accommodate the average walking
speeds of anticipated intersection users (longer crossing times for
intersections near schools and community centers, etc.), or to limit
pedestrian waiting time.
Fully-actuated signals are highly responsive to local traffic
variations because they detect vehicles and pedestrians on arrival.
Fully-actuated signals require pedestrians to push the button to
actuate the WALK phase.
Special pedestrian phases can also provide more crossing time for
pedestrians at certain intersections. These include:
Extended phase – At intersections with an extended
phase, pedestrians who push the pedestrian crossing
button get more time to cross the street than is provided
during the normal signal phase.
Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) – At intersections
where there are conflicts between turning vehicles and
pedestrians, pedestrians receive a “walk” designation a
few seconds before the associated green phase for the
intersection begins.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Pedestrian pushbutton detectors allow pedestrian signals to
become actuated. As required by the CaMUTCD, pedestrian
pushbutton detectors must have signs explaining their use.
Pedestrian pushbutton detectors should be easily accessible for
those in wheelchairs and for the sight-impaired, located
approximately 3.5 ft. off the ground on a level surface. Pedestrian
pushbuttons should not be used in locations where the pedestrian
phase is set on a fixed cycle and cannot be actuated. One exception
is using pushbuttons to activate audible pedestrian signals at non-
actuated locations.
Verbal messages shall provide a clear message that the walk
interval is in effect, as well as to which crossing it applies, when
used to communicate the pedestrian interval.
The verbal message provided regularly during the walk interval
shall be the term "walk sign," which may be followed by the name
of the crossing street.
A verbal message is not required at times when the walk interval is
not timing, but, if provided: 1) It shall be the term "wait" and: 2) It
need not be repeated for the entire time that the walk interval is
not timing.
Accessible pedestrian signals that provide verbal messages may
provide similar messages in languages other than English, if needed,
except for the terms "walk sign" and "wait." A vibrotactile
pedestrian device communicates information by touch about
pedestrian timing through a vibrating surface.
Vibrotactile pedestrian devices, where used, shall indicate that the
walk interval is in effect, and for which direction it applies, through
a vibrating directional arrow or some other means.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
According to ADA regulations, all streets with sidewalks and curbs
or other barriers must have curb ramps at intersections (U.S.
Access Board 1999, p. 58). The City of Culver City requires curb
ramps at all street intersections. New curb ramps must comply
with the requirements of the State of California Code of
Regulations Title 24 and the Americans with Disabilities Act
Accessibility Guidelines.
Curb ramps should direct pedestrians to the opposite corner and
provide a direct connection between the sidewalk through the
Pedestrian Travel Zone and the crosswalk. Curb ramps should
allow wheelchair users to transition from the sidewalk to the
crosswalk without having to enter travel lanes.
Curb ramps are necessary for people who use wheelchairs to access
sidewalks and crosswalks. They help people with other mobility
impairments to transition easily between sidewalks and
crosswalks. Curb ramps also help people with strollers or rolling
carts.
Curb ramps consist of the following basic components:
The level area at the top of a curb ramp facing the ramp path.
Landings allow wheelchairs to enter and exit a curb ramp, as well
as travel along with sidewalk without tipping or tilting.
The portion of the sidewalk on either side of the landing.
Approaches provide space for wheelchairs to prepare to enter
landings.
The sloped transition between the curb and sidewalk. Flares
provide a sloped transition between the sidewalk and curb ramp to
help to prevent pedestrians from tripping over an abrupt change in
level.
The sloped transition between the sidewalk and street where the
grade is constant and cross slope at a minimum. Ramps are the
main pathway between the sidewalk and street.
The trough that runs between the curb or curb ramp and the street,
designed to serve as a conduit for storm water flow or other
drainage.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
ADA requires installation of curb ramps in new sidewalks, as well
as retrofitting of existing sidewalks. The section below describes
the three most common curb ramp designs, perpendicular, parallel,
and diagonal, and their respective applications. This section also
addresses other curb ramp types, including built-up ramps and
depressed corners.
Perpendicular curb ramps allow for a convenient, direct path of
travel with a 90-degree angle to the curb. Perpendicular curb
ramps allow users to enter the street traveling perpendicular to
vehicular traffic. Perpendicular curb ramps maximize access for
pedestrians at intersections. They reduce the overall distance
required to cross the street when compared with diagonal ramps.
However, perpendicular curb ramps require more space than single
diagonal ramps.
The City should not install perpendicular curb ramps without level
landings because they are difficult for wheelchairs to negotiate.
Where sidewalks are narrow, there may not be space for two
perpendicular curb ramps and their landings. Adding curb
extensions can create additional space to accommodate two
perpendicular ramps and landing areas.
Diagonal curb ramps are similar to perpendicular curb ramps, but
are placed at the apex of the corner. They orient users to enter the
street traveling diagonally to the path of vehicle travel. Diagonal
curb ramps require less space than dual perpendicular curb ramps,
but also require users to take a longer, circuitous travel path than a
perpendicular ramp to the other side. They cause the user to travel
towards the center of the intersection before maneuvering left or
right to cross the street.
Diagonal curb ramps cost less than perpendicular ramps since they
are single ramps, and hence the City can install more diagonal curb
ramps than perpendicular curb ramps. Diagonal curb ramps are
generally desirable on streets with little motor vehicle traffic,
where the advantage of installing more curb ramps compensates for
the drawbacks.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Parallel curb ramps are two opposing ramps that
slope down parallel to the direction of pedestrian
travel. They are generally used on narrow
sidewalks where there is inadequate space to
install other ramp types. Parallel curb ramps are
useful in locations with high curbs, as the ramps
can extended to ensure a gentle ramp grade
without concern for right-of-way limitations.
However, parallel curb ramps require pedestrians
continuing along the sidewalk to ramp down and
up. Parallel curb ramps can combine with
perpendicular ramps to reduce the ramping for
through pedestrians where space exists in a
planting strip.
Depressed corners gradually lower the level of the sidewalk to meet the street grade. Depressed corners offer the same advantages of
perpendicular curb ramps. However, they are difficult for visually and cognitively impaired people to distinguish the transition from
sidewalk and street. They can confuse guide dogs as well. Turning motor vehicles, especially large trucks, may intrude onto depressed
corners. For these reasons, this guide recommends retrofitting depressed corners with bollards or other intermittent barriers to prevent
vehicles from traveling on the sidewalk. Agencies should place detectable warnings at the edge of the sidewalk.
Source: Georgia Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook
Parallel Curb Ramp Design
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Curb Ramp
Type
Characteristic ADAAG Standards US Access
Board
Guidelines
Title 24
Standards
Other
Perpendicular
Diagonal
Maximum slope of ramps 8.33%; if space prohibits this,
8.33% to 10% with a maximum
rise of 150 mm (6 in); or 10% to
12.5% with a maximum rise of
75 mm (3 in)
7.1% + or – 1.2%
Maximum cross-slope of
ramps
2%
Maximum slope of flared
sides
10%
Minimum ramp width 0.915 m (36 in) 1.22 m (48 in) 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing length 0.915 m (36 in); if landing is less
than 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing width 1.22 m (48 in)
Maximum gutter slope 5% Gutter should
be designed
to not retain
water
Changes in level flush
Truncated domes 610 mm (24 in)
Maximum slope of ramps 8.33%; if space prohibits this,
8.33% to 10% with a maximum
rise of 150 mm (6 in); or 10% to
12.5% with a maximum rise of
75 mm (3 in)
Maximum cross-slope of
ramps
2%
Maximum slope of flared
sides
10%
Minimum ramp width 0.915 m (36 in) 1.22 m (48 in) 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing length 0.915 m (36 in); if landing is less
than 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing width 1.22 m (48 in)
Maximum gutter slope 2% Gutter should
be designed
to not retain
water
Changes in level none
Minimum clear space 1.22 m (48 in)
Parallel and
combination
Maximum slope of ramps 8.33%; if space prohibits this,
8.33% to 10% with a maximum
rise of 150 mm (6 in); or 10% to
12.5% with a maximum rise of
75 mm (3 in)
7.1%
Maximum cross-slope of
ramps
2%
Maximum slope of flared
sides
10%
Minimum ramp width 0.915 m (36 in) 1.22 m (48 in) 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing length 0.915 m (36 in); if landing is less
than 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing width 1.22 m (48 in)
Maximum landing slope 2%
Maximum gutter slope 5% Gutter should
be designed
to not retain
water
Changes in level none
Truncated domes (parallel);
detectable warnings
(combination)
610 mm (24 in) Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
Curb Ramp
Type
Characteristic ADAAG Standards US Access
Board
Guidelines
Title 24
Standards
Other
Curb extensions
and built-up curb
ramps
Maximum slope of ramps 8.33%; if space prohibits this,
8.33% to 10% with a maximum
rise of 150 mm (6 in); or 10% to
12.5% with a maximum rise of
75 mm (3 in)
7.1% + or – 1.2%
(curb ext.);
7.1% (built-up)
Maximum cross-slope of
ramps
2% 2% + or – 0.9%
(curb ext.);
2% (built-up)
Maximum slope of flared
sides
10%
Minimum ramp width 0.915 m (36 in) 1.22 m (48 in) 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing length 0.915 m (36 in); if landing is less
than 1.22 m (48 in)
Minimum landing width 1.22 m (48 in)
Maximum gutter slope 5% Gutter should
be designed
to not retain
water
Changes in level Flush (curb ext.);
none (built-up)
Detectable warnings 610 mm (24 in)
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
These facilities eliminate grade changes from the pedestrian path
and give pedestrians greater prominence as they cross the street.
When implementing these measures:
Use detectable warnings at the curb edges to alert
visually-impaired pedestrians that they are entering the
roadway.
The approaches to the raised crosswalk may have a
design to be similar to speed humps.
This type of facility requires an extensive evaluation of the specific
location’s impacts to emergency response times.
Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan – Design Guide
This street recommends a 20-foot turning radius. Streets with
significant volumes of truck or large vehicle traffic may require
larger corner radii.
A corner’s turning radius determines how fast a driver can
comfortably make a turn. A tighter turn or shorter radius forces
drivers to slow down, allowing them to see pedestrians better and
stop more quickly. Intersection corners with short radii increase
safety for pedestrians at intersections by creating more sidewalk
space and less roadway space. A decreased curb radius also allows
for curb ramps aligned parallel to crosswalks.
ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Overall I think the plan is great; however, I would NOT recommend Huron as bike friendly!
Unless there is to be a crosswalk or traffic light installed at Washington Blvd, it is not easy to
cross there! For the same reason, I would not consider it a good pedestrian street either. It also
does not cross Culver Blvd easily. The Tilden/Harter recommendation is also not very bike
friendly at the Washington Pl/Blvd and Culver Blvd intersections. I wish we could do something
more than bike routes around downtown and at the Jefferson Blvd shopping center, but I
understand the constraints. I would also never bike on Sepulveda Blvd. It would not be a good
bike route! Too much traffic at too high of speeds, and buses as well. That being said, I think the
other proposed changes are fantastic and greatly needed. I appreciate all the changes you are
proposing, and I can't wait to see them done!
These are recommended routes for improvements. We will designate
them bicycle friendly after traffic engineering analysis and
implementation of needed improvements.
The purpose of the network is to provide options and alternative routes to
cyclists. There are a number of alternative streets that provide north-
south connectivity, and not all of them will be appropriate for riders of all
comfort levels.
I'm sorry to say that I haven't time to read the whole report but I would hope that a bike path
from East Culver City to downtown is a part of the the plan. Something that starts at Helms and
goes W on Washington to downtown. Thanks!
There is no separated bike path planned for Washington Boulevard, but
we are exploring on-street facilities that provide that connectivity.
In general, I think it is great and I particularly like the creation of bike friendly streets. However,
I have three concerns/comments 1. The study identified residential community resistance to
access point to Ballona bike path but said nothing about eduction and/or community outreach to
demonstrate the benefit of having access point to the residential community. It also did not
address this point in the creating a network section (unless I missed it). Seems to me that it will
be critical to connect the proposed North-South bike friendly streets around the Culver High
School with Ballona bike path for this master plan to be a success. 2. The study identified
Overland as the "missing link" in the bike lane (which I agree entirely) but doesn't go far enough
in the recommendation. Overland needs dedicated bike lane, not "shared space" sharrow marking.
This is an opportunity to change the way the city think of its road space and I think it is really
important that the cycling community demand Overland get its own bike lane. 3. The suggested
shared space sharrows is a good start but other local cities have done better (Long Beach) or are
about to do it better (Santa Monica) with fully painted bike lane/shared lane markings. The
Portland style fully painted strip should be part of the recommendation in the master plan.
There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
Bike lanes and sharrows have been proposed based on road widths and
other considerations (speed limit, presence of curb parking, etc.).
The painted strip is not an approved facility in the current CAMUTCD.
The BPMP is only recommending approved facilities. However, as new
standards are approved, the City will look for opportunities to take
advantage of the newly available facilities (i.e. bike boxes, lane painting,
sharrows without curbside parking).
1 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Hi, I looked at your maps with interest, and I was dismayed to see that there is NO plan to help
students and their parents safely cross Sawtelle from the East in order to get to/from El Marino.
There are many families, my own included, who would walk to/from school. However, because of
the shoddy placement of traffic or pedestrian lights on Sawtelle Blvd., it makes it extremely
unsafe. As you many know, Sawtelle rests on a hill overtop Ballona creek. Any car racing down
Sawtelle between Braddock and Jefferson/Sepulveda cannot see a person crossing the
street..until it's too late. This has been brought up over and over again, however, a request to put
in a light for the safety of students has been completely ignored. If the reason is because "studies"
have shown that the number of people crossing Sawtelle is low and doesn't meet some kind of
standard, I propose this suggestion: perhaps the number may seem low, because it is so
terrifically dangerous to cross. You have to RUN across that street to be on the safe side. Please
include a cross light on Sawtelle, between Braddock and Jefferson/Sepulveda for the safety of
Culver City residents. Thank you, Jeannine Stehlin
The City has been looking at this for a number of years. There have been
signals proposed at Blanco/Hayter, but they have not been installed due to
community opposition.
I attended the PAC meeting where public input was sought, and have been participating in
audits and counts. I forgot to raise, but would like to suggest here, the incorporation in the Plan
of bicycle valet parking in downtown Culver City. Here is a link to a Time Magazine article on the
subject: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1625309,00.html. Santa Monica offers
this; I believe they initially contracted with LACBC, but now use city employees. I think it would
do wonders to increase bicycle use downtown. Thanks for considering it.
Bicycle valet is discussed in the "Programs" section of the Plan. The Plan
recommends valets for special events. The proposed mobility coordinator
would be tasked with increasing bicycle parking in the downtown area
and analyzing the need for a regular bicycle valet service, as need arises.
I'll be relocating to the Ventura County area later this summer and frequently riding with friends
in the Marina Area. Having reviewed numerous bike plans over the past 10 years I have several
comments regarding your plan that I believe should be added in. 1) On your intro page (Page 12)
should be mention of compliance SPECIFICALLY to the CA Streets & Highway Code Sections
891.4 (A-K) (BTA). Stating compliance to BTA alone is a rather weak statement. 2) On Page 13
Section 2.1 "Caltrans Bikeway Classification". While somewhat a correct statement the legal
classification of California Bikeways is codified (i.e. law) in the Streets & Highway Code Section
890.4. We at Caltrans only incorporated the S&H Code into our guidelines. It would be more
appropriate to quote that section and in fact download it and past it into your doucment.
3)Unfortunately, the maps shown on page 16, 66 and 67 do not adequately show your plans
interconnectivity to the bike facilities in the towns that surround your city. This plan could be
greatly enhanced by showing such interconnectivity the the bike facilities of the surrounding
towns. There more facilities than just Venice Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevards.
1), 2) We will add a more specific references to the code, per your
suggestions.
3) We will update the maps to show the bicycle facilities that currently
exist in the adjacent areas of the City and County of Los Angeles and
connect to our facilities. For regional bicycle connectivity, refer to Metro'
May 2010 map. We are not including them in this document, but will
make reference to them.
2 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
4)Page 30 (Design & Layout). This section needs to be completely rewritten.The reference to the
California MUTCD is very week and there is no mention of the mandatry design standards
developed within Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual for bikeway design.
Specifically, the Streets and Highway Code (Sections 890.6, 890.8 and 891) specify that bikeway
design, signs and striping must comply to standards developed by Caltrans. Pg 72. The photo
shows a Share the Road sign that is NOT approved in the CA MUTCD. Please replace that
photograph with one that shows a combination of the CA MUTCD approved signs (a
combination of W11-1 & W16-1). Page 82-85 Comment only - your local air pollution control
district may be another source for bicycle facility finding. Up here in Fresno it is a major source
of funds. Page 89 Complete Streets. This paragraph is weak. Beginning in 2011 local agencies will
be required by AB-1358 to begin fully implementing their Complete Streets program. A copy of
AB-1358 in an Addendum would be appropriate. Page 94 - Bike Parking. The new national
standard for bike parking has been developed by a professional bike/ped organizatio I belong to -
the APBP (www.apbp.org). The City would be wise to adopt this standard (though your Bike
Plan or a separate Relolution)as the City's standards for bike parking. General Comment - Do
you city's buses have bike racks on them. If not this is a good place to list such a program for
CMAQ and or BTA funding. Hope this information is useful.
4) We will add more specific language as needed, per your suggestion, and
replace the share the road picture. We will explore the funding options
available through Southern California Air Quality Management District.
We believe the representation of the Complete Streets Act in the
document is appropriate given the timeline for the Plan. We will review
and consider recommending the APBP standards. All City buses have dua
racks on them.
3 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
First, thank you for your efforts to make Culver City more Bicycle and Pedestrian friendly. My
comments are focused primarily on bicycle access and mobility. 1. The plan seems to consider
Culver City in isolation rather than in its context with nearby cities and a community of riders
who enter, leave or pass through the City on bicycles. Venice Boulevard is one major connector
and thoroughfare that already has a designated bike lane and is heavily used. There are two other
major thoroughfares, Culver Blvd. and Jefferson Blvd. that could handle an equal amount of
bicycle traffic and could probably be marked without significant changes to the existing
infrastructure. These major arteries also pass by the destinations most cyclists would like to
reach. 2. The concept of the "Bicycle Friendly Street" should be scrapped. It could easily become
either an excuse to do nothing on the ground that the City is already 'Bicycle Friendly.' Instead,
the plan should recognize these streets as readily available for simple and cost-effective
conversion to bikeways or sharrrows to be designated with appropriate signage and street
markings. Major roadway improvements should focus on where these streets intersect with major
vehicle roadways. 3. Use the Safe Routes to Schools program to make each school site act as a sort
of 'bicycle transportation hub' so that bike/pedestrian routes and signage expand outward from
each 'hub' to the residential areas AND to commercial destination points in the downtown area,
Fox Hills and the Jefferson/Sepulveda commercial area. 4. The City needs to get the Police
Department on board with this initiative. Police hostility to cyclists (which I've not witnessed,
but only heard of) will mean that enforcement of new ordinances or street and lane markings ma
be lax. 5. Educate, educate, educate.
1. Culver and Jefferson are included in the proposed network with bicycle
facilities that can be accommodated within the existing configuration of
the street and in compliance with the California Design Standards and
approved Guidelines. If in the future roadway conditions change, bicycle
facilities will be reanalyzed at that time.
2. We now propose to make the Bicycle Friendly Street designation after
further traffic engineering analysis and implementation of identified
improvements.
3. The Plan calls for the pursuit of grant funding and the staffing of a
mobility coordinator to oversee such programs. However, the purpose of
the Safe Routes to Schools program is to provide access to schools
specifically. The plan does provide linkages between the school sites and
surrounding residential and commercial areas.
4. The Police Dept. has been involved in the Plan through its participation
in the Technical Advisory Committee.
5. An education program for adults, children, and City staff is a
component of the Plan.
I feel Blair Hills is left stranded in this plan. We would like to be able to let our son ride his bike
to the middle school but feel there is no safe route for him to get to the Ballona Creek Bikeway.
Jefferson Blvd between Rodeo and Duquesne is marked as a 40mph zone but drivers rip through
there at 60-65mph. There is no bike lane indicated and a rider must ride pass all the parked cars
and pray the speeding cars see them. I understand that access to the Ballona Creek Bikeway at
Higuera is being considered. I hope it becomes a reality soon and that access to the path from
Blair Hills is indicated. Please remember us in Blair Hills and know we love riding ours bikes. Give
us a safe route for our son to take to school and we will have one less car on the road during rush
hour.
The route from Blair Hills to the bike path requires traveling though the
City of Los Angeles. The City of Los Angeles is not governed by this Plan.
The plan will be modified to designate the Culver City segment of
Lenawee Ave. and portion of Wrightcrest Drive to Blair Hills Park as a
Bike Route, with Sharrows where allowed. The City has previously sent a
letter commenting on the Draft LA City Bike Plan asking that they
connect to our facilities.
4 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
June 18, 2010 Submitted online via http://ccwalkbike.org/public_input/ Comments to the Culver
City Draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Thank you for all of the hard work that has gone
into the draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. City staff, consultants and community
members deserve much gratitude for all the time that has been invested in this timely project. As
a frequent visitor to Culver City and long-time bicycle advocate (10 years on LA Co. Bicycle
Coalition board of directors, now retired) I have been eagerly awaiting Culver City's adoption of
an ambitious bicycle master plan. There is much good work contained in the Draft Plan but it is
held back by a reluctance to implement the transformative changes needed to make cycling a
safe, inviting, convenient travel option. The Plan's initiatives focus mainly on the easy stuff. If we
are serious about making cycling a convenient choice for greater numbers of residents and
visitors to get around, we need to expand on the good framework that this plan provides and
significantly rebalance how our roads are designed. Below is a summary of some of what's needed.
Bike Lanes on Washington Blvd. to/from the Expo Station and downtown,
while desirable, are not presently feasible without the removal of street
parking and travel or turn lanes or the acquisition of private property.
The current Washington Blvd. striping plan resulted from required traffic
mitigation to reduce traffic incursion into the residential neighborhood to
the south. Changes to the street would require detailed traffic
engineering analysis. Washington Blvd is recommended as a bike route
with Sharrows (where allowed) in this segment, which will help
accommodate the more confident bicyclists apt to ride on arterial streets.
The Plan will be revised to add a new priority project to study the access
to and from the downtown area. This analysis would include the necessar
traffic engineering review.
Expo to Downtown Bicycle Connector This keystone physical project to establish useful bicycle
connectivity between the planned Expo station and Downtown Culver City falls short of
providing the convenience and safety needed to maximize the benefits this major public
investment offers. The obvious and most desirable route, Washington Blvd., could incorporate
bike lanes with the removal of approximately 15 on-street parking spaces on one side of the
street. This is a small price to pay to provide the valuable multi-modal link that is otherwise
lacking. The circuitous Expo-Downtown routes proposed in the Draft Plan are excessively long,
inconvenient and will be frustrating to use. It is inevitable that many cyclists will choose to use
Washington, and the lack of dedicated on-road space for them sets the stage for conflicts with
motor vehicles. The Wesley, Lucerne Improvement Project is good and needed for general
neighborhood bicycle connectivity. But this is no substitute for the direct connection that
Washington provides between Expo and Downtown. Both are needed. Downtown cycling issues
Downtown is the major destination in the city and as such must have better bicycle access from
surrounding communities and connectivity within it. The large intersections on Washington and
Culver Boulevards must be traversed for cyclists to get through this area but they present special
hazards. More attention must be paid to revising the design of these intersections to make them
safer for cycling. Bicycle Parking Downtown Culver City, other commercial districts and
shopping centers are in short supply of secure bicycle parking.
5 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Racks must be sited in locations with pervasive pedestrian activity, near entrances and away from
easy automobile access (bike thieves often use motor vehicles to escape with their booty).
Cyclists are customers just like car drivers, they reduce parking demand and relieve congestion.
The plan needs to go farther to attract them with safe, pervasive and convenient bicycle parking.
Washington Blvd. from Centinela to Washington Place The bike lanes proposed for other parts
of Washington will be a great improvement, but this segment remains problematic. In particular,
the intersection of Washington and Washington Place is very hazardous for cyclists with no good
alternative routes for reaching destinations on this boulevard. Additional measures are needed to
accommodate cyclists here. If and when Washington undergoes refurbishment, new designs
should embrace a Complete Streets approach that provides road space, safety and amenities for
all road users, not just automobiles. Sharrows The several proposals to install sharrows are a great
start. The city should take full advantage of them even on streets that do not have on-street
parking. Presumptions about possible liability issues (which occur very rarely) if they are used on
streets without parking must be balanced with the very real safety advantages that these
innovative awareness markings will bring 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
The Plan will further address the placement of bicycle parking. Bike lanes
have been proposed on Washington Blvd where the road configuration
allows. In other locations, sharrows have been proposed.
Sharrows are currently recommended for the stretch of Washington Blvd
that meets the requirements under the CAMUTCD (namely, they must
be adjacent on-street parking). However, the City will reconsider street
designations when the CAMUTCD is updated in approximately two
years.
Ballona Creek Trail Access and Safety How much longer should we tolerate the unsubstantiated
concerns of trail adjacent neighbors holding the rest of city hostage to their outdated views?
Culver City Police acknowledge that the trail is a low-crime area when compared with streets.
Similar trails throughout the U.S. have much greater access without the grave problems some
here presume will follow. Long stretches have only locked gates where access is needed. The lack
of pervasive access limits the usefulness of the trail for everyone, makes it less safe, hampers
emergency access and law enforcement. The Plan needs a strategy to initiate greater trail access
with mechanisms to deal with any issues that may arise for nearby neighbors. In addition, the
Plan should describe a strategy for improving trail safety with increased patrols, improved
lighting (especially in underpasses) security cameras where warranted and safety awareness
campaigns. Need for an ongoing Advisory Committee It should be clear from this process that
citizen input is crucial to creating a top-quality plan that meets the needs of all road users. It
should also be apparent that our work is not done. Implementation will require many decisions
on design details and revisions to meet our goals of creating a truly bicycle and pedestrian
friendly community. The Plan should include policies for establishing a permanent bicycle and
pedestrian advisory committee. Again, thank you for all of the good work in the Draft Plan and
for the opportunity to comment.
The Plan addresses perceived safety concerns and proposes placing
volunteers on the Ballona Creek Path. Also, the Ballona Creek issues will
be addressed in greater detail in the final draft. The Plan does not include
a recommendation for an advisory committee. Public input can be
provided to the Public Works Department Administration Division, the
Mobility Coordinator (when created), the City's Traffic Committee or to
the City Council.
6 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Page 10: Table 1.1 is blank Page 11: You say BPMP reallocates motor vehicle resources for bike/ped,
but this plan pointedly does NOT do this. It's all grant-based from bike/ped funding sources. All
proposed projects prioritize existing road layouts despite glaring gaps in the proposed network.
Page 16: Ballona Creek Path should continue west into City of LA Page 26: Table appears to have a
lot of errors in the numbers and arithmetic. Mode shares of 0, future results lower than current,
etc. Page 34: page is duplicated Page 37: Metro bikes on rail policy is out of date--no longer
restricted hours Page 45: Top concern is vehicle speeds; plan claims to address this. Nowhere is a
speed limit lowered or traffic calming mentioned besides being possible in the future. If the plan
doesn't slow down cars, don't claim it does. Page 58: Mentioned at the workshop for Ballona Cre
was coordination with law enforcement dispatch to identify landmarks/mileage marks so that
path users can tell their location. Page 69: Should mention that poorly placed speed trailers on
right side of lane are often hazards for bikes. Page 74: Special events section should mention
weekly farmers market in downtown. Page 75: Plan should suggest a possible location for Ciclovi
Page 10, Table 1.1 is not blank, it contains project goals.
Page 11 The city's budget does not include funding to implement the
recommended programs and projects, so grant funding must be pursued.
The network is designed to connect bicyclists and pedestrians to activity
centers, schools, commercial locations, and other trip generating
destinations. Through public input and fieldwork, a system was designed
so that users would not have to travel more than a 1/3 of a mile to get to a
facility.
Page 16 The Bike Path will be extended into the City of LA on the map.
Page 26 Mode shares were rounded, which makes them appear to be zero
if they are under 0.5. This will be changed in the final version.
Page 34 The duplicate page will be removed in the final version.
Page 37 We will confirm the peak hour restrictions.
Page 45 This description will be revised as traffic calming can only be done
after traffic engineering analysis and thus is not recommended for specific
locations in this Plan.
Page 58 This will be added to the final version.
Page 69 Mention of the importance of correct placement will be added to
the final version.
Page 74 The final version will mention the Farmer's Market as an example
of a possible event for bike valet.
7 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Page 92: The workshops had a comment about locating cuts in the pavement for utility work
away from where a bike would ride to reduce vertical grooves. Also a policy to restore pavement
quality to pre-cut condition. Neither are mentioned. Page 98: Should recommend doing an officia
pilot of sharrows w/o on-street parking. We know it will become standard in the future. Gaps on
Washington Blvd along Sony are a speedway without some kind of pavement marking. Also, is
periodic on-street parking going westbound from Duquesne to Overland on Washington, so
should have sharrows in that direction at least. Page 99: Overland has on-street parking north of
Culver. Should be sharrows. Page 103 (Bike Map): Maintain sharrows connecting Washington
through downtown. Streets have some parking on most blocks, and markings should be
continuous. The downtown zig-zag is particularly hazardous and bikes need all the help they can
get. Also p103: Somewhere should specifically address making Higuera street closure through for
bicycles as part of BFS. Page 108: Overland should be considered one project, even if different
markings have to be used (which they shouldn't). Would not make sense to do it at different
times. Page 113: Why does section of Overland along Sony w/ on-street parking not qualify for
sharrows? Page 121: On Washington, many of the crossings are red for peds unless activated,
requiring peds to wait through at least one light cycle at every intersection--it's a pain. This was
mentioned at the workshops.
Page 92 This will be added to the section describing the workshop. The
plan will be revised to state that the City will explore revising its
standards to require full repair of cuts in designated Bike Lanes.
Page 98 The Plan does not recommend such a pilot. Pilots are currently
underway in other areas and the City will consider such treatments when
they are approved under the CAMUTCD.
Page 99 Sharrows will be considered for this location.
Page 103 Sharrows will only be placed where there is on-street parking.
Thus, some stretches of Washington Blvd do not support sharrows at this
time. Requiring the Higuera diverter to be modified to allow through
bike movement would require detailed traffic engineering and physical
design changes. The plan will be revise to add this analysis as a future
project.
Page 108 Projects were not necessarily intended to include entire streets,
but rather key segments.
Page 113 Same as p. 99 comment.
Page 121 This suggestion will be considered.
As a member of the Culver City Green Ordinance Advisory Committee, a Culver City resident, a
bicycle commuter to and from Culver City, Santa Monica, and Downtown LA, and as an Architec
involved in development projects in Culver City, I would like to see the Planning Department
reduce the car parking requirement in certain areas designated for high density. For example, on
my street, Helms Ave, south of Washington, most of the lots are designated as RMD, which
allows up to four 3-BR units on 6500 sf lots. However, the Planning code requires 9 parking
spaces on such lots, which means that parking is forced either fully underground or semi-
subterranean. This elevates costs to a substantial degree, and, at least in my case, has prevented
realization of at least one development project for financial reasons. Part of encouraging cycling
and the use of alternative means of transportation is to actively discourage the use of the private
automobile. An easing of the parking requirements makes ecological, financial, and urban
planning sense.
The reduction of required on-site parking is not with in the scope of the
Plan. However, the plan will be modified to incorporate exploring the
potential for reducing required parking for development, if additional
bicycle parking above required bike parking is provided.
8 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
First of all, it’s a great document, all the teams did a great job compiling and generating the
package. Excellent results. Safe routes to school. Adding to my comments above, I support the
safe routes to school initiative. Unfortunately, 3 major schools (Farragut Elementary, and Culver
City Middle and High Schools) are located near the inside corner of Elenda and Farragut,
meaning that over half of the school age children in Culver City converge on a single sided entry
of 3 blocks within a 2 hour period every morning between 7 and 9 am.
Network access to schools will be addressed during the revisions.
Addressing the Los Angeles gaps:
2 main north/south routes are missing from this study because of unincorporated LA gaps. The
Sawtelle Bike and Pedestrian Corridor starts at Venice and stops at Braddock, rather than
continuing through LA and picking up again after crossing Ballona Creek. Because of this we miss
all of Sawtelle as it curves up to Sepulveda and continues to Overland near El Rincon Elementary.
Additionally, there are numerous pedestrian crossings that are required to cross Sawtelle to serve
El Marino.
This similarly happens with Sepulveda as it crosses into LA near the McDonalds and doesn’t com
back into Culver City after Ballona Creek.
If this document could address the existence of these gaps, stating that this draft only covers
Culver City, but that we envision a linking through adjacent LA City and Unincorporated areas
to provide a continuous pedestrian and bicycle network. That would allow the adding of large
swaths of Sawtelle and Sepulveda that are missing from this document.
The Plan will address the limitations of the network, including challenges
presented by jurisdictional boundaries and private property. The City did
provided written comments during the City of LA Bike Plan Update
requesting that they included connections to our proposed network. We
will provide similar comments to LA County if their draft update does not
include connections.
Bicycle Project 3: Farragut Drive…
Add Culver City Middle School to the list of schools (sentence to say: direct access to Culver City
High and Middle Schools, and Farragut Elementary.
The text will be mentioned in this section.
9 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Pedestrian Project 1: Braddock Drive…
I would like to see the crossings at the 2 arterials: Sepulveda and Overland better addressed.
Currently my children cross Sepulveda on Braddock in the morning and afternoon to go to the
MS/HS, and have near-miss collisions from automobiles turning right from Sepulveda to
Braddock. I’m sure this similarly happens at Overland and Braddock. Addressing no right turn
requirements during specific times (similar to Washington and Elenda for La Ballona), will help
mitigate this issue.
The proposed project will be revised to include analysis of these
intersections to address this comment.
It is really exciting to see progress in making Culver City more walk and bike-friendly, and I
really like the way the BPMP takes into account many different factors and facets of this very
complicated issue. In addition to the specifics of the plan, I think it is really useful and helpful to
have the document that compiles so much information into one place and is a good resource and
tool in general. And, of course, I also like the way the plan really does make progress and
improvements in safety and access in ways that are, as these things go, relatively easy to
implement, so this means that real improvements are within reach.
Longer-term/ideal Goals
Since the current plan cannot reasonably include every desired ultimate improvement, it would
be good to include a section of desired improvements that are not feasible at the current time,
but are conceivable as potential future improvements/goals. This can be used to guide future
development, and also as a record to provide some continuity in the future and prevent wasted
time/energy as the issue is revisited.
We will add some longer term goals and an expanded description of the
Plan's vision in the final version.
Tracking/Responding to Public Comments
At the BPMP public workshops and through the website, members of the public had
opportunities to make suggestions, share their experiences, etc. It would be very helpful for
these comments to be collated, responded to, etc. This would serve a variety of important
functions: it would help demonstrate to members of the public that their feedback had been
received, considered, etc., even if the comment expressed a desire for some change that was
impossible, for example, it would be very helpful for people to know the reasons, both to
understand the complexity of the issue, and to know that they had been "heard", also a record of
public comments would help make the process more efficient and avoid repetition.
This document addresses the public comments and will be incorporated
into the Plan.
Related to this -- it would be helpful to have a FAQ list on the website (e.g. why there can't be a
bike lane on Washington at his time, can we remove the low gates at the bike path access points,
etc., etc.)
As mentioned above, this document addresses the public request portion
of the BPMP Planning process. Also, if the City is successful in funding
and hiring a mobility coordinator, that staff member could be tasked with
maintaining an FAQ component of the website.
10 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
City Commitment
I think it is important that one outcome of the BPMP process be that bike/walk issues become
more salient in the City in general. This raised profile for biking/walking would mean that
whenever construction and development in the city (both private and public) is considered,
these issues are featured prominently. I think this is important for overcoming the systemic
bias in favor of car travel, and for efficiency and compliance in projects that involve different City
departments.
This idea is what is behind the BPMP in general, and the Complete Streets idea too, and the hirin
of a City staff person who would oversee these issues, but I think the plan would be strengthened
if there were some language specifically about this, including specific discussion about the City's
commitment to the issue and how this is now something that becomes part of the picture
throughout the City.
This comment is addressed through the City's adoption of the concept of
Complete Streets and administered through the proposed hiring of the
mobility coordinator. Also, the final version of the document will contain
a revised vision statement aimed at better articulating the City's
commitment.
Physical Examples
It would be very helpful for people to see actual examples of, for example, a "Complete Street" (a
few blocks of Washington Blvd, somewhere between La Cienega and Helms? -- ties in with Expo
construction?), and a Bike-Friendly Street (part of SRTS?). The City could aim to develop some
smaller sections of streets as a demonstration/showcase, even just a few blocks long.
The final document will include a case study on Complete Streets from
another jurisdiction. Also, as the City begins implementing the Plan, it
will naturally occur in stages, providing a template for future
improvements.
Data Collection/Analysis
The Evaluation part of the BPMP, and is really important and it's good to see it in the plan.
Collecting good data is very important, not just for evaluating the efficacy of improvements, but
for determining the need for further improvements, and crucially for being able to discuss the
issues in an informed way, e.g. what will the projected results be of proposed changes? This also
has the potential to be a useful tool at helping implement future improvements, e.g. if merchants
knew how much increased foot traffic there would be projected to be in a particular location, or
how many people might actually walk or bike between two locations and combine errands if
there were a safe way to do it, etc. Part of the BPMP then should include the collection and
analysis of good data about the issue.
A recommendation on scheduled evaluation will be included in the final
version of the document.
11 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Also, the BPMP, reasonably, includes discussion of data collected from the public workshops and
online surveys, but the actual response rate is very low. It's simply not a representative sample.
It is important then for the City to continue to work to collect data on issues related to
biking/walking.
In the Plan, we note that the data we collected from public workshops,
online surveys, etc. are likely not representative of the community as a
whole. However, gathering data via other means (such as phone surveys,
etc.) was not within the Plan's budget, and we believe the data collected is
still instructive. Getting updated data will be a responsibility of the
proposed mobility coordinator.
Expo Light Rail Construction
It seems that there is still much that is unknown about specifics related to Expo-related
construction and development. This project is really important for transportation in (and
to/from) CC. e.g. the intersection of Washington and National, and the area near there, is
undergoing major changes, pedestrian access across National (more or less between La Cienega
and Washington) is currently blocked, but under transition, the Kronenthal Park entrance to the
Ballona Creek bike path is currently closed, etc.
Although issues related to the construction are relatively temporary, they will continue for at
least another year? two years? Bike/walk issues should be prominently considered during this
time of construction, in addition to, of course, keeping them in mind as development progresses.
The light rail is such an important potential change in CC transportation issues, so it is importan
that bike/walk issues are kept salient as this construction/development progresses.
The City is in close communication with Expo. Bicycles and pedestrians
are an important consideration in construction. However, there are
limitations due to road width and construction requirements that may
temporarily adversely affect travel, both motorized and non-motorized.
Incentives
In addition to actual physical changes to facilitate biking and walking, it is also necessary to really
change people's behavior. To this end, incentives and encouragement of various kinds are
necessary. Some will come naturally through improving the environment and infrastructure for
walking/biking, but there is good evidence that offering actual incentives/rewards, even small
ones is very helpful. The Outreach Subcommittee has offered some suggestions to this end, but it
is important for the City to work to find creative solutions in this area.
The programs recommended in the BPMP address the non-infrastructure
encouragement programs that can be explored in Culver City.
2. Smaller Issues
The proposed networks go quite near to, but don't include two areas that would seem to be good
candidates for inclusion:
El Marino School and Park (includes elementary school, preschool, high school, park)
The plan will be revised to designate Bike Route, with Sharrows where
appropriate, connecting to El Marino area.
Howard Hughes Promenade shopping area
It seems they should be incorporated.
The Promenade is not within Culver City's borders, and thus this Plan
does not address it specifically.
p. 43, Wesley -- missing Saturday data? Not all locations were able to be staffed by volunteers for the three
observation periods.
12 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
p. 57, The comparison of CC collision/accident statistics to Santa Monica is given somewhat
randomly (it seems). What is the basis for the comparison? Population? Demographics?
Geographic size? It is confusing because it seems like an unlike comparison. Whatever the
population, etc., Santa Monica has much more foot/bike traffic than CC (many tourists, more
development of a kind that encourages bike/ped traffic, beach proximity (including
walking/biking path along beach), so it is not surprising that they have more collisions. The
relevant comparison would be to an area with similar numbers of bikers/walkers. If this is true
of Santa Monica, this should be explained explicitly, if it is not true, it seems to not be the right
point of comparison.
Santa Monica was chosen for its proximity and size. However, we will
revisit this section in the final version of the document.
p 68, Toronto "trail ambassador" link broken
This link seems to be one that does lead to the program that is mentioned:
http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/ratsa/index.htm
We will fix this link in the final version.
p. 91, What does it mean to add walking to "preferential parking"? We will revise this in the final version.
p. 3: Executive Summary
"An analysis of collision statistics over the past five years indicated the relative safety of bicycling
and walking throughout the city."
- relative safety may also reflect current reality of limited biking in city (as more ride, barring
improvement, accidents may increase)
The relative safety was determined though a comparison of local collision
data to state data. We will revise this in the final version.
p. 7, plan will be updated every 5yrs > how does that work? who updates? what resources allocated
for this process? will there be an assessment of how the plan is working so far? will there be a
chance for public input (other than before Council, which is limited to 3 minute sound bytes)?
will there be a dedicated person to address comments/concerns from the public in between
updates? who will see through implementation?
The Public Works Department(PWD) will be responsible for the
implementation of the Plan. The PWD Administration Division will be
initially tasked to work on activities designated for the proposed mobility
coordinator until the position can be created, funded and filled. Public
Works will work with Planning, Police, and other relevant parties on
implementation. Bicycle plans must be updated every five years to be
BTA compliant. However, the details of this update will be determined
based on available resources at that time. Evaluation criteria are included
in the Plan.
p 91, "Open Space Element of the Culver City General Plan discusses sponsoring bikeways.
Bikeway sponsorship involves the placement of advertising signage along bikeways, with revenues
typically going into a general maintenance fund.
Recommendation – Implement a bikeways sponsorship program. Revenue could be used towards
maintenance costs and security improvements."
I strongly recommend against this 1) Culver City has a billboard ordinance (= no billboards), 2)
potential danger (in conflict/competition with recommended way-finding signage
If this program is implemented, compliance with existing ordinances,
community aesthetics, and safety will all be considered in the design
guidelines.
p. 92 > hiring a Culver City mobility coordinator YAY! If we have the right person, this would
guarantee the success of this plan (ongoing assessment of BPMP).
The proposed mobility coordinator has the potential to be a very valuable
resource.
13 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
p. 94 > "Add pedestrian facilities at areas with high pedestrian activity. Pedestrian facilities can
include (but are not limited to) enhanced maintenance schedules, widening sidewalks, lengthen
crosswalk times, bulbouts, high visibility crosswalks, benches, street trees, water fountains, etc."
what about traffic calming? one reason for not walking in certain areas (example WA Blvd. from
Metro-to-be to Downtown) - cars going too fast - loud, dusty, perceived or real safety concerns
(kids). A counter example is Downtown CC: part of creating pedestrian friendly environment
went beyond trees, benches & public art (which, I agree are very important), it included
increased pedestrian crossings, improved crosswalk signals (easy to press, countdown signals,
beeping), and a whole new traffic pattern.
Enhanced pedestrian friendly designs are included in all pedestrian
corridors, and traffic calming features will be considered after traffic
engineering analysis approval.
p 96 > illustration of sharrow (discussed during last PAC workshop) which one gets cyclists out of
door zone? bike lane or sharrow? I've heard conflicting answers to this question.
Minimum design standards place bicyclists outside of the door zone in
most circumstances, but do not account for the variables of human
behavior. Facilities do not absolve bicyclists of their responsibility to be
alert of the potential hazard of opening car doors. That being said,
whether bike lanes or Sharrows are preferable depends on the individual
situation.
pp. 98-99 > significant care has been made in the draft plan to add lanes/sharrows only where they
can be installed without significant improvements/road work.
What is the purpose of this plan, to aspire only to the limitations of today? - or to make a road
plan for the future (under different economic circumstances, political will & environmental
priorities)? I think this plan has very successfully presented the low-hanging fruit (concrete
projects that can realistically be achieved in a 5-year span). This is indeed important, however, we
also need to reach for the summit. The plan needs to demonstrate vision. We have spent
significant time, money, care - blood sweat and tears, if you will - on this plan. We have an
amazing amount of information, comments and desire on the part of the community and our
partners in this plan. We need to set out long term goals based on this information. It is neither
efficient nor is it satisfactory to put off real vision until the update in 5 years. It does not make
sense to be so unambitious.
The BPMP is the first step in transforming Culver City into a place that
accommodates more bicycle and pedestrian travel. It will be a tool for the
City to work within the confines of available funding mechanisms, its own
physical environment, and the will of the citizens. However, the vision
section of the document will be revisited in the final version.
p. 99 > signage not very effective - more distinctive? visible? Signage will be used according to the latest standards and best practices in
bicycle and pedestrian way finding.
14 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
p. 100 > "Bicycle Friendly Streets will include—at a minimum—standard bicycle route signage,
and may also include custom signage, Shared Lane Markings, and where determined through
future engineering analysis traffic calming features. As funding will allow Bicycle Friendly Streets
will be analyzed after implementation to see if additional traffic calming measure should be
implemented." Traffic calming shouldn't be such a low priority. If we're encouraging people to
bike and walk, signs are not going to make it safe or possible to do so - only traffic calming will. If
they're not "friendly" they cant be called "friendly." School Board member Scott Zeidman's son got
run over on Farragut (called bike friendly street, p 101) - it is, in my view, irresponsible to
promote biking w/out making it safe. Stronger language - stronger priority.
Traffic calming installations will be implemented after traffic engineering
analysis deems them appropriate. Additionally, traffic calming is not the
only method of encouraging bicyclists to ride or making a street safer for
bicyclists. The Programs section addresses these situations when
infrastructure may be less effective.
Does bike lane in Fox Hills connect to Antioch College? (College should be marked on legend.)
Will there be sufficient bike parking in Westfield?
Antioch College will be added to the map. The Bike Lane on Hannum Ave
would provide access to Antioch College area. Bike parking in private
development is dictated by Zoning Code. Now that Westfield is
completed, it is challenging to require additional bike parking. However,
the recommendation for increased bicycle parking will be passed on to the
Planning Division. The commenter is also encouraged to contact
Westfield directly and request that additional bike parking be provided.
p. 105 proximity to schools - add Antioch Antioch College will be added.
p. 112 > WA Blvd., overall vision of TOD (Transit Oriented District) from RDV (Redevelopment
Agency) - cohesion/cooperation/sharing resources
share plan w RDV - look at possible shared resources & potential conflicts
The City has and will continue to work with the RDA on bicycle planning.
113 > Overland, high speed zone - if we can't do traffic calming we need to do major enforcement -
Priority safety study - look @ not only bike/ped accident stats, but car accident stats - if speed
not addressed, will not be safe
Overland Ave will be evaluated for the placement of bike lanes between
the Ballona Creek Path and Culver Blvd.
114 > Farragut also Middle School access (add to description) high traffic volume - significant
school traffic - this is where child struck (S. Zeidman)
We will add Middle School access to the description.
p 115 > Jefferson: safe access to WLAC (West L.A. College) & condos (ability for bikes to turn
left)? Glass & debris major problem along Jefferson for bikes, there's also a visibility issue for cars
going into/out of business driveways.
Jefferson Blvd is swept regularly. And features bike lanes and signage in
various segments
p 116 > Braddock - needs traffic calming Traffic calming will be implemented only after traffic engineering analysis
deems it appropriate.
I'm attaching the doc I passed out at the 6/3 meeting. It's a draft of a Policy idea to improve
safety at dangerous intersections. I wrote it with downtown in mind. The Biking Subcommittee
endorsed it in April. I'm not attached to specifics, but just hope for some policy to encourage
motorists to share the lanes with bikes, targeted toward "challenging locations."
Signage indicating that bicycles may use the entire lane and colored
sharrows are not currently approved devices. If and when they are
approved, the City will examine appropriate locations for their
installation, focusing on "challenging locations" among other things.
15 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
I hope Ron has passed on to you the other items we supported at our April Biking Subcommittee
meeting. We endorsed a Cyclist's Bill of Rights and also a policy to conduct an ongoing survey of
bike parking in the city to respond to the need for it.
The spirit of the Cyclist's Bill of Rights is injected into the BPMP with the
attention to complete streets and an equal transportation system for all
visitors and residents of Culver City, though not adopted verbatim. The
BPMP has been amended to include language that recognizes that cyclists
have the right to and may use all roadways.
Goals
To promote the safe and confident use of existing traffic lanes by bicyclists by
1) defining the roadway as a "shared resource", and by
2) informing and reminding all vehicle drivers of the need to share the traffic lanes.
The vision statement will be revised. Approved signage will be used,
where appropriate, to remind drivers of their responsibility to share the
road as described in the Plan.
Objectives
To improve driver and cyclists' safety by clearly and concisely making drivers aware of the law
regarding cyclists' rights to the roadway.
To identify locations within the city where cyclists are especially challenged by existing roadway
conditions, such as high traffic volume or narrow traffic lanes, and to increase drivers' awareness
of cyclists at these locations.
To encourage cyclists to ride safely and legally throughout the city, especially at the above-
mentioned challenging locations.
The BPMP identifies programs and infrastructure that focuses on
education of bicyclists and motorists. The BPMP identifies places where
pedestrian and bicyclist collisions have occurred in the past five years, and
seeks to address these areas of the City through education and prioritized
projects.
16 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Policy
The city will take actions to generally increase drivers' awareness of cyclists in the roadway, and
their right to use the full lane when conditions warrant it.
Additionally, the city will identify locations of special concern for cyclists on the roadway.
Concerns will include a high traffic volume or speeds, narrow traffic lanes, limited visibility, or
special circumstances requiring cyclists to cross lanes of traffic. Priority will be given to areas
where there is not a convenient alternative route for cyclists to reach destinations.
These "locations of special concern" will be studied to assess the potential for improving safety.
Remedies will be considered and applied with the the clear intention of making the roadway
safer, in accord with requirements and restrictions of California law and codes.
The recommended on-street facilities will encourage bicyclists to legally
use the roadway. When available funding permits, education programs
can instruct bicyclists on when it is permissible to utilize the entire travel
lane. As mentioned in the comment above, programs and recommended
infrastructure address the areas where multiple bicycle and pedestrian
collisions were reported. The BPMP has been revised to identify the
following locations where the roadway configurations may be unusually
challenging for cyclists; Downtown Culver City Washington Bl., between
Overland Ave. and Downtown; Sepulveda Bl., between Centinela Ave. and
Playa St./Jefferson Bl.; Jefferson Bl, between Sepulveda Bl. and Duquesne
Ave.; and, La Cienega Bl. These areas will be analyzed in the future to
identify ways to make these areas less challenging for cyclist to navigate.
Implementation
City will develop a toolkit of actions that may be applied consistently at various locations.
However, each location will be studied for its specific needs; all remedies will be site-specific and
appropriate to road conditions.
City will develop appropriate signage that conveys that cyclists are allowed to use the full traffic
lane. This signage may be used where appropriate, and where it will be considered helpful to
cyclists' safety.
City will adopt a preferred pavement marking for roadways that challenge cyclists, such as a
colored Class 2 Bike Lane, or a colored Sharrows pathway, with the intention of both encouraging
cyclists to ride in a defined portion of the roadway, and increasing driver awareness of cyclists in
the roadway.
The city may develop other applications to be used where appropriate to improve driver and
cyclist safety.
The city will install devices at locations that may benefit from increased driver awareness.
Signage indicating that bicycles may use the entire lane and colored
sharrows are not currently approved devices. If and when they are
approved, the City will examine appropriate locations for their
installation, focusing on "challenging locations" among other things.
17 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
These are designed to supplement the original list of recommendations from 1/30/10. We feel this
aspect is vital to the plan, since it is important to find creative and effective ways to really change
people's behavior, in addition to physical changes that facilitate walking/biking.
city staff person/mobility coordinator in charge of walk/bike issues is great idea, and could
coordinate many of outreach efforts suggested by Outreach Subcommittee below, and also
suggestions made in late January (e.g. website updates on walk/bike issues, current status of
walk/bike-related projects, email blasts re: walk/bike issues to those who've expressed interest,
coordination with SRTS, etc.)
Yes. This is the intent of the proposed mobility coordinator.
# employer education/incentives to create policies that promote non-auto commuting to work --
find ways to encourage employers to do this
* assist companies with small incentives to give to employees. etc
* City program to awards/acknowledgment of local businesses that increase the % of
employees who commute to work without driving
* offer bike education class at major employers in the City
financial incentives, even relatively small tokens, e.g. partial rebates for helmet purchases, small
gift certificates to local businesses
education/outreach to assist people learn about utilitarian biking/walking (how to carry things,
multi-modal connections for partial bike/walk trips)
bike safety/repair/education courses offered through Culver City Living/Parks & Rec (The city
offers many fee-based programs for children -- camps, courses, etc., these could include some
bike education either short courses, or as components of longer courses.)
NOTE: these could be combined, e.g. participants who successfully complete bike course get $5
gift certificate for local bike store, etc.
pointers re: increasing utility of walking/biking, e.g. how to carry things, multi-modal
The City will also continue to look for opportunities to partner with
other organizations to promote and incentivize cycling. For example, as
part of a Safe Routes to School grant, the City may be able to work with
local schools to provide small prizes to school children. Also, the propose
mobility coordinator could work with volunteers and local businesses to
organize educational opportunities and fund prizes.
consider bike/walk column in local paper Though the proposed mobility coordinator would be able to provide
information for a column to be written.
* develop walk/bike "trip planners" available online and possibly as apps for mobile devices,
etc., possibly including Google Maps, to help people plan walk/bike trips, including amenities on
route, multi-modal connections, points of interest, etc.
This is already available through Google Maps, Metro, and other online
resources. The City will explore a permanent online presence for its
bicycle and pedestrian programs, implementation efforts and other
actions under the proposed mobility coordinator's supervision.
18 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
First of all, great job on getting that all together. The municipal code recommendations look
great, as does the prominence of "Complete Streets" in various places.
Two areas I think where we could go further are:
I. West CC -> Downtown: great improvements on Washington until Overland, where cyclists
should really be moved down to Culver Blvd, either along Overland or Elenda with signage. With
the comments on p28 regarding Washington for autos and Culver for peds, I think we
should consider slowing traffic on Culver Blvd, and make space for bike lanes, either by removing
parking by the studio or road diet. If we're really serious about this, autos should be "encouraged"
to move to Washington or Venice.
Washington and Culver Blvds., from Overland Ave through Downtown
will be studied in more detail. The BPMP has been revised to reflected
this project.
I. East CC -> Downtown: Extend Downtown area to be Madison-Ince (currently Madison-
>Main), so it includes the Washington/Ince intersection -- lots of peds here coming from that
parking structure, and more with the coming of the Expo line. That intersection is awful
for peds, both for signal timing and for safety. The larger issue is that the Washington Blvd.
corridor between Ince and Expo line is un-bikeable, due to the speed of cars and lack of shoulder.
The Downtown area (the “CD Zoning District” in the City’s Zoning
Ordinance and General Plan) includes Ince. Pedestrian Project 5 and
Bicycle Project 1 extend through the Washington/Ince intersection to the
Expo area. This intersection and corridor will be looked at again in the
final version of the report.
I would like to encourage the attendees at the meeting to think about what we want Culver City
to look like in 5, 10 years. If they agree with the vision of Culver City as a destination (where
people park and walk) rather than a thoroughfare that people use to get to somewhere
else, then hopefully there would be enough public support to de-prioritize automobile traffic on
both approaches to Downtown CC.
I don't know what the extent of public support would be, but it seems that if people think about
it, and decide that it's a good idea, then they should submit these comments and we can push the
BPMP just a bit further.
Washington and Culver Blvds., from Overland Ave through Downtown
will be studied in more detail. The BPMP has been revised to reflected
this project.
Take entire lane from on Washington from Downtown to the Beach for only bikes and buses The portion of Washington Blvd that is within Culver City and within the
jurisdiction of the Plan has been examined for bike facilities given
existing curb to curb widths.
Washington Pl: include this as a bikeway and coordinate with LA to fill the gap not in Culver
City (between Centinela and Sawtelle)
Washington Pl is a recommended bike lane in the BPMP, and the City of
LA has indentified it as a bike lane in its draft Plan.
Sepulveda: must put sharrows and bike lane (not just a route!) We have examined the use of Sharrows where feasible. Sharrows are
currently only approved for streets with a maximum speed limit of 35
miles per hour.
Sepulveda: sharrows and bike lane Same answer as previous.
19 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Sepulveda: bike parking The Plan addresses methods to increase the amount and quality of bicycle
parking and bike parking will be discussed further in the final draft of the
document.
Culver City HS: bike education for kids to start a bike culture (or popular thing to do) Bike education is addressed in the "Programs" section.
El Marino: needs better access to El Marino and high school and preschool. (See map for
suggested streets)
Schools will be examined additional bike/ped facilities, where feasible.
Connect bikeway on Playa St to West Fox Hills to the southwest Bicycle facilities have been proposed connecting Playa St. to the Fox Hills
area. An additional Bike Route has been added to the BPMP on Bristol
Parkway, between Slauson Ave. and Centinela Ave.
Make Sepulveda more bike friendly, especially at Fox Hills mall There are currently limited options available for making Sepulveda bike
friendly in this area given the existing curb to curb widths. The Plan is
intended to provide options for cyclists of all comfort levels, and some
cyclist may choose to use non-arterials over arterials like Sepulveda.
Jefferson: sharrows and bike lane on section just north of intersection with Sepulveda Sharrows and bike lanes have been proposed where feasible given speeds,
presence of on-street parking, and curb to curb widths.
Slauson: add sharrows and bike lane Current configurations of Slauson to not permit bike lanes or the standard
use of sharrows. An update to the CAMUTCD and a reduction in speed
limit would be necessary for a bike lane or shared lane marking on Slauson.
Intersection of Venice and Motor at wash - very dangerous! The intersection of Venice and Motor is within the City of Los Angeles.
The injury data shown on Figures 3-3 and 3-4 do not suggest that this area
is "dangerous."
Braddock Dr: repave the road Street maintenance is important for cyclists as mentioned in the Plan.
This recommendation will be passed on to engineering staff.
Add more access points to Ballona Creek (see map for suggested locations) The BPMP includes a new connection to the Ballona Creek at the Higuera
Street bridge. There aren't proposed new connections to the residential
area in the Plan, as we focused on the existing access points. However, the
City Council will be asked if they want to direct staff to further explore
opening additional access points to the Ballona Creek Bike Path.
Culver Blvd near Duquesne: flashing sign notifying motorists to slow down and signals set for 20
mph
A 20 mph zone in this area would be unlikely to be effective or
enforceable.
Ballona Creek at Duquesne: dangerous exit from path Changes to this area are under consideration.
Main St. should have bollards for Farmers Market days The final draft will address the farmers market and ways to make it more
pedestrian friendly and accessible.
20 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Culver Blvd: add sharrows from Duquesne to Sepulveda We will continue to examine the use of Sharrows where feasible.
However, there is currently a bike path from the westerly City boundary
to Elenda and some of the stretch between Elenda and Duquesne lacks on-
street parking and thus is not eligible for Sharrows under current
standards. However, where on-street parking does exist, the BPMP has
been revised to add Sharrows.
North of Ballona Creek (just east of Duquesne): staging area for the bike path, pavement
markings and striping
The final Plan will include a larger discussion of the Ballona Creek Path.
Braddock Dr, Farragut Dr, 95% of cars do not stop at stop sign The Plan includes recommendations for enforcement, which is an
important part of keeping all users of the road safe.
National Blvd and Wesley St: missing school Schools will be added in the final version of the document.
Washington Blvd near intersection with Culver: 20 mph zone (for bikes and ped) for CARS A 20 mph zone in this area would be unlikely to be effective or
enforceable, since it would not meet the 85 percent rule (see
http://www.ite.org/standards/speed_zoning.pdf for more information on
the 85 percent rule). This segment of Washington Bl. will be analyzed
further for potential improvements.
At Expo Station: bike storage, bike repair a la Long Beach. Must be SAFE bike corridor to station Expo is considering including a bike storage facility. Also, there will be a
12ft sidewalk and bike path connecting Expo to Ballona Creek.
Elenda St: existing access to Ballona Path should be striping through middle school parking lot The school parking lot is not a City facility and thus this issue will have to
be addressed in collaboration with the school district.
Coombs St is vastly superior to Elenda as a bicycle friendly street. Elenda, under no
circumstances, is a bicycle friendly street.
Elenda was chosen in part for its connectivity. However, we now propose
to make the Bicycle Friendly Street designation after further traffic
engineering analysis and implementation of identified improvements.
Culver City has one high school @ 2500 Students, one middle school @ 1600 students and are
adjacent to each other. Any bicycle plan that does not include High and Junior High schools is
not a bicycle plan.
The Plan includes connections to these schools.
Braddock from Overland to Duquesne needs to be repaved like it is from Overland to Sepulveda Street maintenance is important for cyclists as mentioned in the Plan.
This recommendation will be passed on to engineering staff.
No place to walk into shopping mall (east of intersection of Jefferson and Sepulveda) Pedestrian access to existing private facilities is challenging. The
Municipal Code was amended after these centers were constructed to
require pedestrian pathways from adjacent public right of way for
developments of/or adding more than 100,000 square feet of floor space.
The BPMP has been revised to include a recommendation that the City
explore reducing the threshold to 50,000 square feet.
21 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Library access crossing Overland The City does not install unsignalized mid-block crossings and the
crossing has yet to meet the warrants necessary for signalization.
Currently, pedestrians can cross along the Ballona Creek Path or at an
adjacent signalized intersection. The City will continue to explore
options for enhancing access in this area.
Fix sidewalk (near Ince Blvd, Hayden Pl, Lucerne Ave, Higuera St - see map) This suggestion will be relayed to our Public Works Maintenance
Operations Division.
Foliage restricting sidewalk (same neighborhood as above - see map) If foliage is on private property, it is the property owner's responsibility to
ensure it does not create an obstruction. If more detailed locations are
provided, they will be relayed to Code Enforcement.
Overland at West LA College: address Overland Avenue will be evaluated for the installation of bike lanes and
shared lane markings.
1) Very much for safe pedestrian and bicycle paths and ways for all children to go to school. 2)
When you establish what you want, have at least a group of 10 go to City Council - could be
different people each time.
Safe Routes to School is covered in the Plan. Also, the City has applied for
the 2010 Safe Routes to School grant to improve safety around Linwood E.
Howe Elementary School and will continue to seek Safe Routes to School
grants as staffing and funding permits.
The public are always encouraged to attend and participate in City
Council meetings.
Include School population in all planning - high school, middle school - Faraggut Bike Lane Schools are included in the planning of nearby projects. For example, they
have been highly involved in the Ballona Creek Path Improvement Project
between Overland and the Pedestrian Bridge and Safe Routes to School
application processes.
Add youth cycling skills Ed Education is addressed in the "Programs" section of the document.
Education is recommended to be school based (for youth) as well as aimed
at adults.
Add police education The Plan proposes education for City staff, which includes Police as well a
others who work in the public right-of-way.
Share the Road Education Campaign: target motorists The Share the Road Campaign, like all educational campaigns, should
educate all users of the road, including not only motorists but also cyclists
and pedestrians.
Simple "share the road" signage will help spread the word that more bike traffic is coming! Bike route and share the road signage is proposed as part of the Plan.
However, it will be used judiciously, as placing signage everywhere may
lead to visual clutter and reduce its effectiveness.
Overall: sounds good! Works fine. Thanks.
CC Police must be on board to facilitate/support bike culture The Police Department has been actively participating in the development
of this Plan through their work on the Technical Advisory Committee.
22 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Bike Light Campaign: bell? Could be less of a priority. Better when have more bike lanes. The proposed programs are intended to work alongside but not replace
improvements to the network.
Bike theft Sting Operations/ Patrols. Watch neighborhood, check 4 people on bikes that do not
fit them
A potentially more effective way to reduce bicycle theft is to
appropriately place bicycle parking.
Enforcement of stop signs around schools. Police patrol on Ballona Creek The Plan discusses Targeted Enforcement and potential use of Bicycle
Patrol Units, and also recommends using volunteers to help increase path
safety and comfort.
Ciclovias: great high visibility event, maybe also combine w/ regular bike and walk tours Bike tours would likely be community-driven in conjunction with the
work of a Mobility Coordinator, if funding is obtained.
Ciclovias: great idea. Like colors on crosswalk! Crosswalk designs will be discussed in the design manual that will
accompany the Plan.
The ciclovias is the best idea to bring about much needed drastic change for biking Thanks.
Ed programs a MUST to create a bike/ped culture Education is addressed in the "Programs" section of the document.
We need safe routes from Blair Hills to CCMS and CCHS The route from Blair Hills to the bike path requires traveling though the
City of Los Angeles. The City of Los Angeles is not governed by this Plan.
However, Culver City is pursuing funding for a new connection to the
Ballona Creek Bike Path at the Higuera St. bridge.
Program to develop bike racks as public art in partnership with the private sector (corporate
funding)
The Plan doesn't include such a program; however, it will be considered.
Employer / human resources education about promoting and supporting bicycling to work (not
2nd class!)
These educational opportunities will likely have to be community-driven.
Tax incentivize bicycle friendly work places and commuters The Plan does not recommend using local tax incentives to encourage
bicycling. However, such programs might be appropriate at the state
level.
Health must be stressed as a reason to make room for bikes The Plan identifies health benefits as a reason to support bicycling and
recommends a bike-to-health campaign.
Improve public transit online trip planners and combine with bike and ped trip planners online The Culver City bus currently uses Metro's Trip Planner. Other trip
planners are also available, which are increasingly combining bus and non-
motorized travel (i.e. the planner available as part of Google Maps). This
Plan does not propose the creation of a separate Culver City planner.
However, the City will explore a permanent online presence for its bicycle
and pedestrian programs, implementation efforts and other actions under
the proposed mobility coordinator's supervision.
Bikerowave / Bike Kitchen / Bike Oven Do-it-Yourself bike repair shop in Culver City. Where?
Who? (Volunteers) Need start up capital…
The development of such a shop would have to be community rather than
City-driven.
(regarding bike co-ops) This kind of program can be self-sustaining. Just need seed $, tools etc Same answer as previous.
23 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Master plan should say specifically list options for enhancing a bike friendly street The Plan currently lists possible improvements to a bike friendly street.
Also, the Plan will be revised so that bicycle friendly streets are only
designated after improvements are made.
PAC should continue to meet AFTER the Plan is submitted. Organize more bike rides! The PACs official role will end when the Plan is complete, but they can
continue to meet informally.
Bike racks should look like bikes, like at LA Natural History Museum The Plan recommends the inverted U bike rack design, which is the
standard for bicycle parking. Other designs can be considered.
Secured bike parking as an option. Parking structures, meter space The Plan will discuss secure bike parking further.
Bike racks: public art, private corporate funding, local business advertising The Plan doesn't include such a program, however, it will be considered.
Add bike parking to parking lots at City Hall, Ince Structure and other lots The Plan will discuss secure bike parking further.
Reconsider code parking requirements to allow less parking for cars and more bike parking This recommendation will be provided to the Planning Division.
Secure bicycle parking lots in existing car parking lots or active valet parking lots / buildings The Plan will discuss secure bike parking further.
Driver and cyclist education programs Education is addressed in the "Programs" section of the document. Driver
and cyclist education programs are discussed.
Educate directly the planning commission, City Council, and ACOR committees to improve thei
awareness of bike/ped
The presentation of this Plan will provide an opportunity for the Planning
Commission and City Council to learn more about bike/ped issues.
Culver City bike Registration / License no longer at P.D. Where is it? Public outreach / ads to
inform
The Plan will not be recommending a license program.
Bollards on Main St. Beat Long Beach: big public art bike on City Hall There is currently no plan or funding for public bike art on City Hall.
School drop off: enforcement (double parking, idling), and discouragement The Plan recommends promoting alternatives to driving to school (like
the Walking School Bus or Bike Trains) and also recognizes the
importance of enforcement.
Big developments: city planning needs to force bike/ped facilities The Municipal Code currently requires bike parking for such
developments, but doesn't include design standards. The BPMP provides
for the adoption of bike parking design standards.
Closing several east-west streets to only bikes and buses This could be problematic for local residents who need to access their
properties and difficult to enforce. Also, traffic engineering analysis
would have to be conducted prior to implementation.
Slow down traffic downtown: remove lanes, traffic calming Traffic calming can only be implemented following traffic engineering
analysis, and thus has not been proposed in the Plan. However, the
Downtown area will be analyzed as a part a project added to the BPMP.
Make schools a higher weight The weighting of schools is consistent with most of the feedback we have
received.
24 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Prioritize Blair Hills projects The Plan does not directly prioritize any one area of the City above others,
but instead looks at criteria such as connectivity, public input, collisions,
etc.
Put sharrows on Braddock from Duquesne to Sepulveda. Braddock key connector between
downtown, schools, and shopping
Shared lane markings will be evaluated for installation along Braddock.
1. Goals and Objectives
• Add goals to the plan to establish/clarify the City’s long-term vision.
• The term “recommendations” is confusing; the City should include objectives and strategies
that connect to the goals.
• Even if the objectives are not all accomplished in five years, this will make the plan more clear
and lay out a vision for where the City wants to go.
• Examples of goals to include are:
Goal #1: Increase the number of people bicycling and walking in Culver City
Objective: Conduct yearly bike and ped counts at [x] number of locations.
Goal #2: Increase the safety of bicycling and walking in Culver City
Objective: Reduce the number of crashes (or ideally the rate, if that data is available) involving
bicyclists and pedestrians
The vision statement will be revised.
2. Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee
• Include as an objective in the plan the establishment of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee, appointed by City Council, to advise on walking and biking issues in the city. City
staff from the Community Development Department, Public Works and Police Department will
attend.
• Follow best practices in the structure and operations of this committee, including interviewing
applicants, setting clear expectation for committee members’ role and responsibilities
(time/meeting commitment), involving a diverse group of stakeholders with different levels of
biking and walking experiences, having the committee develop yearly priorities/workplan, etc.
The PACs official role will end when the Plan is complete, but they can
continue to meet informally. The BPMP will reflect the responsibility for
implementing the plan is proposed to reside with the City's Public Works
Department Administration Division.
25 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
3. Complete Streets Policy (page 89)
• Strengthen the language to prioritize bicyclists and pedestrians as high as autos when
conducting reviews of development projects or capital improvement projects, for example, “the
City’s goal is to prioritize bicyclists and pedestrians, with at least the same level of priority as
cars, in new construction or when retrofitting existing streets.”
• A bolder approach is to say pedestrians first, then bikes, then transit, autos last.
• State in the plan that the City will voluntarily adhere to the State guidelines for how cities
should comply with the CA Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358), once these guidelines are
completed, even before the City updates the Circulation Element of its General Plan.
The language re: Complete Streets will be revisited in the final version.
4. Safe Routes to School (SRTS) (page 92 - 93)
• Strengthen the recommendation to include a long-term goal “to establish safe routes to school
for all public schools in Culver City.”
• Explain how the City will proceed with developing safe routes to schools in all Culver City
public schools; “conduct an assessment of all public schools and prioritize the improvements that
need to be made to encourage safe walking and biking.”
• State that the City will use Linwood Howe’s SRTS plan as a model for developing SRTS plans
for the other schools.
The Safe Routes to School discussion will be revised in the final version.
5. Traffic Calming and Physical Improvements to Streets
• Identify intermediate and/or long-term improvement projects that will add needed traffic
calming for bike-friendly streets and pedestrian-friendly streets.
• Include "develop a model bike-friendly street" as a intermediate physical project
• Include "develop a model/prototype complete street on a major boulevard" as a intermediate-
term physical project
• Some of the ten “project sheets” that describe the top ten improvement projects for this five-
year plan, include vague language about traffic calming, e.g. “traffic calming measures will be
analyzed in the future.” City should set a target for doing some/all of these traffic calming
assessments mentioned in top 10 improvement projects—in this five-year period
• Create a second set of 10 “project sheets”, for pedestrian and bicycle improvements so the city
identifies some longer-term project improvements in this plan.
Traffic calming projects cannot be identified without traffic engineering
analysis. The projects will be revised in the final version to clarify short
and long term goals.
6. Evaluation
• Conduct yearly counts of bicyclists and pedestrians, at same time and location each year to
measure increases in bicycling and walking.
• Include a policy/objective that the City will conduct a yearly review of bicycle/pedestrian
collision reports and then establish yearly safety goals.
Additional information on evaluation will be provided in the final version
of the report.
26 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
7. Design Guidelines
• Include more detailed design guidelines for bikeways, bicycle-friendly streets, bicycling
parking, traffic calming devices, pedestrian crossings, etc.
A separate design guide document will be produced, which will provide
this information.
Landscaping? Landscaping is not specifically addressed in the Plan.
Triple racks on bus All City buses have dual racks.
Good idea (triple racks) See above response.
Very important to coordinate bus & expo w/ bike + ped routes, people often want to use both on
the same trip
The City is working with Expo to incorporate bike and ped amenities and
links. Planned amenities include a 12 foot sidewalk and bike path along
National as well as a possible Clean Mobility Center.
Some sort of directory of where bike racks are available. Include this on the bus listings/maps so
people know where they can connect to
The Plan provides a map of bicycle parking downtown.
Connect bike lanes/routes with expo as well as bus lines See above response.
It's ironic that there's no bike parking for this meeting Bike valets were provided for the community meetings.
Secure parking facility like a "bike station" at Expo ROW or Trader Joes parking street A Clean Mobility Center is under consideration at the Expo Station.
There is currently some bike parking near Trader Joes and secured parking
is under consideration at nearby Ince parking structure.
Place nice bike racks in public areas The Plan addresses bicycle parking and the final document will discuss
bicycle parking in more detail.
Generally - we need bike racks throughout the city - these could be sculptural, artistic like in
New York City
See above response.
[picture of downtown racks] - example of good bike rack See above response.
[picture of downtown racks] - yes I agree! See above response.
[City Hall rack] - worst bike rack ever See above response.
[City Hall rack] obviously designed by someone who doesn't own a bike See above response.
[City Hall rack] - I agree! See above response.
Bike racks shouldn't be kept out of sight. The bike racks at Veteran's Hall & Howard Hughes
mall are terrible. T hey increase the potential for theft by being out of sight & promote creative
parking like chaining bikes to street signs, trees, hand rails, etc.
Bike parking is addressed in the Plan and additional discussion is
presented in the Design Guidelines.
Are there any locations that make sense for bike lockers in Culver City? Maybe vets park at
Barman? Motorists use this lot as an informal park & ride, perhaps could be a bike n ride w/
lockers?
The Plan identifies the need for secure bicycle parking, and calls out parks
as a potential location.
Significant outreach effort necessary for this PAC to incorporate interest of culver city's diverse
communities
LACBC and the Outreach Committee conducted extensive outreach.
[picture of culver path] Love it! Thanks for the comment.
signs posted in Spanish This will be considered.
re-open all access gates to Ballona Creek bike path There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
27 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
[Culver path] needs more lighting at night Lighting is part of the Ballona Creek Bike Path Project between Overland
and the Pedestrian Bridge and will be considered for other locations as
budget allows.
[culver path, separated bike/ped path] great use of space for pedestrians & bikes Thanks for the comment.
Lighting! See above response.
re-stripe Paths will be striped or re-striped as funding allows.
need way finders so people can locate bike access points. This would help visitors as well as
residents
Way finders are being considered.
add benches and water fountains along bike paths These will be considered as funds allow and consistent with the Municipal
Code.
Extend Culver bike path all the way to down town (used to be a train right of way) This is not currently feasible due to roadway widths.
increased maintenance of ballon path. Decrease debris & water in underpasses. Better crossings
signaling on culver path, must get off bike too frequently to be useful
The Plan identifies maintenance on the Ballona Creek Path as an
important issue.
easier crossing at streets for culver bike path The major crossing points of the Culver Blvd Bike Path (within Culver
City) are Sepulveda Blvd and Sawtelle Blvd and both have actuators
positioned for bicyclists.
investigate opening (closed/blocked) thru routes in neighborhoods as safe contiguous routes for
bikes apart from major automobile routes
There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
[picture of culver bike path] Very good! More, more! Thanks for the comment.
Needs more access which would increase safety, needs to be "beautified" There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
There are various projects to "beautify" the Creek and Path, including the
project near Overland Ave. and work that the MRCA is spearheading near
Duquesne.
The path under the bridge is dark & unsafe, we need lights. There's also lots of trash. We need
security guards or more eyes on the trail somehow to make it at least seem safer
The Plan proposes placing volunteers along the path to serve as
ambassadors and provide another set of "eyes" on the area. See previous
response re: lighting.
There are not enough places to enter & exit bike paths in case of emergency or potential unsafe
situation
There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
Trees please The provision of landscaping is not part of the BPMP scope, but may be
implemented on a project by project bases.
Look at visibility for in/egress at all Ballona creek path access points eg. Duquesne/bike path.
Can't see pedestrians, bikes on Duquesne when exiting bike path
Changes to this area are under consideration.
There are not enough places to stop & rest or enjoy the sights. See previous response re: benches.
28 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Need many more access points, need more security (call boxes, patrols) There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
The Plan proposes placing volunteers along the path to serve as
ambassadors and provide another set of "eyes" on the area. Also, call boxes
and cameras are being added as part of the Ballona Creek Bike Project near
Overland and will be considered at other locations as funding permits.
Better signs marking exits/entries so peds/cyclists know their location The final document will discuss the Ballona Creek Path in more detail.
Camera or Lights on undrpass to protect bikes from thugs The expanded Ballona Creek section will address safety.
For more info on Ballona Creek go to www.ballonacreek.org or contact Jim Lamm
(jim.lamm@ballonacreek.org) there's a lot going on that the PAC's work could really help
No comment.
We need more north & south connectors, sepulveda is pleasant to ride on outside of Culer City,
but not inside the city. I would like to see Ballon trail locked less frequently and have more
entrances such as somewhere between Sepulveda and Sawtelle
There are a number of alternative streets that provide north-south
connectivity, and not all of them will be appropriate for riders of all
comfort levels. The Plan does not proposed additional access points to the
path. The segment of the Ballona Creek Bike Path between Sepulveda and
Sawtelle Blvds. is not within Culver City.
Ditto, I third this (access to Ballon between Sepulveda & Ballona) See above response.
PM safety! The final document will discuss the Ballona Creek Path in more detail.
Need signage along ike path about adjacent streets even if there is no direct access Bike path signage is being considered.
plant gardens Landscaping is not part of the BPMP scope.
Lighting! Lighting is part of the Ballona Creek Bike Path Project between Overland
and the Pedestrian Bridge and will be considered for other locations as
budget allows. However, lighting must be resistant to vandalism and mus
be consistent with the Municipal Code.
Agree (with lighting) See above response.
Coordinate with LA Ballona bike path groups. I.e., landscpaping and cameras are already
proposed for area by Julian Dixon Library & by Farragut Elementary School
The landscaping and cameras mentioned are a part of the Culver City
Ballona Creek Bike Path Project, not LA.
Duquesne exit needs signage or traffic light to allow cyclists existing path to go left on Duquesne Changes to this area are under consideration.
Yes (Duquesne exit remark) See above response.
Red zone the parking (L-3) Spaces at Ballona exits to street, often can't see aroudn parked cars to
easily enter or cross traffic when reach road level & not enough space to pull over prior to some
gates removing parking immediately next to entries would help?
See above response.
culver city bike police patrols on path (LA side has this) The Plan proposes placing volunteers along the path to serve as
ambassadors and provide another set of "eyes" on the area.
29 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
A lot of debris on Ballona bike path at this area, can it be periodically cleaned up? The Plan identifies maintenance on the Ballona Creek Path as an
important issue.
fix bumps and potholes on Ballona bike path See above response.
Bike path access without needing to lift the bike (Duquesne). Very difficult with a bike trailer
with kids inside
This issue has been addressed with recent modifications to all gates in
Culver City, except at National Bl., which is currently closed do to the
Exposition Light Rail Transit Project construction.
low fences at access points impede acces to trailers (with children) and strollers (and maybe
some other riders)
See above response.
Coordinate with neighborhing cities to develop through routes for commuters Alta is preparing the Master Plans for Culver City as well as the City and
County of Los Angeles and efforts have been made to increase continuity
of facilities across jurisdictional boundaries.
Longer times for crosssing at Ince/Washington intersection Crossing times are being revisited per new state standards.
Unsafe bicycling conditions along Jefferson A combination of bike lanes, routes, and Sharrows are recommended for
Jefferson Blvd. as part of the proposed bike network.
More biek parking for people running errands at Rite Aid, Ralphs, Best Buy, etc The Plan discusses the need for additional bike parking.
No Shade. NO permeable suface for ground water storage Landscaping and permeable surfaces are not within the scope of the Plan.
Problem in the evenings at Berryman at Washington - Traffic signals do not detect the presence
of bikes waiting to cross, leaving bicyclists to wait for a cr to trigger the signal.
This comment will be passed onto the traffic engineering staff.
Mentone+ Braddock - Very busy in the a.m. where cars are going to school. Very difficult to cross
or riding a bike
Braddock will be improved for bicyclist safety through the addition of
Sharrows, signage, and traffic calming after traffic engineering analysis.
Sine of Braddock Drive is too narrow for bikes and cars tos hare the slame lane See above response.
Make a bike path on Elenda. Cycle Trac (washington pl to farragut dr) for school kids Elenda is proposed for improvements on the Bicycle Network. However, a
separated bike path is not feasible.
Need more bike parking downtown The Plan acknowledges the need for additional bike parking.
Better timing of awkward crossings like this (culver & washington) you get stuck in this "no
man's land" when crossing
Crossing times are being revisited per new state standards.
Crosswalk needed across Culver and Washington at Irving There is presently a crosswalk 65' south of the intersection of Irving at
Washington and Culver.
Paint Bike paths on streets & wave major city-led communication about new paths Bike lanes are proposed as part of the bicycle network in the Plan.
North South Streets! Bike lanes and other on street facilities are proposed for several north-
south streets as part of the bicycle network in the Plan.
North South Streets! - Ditto See above response.
North South Streets! - Triple Extra Ditto See above response.
North South Streets! - x4!!! See above response.
Speed up Maintenance on Ballona for closed section The bike path was opened in July 2010.
FYI - Not for maintenance for light rail construction, be patient on this See above response.
level uneven pavement on ballona The Plan acknowledges the importance of maintenance.
30 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Repaint Venice Blvd Bike Lanes!!! The Plan acknowledges the importance of maintenance. Also, note that
Venice Blvd is only partially in Culver City.
Repaint Venice Blvd Bike Lanes!!! Or other bike lanes. Rough roads are not biker friendly See above response.
create safer conditions for riding ballona @ night The Ballona Creek Path will be discussed more fully in the final draft.
turn the path into something like a public street not an alley hidden behind The Ballona Creek Path will be discussed more fully in the final draft.
Better lighting The Ballona Creek Path will be discussed more fully in the final draft.
police patrol The Plan proposes bicycle patrol units as well as Ballona Creek Path
volunteers.
bike path next to expostion blvd light rail A multi-use path is being constructed.
open all gates to Ballona Creek bike path There aren't proposed new connections to the residential area in the Plan,
as we focused on the existing access points.
more racks, everywhere The Plan acknowledges the need for additional bike parking.
lobby city of culver city for a 100% buy in for biking in culver city Citizens are always encouraged to attend and participate in City Council
meetings.
invite sudent representitives of culver cityh high school and culver city middle school to next
meeting, listeon to their ideas
The community workshop portion of the Plan has closed, though
opportunities to comment on the Plan will extend until the Council
approves the BPMP.
have culver bike blvd link up to other lanes and cities The Culver Blvd Bike Path extends into the City of Los Angeles and the
proposed network identifies other connections.
have culver bike blvd link up to other lanes and cities - yeah See above response.
more car traffic awareness Education is discussed in the Plan. However, unfortunately, it is not
possible to force drivers to pay attention.
I've noteiced that several traffic signals throughout Culver City d not recognize my sitting there,
on my bike, waiting and waiting for the light to change. Are they triggered by the weight of a car?
I hate getting tickets for running lights on my bike! : )
Culver City follows the standard for bike loop detectors.
change law so bikers can treat stop signs as "yield." Bicycles are not permitted to treat stop signs as yield signs under
California law. That law can only be changed at the state level.
routes, with dedicated bike lanes, throu neighborhoods off main streets The BPMP will not recommend bike lanes on residential streets. Most
residential streets are not wide enough for striping bike lanes.
"routes, with dedicated bike lanes, throu neighborhoods off main streets" - yes! The BPMP will not recommend bike lanes on residential streets Most
residential streets are not wide enough for striping bike lanes.
green boxes, dedicated traffic lights for bikers to get ahead of bstart and up to speed before car
traffic
Green boxes are not yet an approved facility in California, and thus are
not proposed in the Plan. Bike lead times are not being considered.
education for: automobile drivers, bicycle riders, law enforcement personnel (safety, rights,
responsibilities, respect)
Education is addressed in the "Programs" section of the document.
31 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
contact & obtain booth at culver city's premire community event, "fiesta La Ballona" about 15,00
attend, held on august, Friday 28, sat 29, 30th on Sunday.
There is a Public Works booth at Fiesta La Ballona. Bicycle/ped
information has been shared at this booth. Also, Bicycle Pedestrian
Master Plan information has been shared at the Chamber Expo.
Signange: No bike, skateboards allowed in town plaza (Plaza by Pacific Culver Theater and Van
Buren Pl)
The Plan recommends working with the BID on such signage.
I use the plaza and Van Buren Place throughway to get from Braddock Dr. and Irving Place. I also
use the same in reverse back to Braddock even to bike the "wrong" way on the one way street
behind the theater.
Wrong way and other unsafe riding is not legal.
Lots of bike racks here (Plaza by Pacific Culver Theater and Van Buren Pl) The Plan includes a map of downtown bicycle parking.
Allow Passage through bars over bridge (Farragut Dr at Jackson Ave) Improvements have been made to this area and further improvements are
recommended in the Plan.
Lack of drought-resistant Landscape The Plan scope does not include landscaping.
Not Wheel chair accessible as is (Farragut Dr at Jackson Ave) Improvements have been made to this area and further improvements are
recommended in the Plan.
Get Better motorized biuke barriers that allow non-motor (Farragut Dr at Jackson Ave) See above response.
Too Narrow for bodies to go through. People poop in there (Farragut Dr at Jackson Ave) See above response.
Decrease Height of Ped/Cross Bars so [we] can cut through with a bike (carried over); Not
enough space on some sidewalks (e.g. culver, in front of sony) to walk side by side or pass with
strollers
The cross bars have been addressed. The Plan does not propose increasing
sidewalk widths in that area.
Need safe pedestrian way within shopping centers such as Target--connectors frion street
sudwalks to stores. (Jefferson Blvd at Studio Village)
There are limited options for changing this design, since it is on private
property. However, this issue will be passed on to the Planning Division
with the suggestion that the City require improved pedestrian
connections for future developments.
Need better pedestrian connectiong between Target parking lot and Pavillion Parking lot--
people DRIVE to get from one lot to the other because of the fence.
See above response.
No easy pedestrian ingress/egress sparce bicycle parking (Jefferson Blvd at Studio Village) See above response.
Need bike access to Veterans Park building On street bicycle facilities are recommended for Overland that should
improve bicycle access.
Sidewalks on Jefferson -- they are too skinny, disappear; Target at la cCienega is inaccessible to
walk safely on sidewalk, popular area; Raintree/etc even to fox hills, westfield condo complexes
are poorly connected to Culver City Park and Downtown because of bad sidewalks on Jefferson
Jefferson Blvd is called out as a pedestrian corridor and will be examined
for pedestrian improvements.
Consider little used sidewalk vs. lack of bicycling space (Washington Blvd near Robertson Blvd). Washington Blvd. is identified as a priority project in the Plan. Also, in
addition to this project, the City and Agency are pursuing other
improvements to Washington Blvd funded through assessments (the Area
Improvement Projects) and grants.
32 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Washington Blvd is very pedestrian unfriendly (no shade few benches, façade's uinwelcoming)
Really servers to separate Helems area from downtown cc, when they should be more connected.
See above response.
Washington Blvd between Overland and Culver Blvd intercept is too narrow for bikes to be on
the street. I usually use the side--walk which works when not used by pedestrian.
Where bike lanes and shared lanes are not feasible, bike route signage is
recommended along Washington Blvd. Pending the update of the
CAMUTCD, shared lane markings may be installed along this section of
Washington Blvd. Shared lane markings instruct bicyclists how to
properly position their bike as they ride on the street, particularly in areas
with limited ROW.
east washington needs more sidewalks The Plan does not address wider sidewalks on Washington Blvd.
Pretty Rough Traffic. Can I have "Share the Road" signs along this route? (Washington Blvd near
Sherbourne Dr.)
Sharrows are proposed for this stretch of Washington Blvd.
Sharrows 14ft to curb (Washington Blvd near Sherbourne Dr.) The placement of Sharrows will conform to the design standard approved
for use in California.
Bike lane from CC Downtown to Helms Bakery (Washington Blvd near Sherbourne Dr.) Sharrows are proposed for this stretch of Washington Blvd. However, the
City is exploring the installation of bike lanes, east of Landmark Street, in
the future.
Sharrows on Duquesne 14' from curb The placement of Sharrows will conform to the design standard approved
for use in California.
If the big streets are too busy, then people ride on the sidewalks, and these are filled with
impediments like craks/debris overgrown shrubs.
The Plan addresses sidewalk riding.
I walk here weekly. Even early AM, it can be unsafe going over to the park. Important
Intersection (Duqesne Ave at Ballona Creek)
The Plan will address the Ballona Creek Path in greater detail.
Shade? The Plan mentions trees as a component of pedestrian oriented areas, but
they are not a focus of the Plan.
Cyclists Heading west on Culver are very exposed where Culver and Washington Divide (near
Fire Station)
The current configuration of the street network presents challenges for
many bicyclists. Alternative routes have been identified to busier arterials
to give options to bicyclists where infrastructure cannot provide the
desired on-street facility.
street/gutters for wheels The Plan addresses the importance of maintenance.
Looks like street cleaning day - a nice temporary safe bike route (refering to photo: Le Bourget
Ave at Braddock Dr)
Thanks for your comment.
Cars travel very quickly on Braddock, not looking for pedestrians . Important area because of
proximity to Carlson Park, Vets Center and Park, downtown, etc.
Braddock Drive has been identified for further analysis and with the goal
of eventually being able to designate it as "bicycle friendly."
Share the Road signagnel; Cars don't share, drive too close and intimidate or insult bikers;
Washington bike lane - connect it from W. Culver City to Central City and beyond.
Share the Road signage is proposed as part of the Plan. However, the Plan
acknowledges the danger of sign clutter, which can reduce its
effectiveness. Bike lanes, Sharrows, and other on street facilities are
proposed for Washington Blvd. as the curb to curb widths and other
street characteristics permit.
33 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Bike Lane (Washington Blvd at Overland Ave) This area is of insufficient width to accommodate bike lanes.
Bike Lane on Overland Bike lanes and Sharrows have been proposed based on road widths and
other considerations (speed limit, presence of curb parking, etc.).
Need Bike Arteries - safe efficient routes for students and commuters APART from major
automobile routes
The Plan proposes a network that is intended to provide choices.
Need good north/south options on Overland and Sepulveda because these are the only though
streets from one end of town to the other.
Bikeways are recommended on Sawtelle, Harter, Elenda, and Huron
Need more north-south streets Bike lanes and other on street facilities are proposed for several north-
south streets as part of the bicycle network in the Plan.
Washington Blvd has more buisiness destinations I need. Venice is best used as a through way to
further away location for me.
Thanks for your comment. On street bike facilities are proposed for
Washington Blvd. as feasible.
I need to use Washington Blvd at times between La Cienega and Lincoln; however, the seam of
black top and parking cemented area is exactly where the bke needs to run, causing a ridge or gap
that is a hazard (Venice Blvd)
Washington Blvd. is identified as the top bikeway project and will be
examined for places where street conditions can be improved.
Venice Blvd Bike lanes needs better surface maintenance. It is currently in poor condition-
creating a safety concern and an efficiency problem.
The Plan acknowledges the importance of maintenance. Also, note that
Venice Blvd is only partially in Culver City.
This bike path (Venice Blvd) works well. The shade makes it preferable to Ballona Bike Path in
the AM.
Thanks for your comment.
Tip: Look in Rear View Mirror, ninted windows a problem Thanks for your comment.
Yikes (accompanied with drawing of car opening door into Venice Blvd bike lane) Thanks for your comment.
Would better pavement marking help protect against getting doored? Pavement markings and facility design are not sufficient to prevent
cyclists from being doored. Vigilance by drivers and cyclists is required.
Good ligiting (vandal resistant) at shadowy underpasses is key (Jefferson Blvd at Slauson Ave) This area has been identified for a potential future project to enhance
lighting.
We need more of a grid network for the roads. So I don't get on a street and have it being a "not
through street" all the time.
It is not feasible to change the basic structure of the street network, which
is built around natural elements like the creek and hills. However, the
bicycle and pedestrian networks in the Plan are intended to identify
routes that provide connectivity, among other things.
Blanco Park has a great through way from Kinston to Sawtell Blvd; however, it's bloked to bike
and pedestrians during the day. I often need to shop at Fox Hills or Sawtelle shops
This is being examined for inclusion in the Plan.
Bike lane on Venice - repaint, repave, increase signage; "seam"/divet makes lane difficult to use The Plan identifies maintenance on streets as an important issue. Only a
portion of the eastbound Venice Bl. Bike Lane is located in Culver City
and is maintained by the City.
more marked bike lanes throughout the city The Plan proposes bike lanes on streets with sufficient curb to curb width.
34 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Sepulveda Blvd and Opverland Ave. are two busy and too narrow for bikes and cars to share the
road between Jefferson and Slauson in Culver City. I usually need to use the wrong way in alley
behind Sorrentos Market or alley behind CC Hardware
Sepulveda and Overland are included on the bike network. However, even
with improvements not all streets will be comfortable for all riders.
Options on big streets: widen sidewalks for bike riding off the busy streets Sidewalk riding is allowed in some areas of the City. However, the BPMP
does not include any proposals to expand the sidewalks to facilitate
riding.
Concerted public education campaign needed to help drivers be respectful about sharing the
road with cyclist.
Education is discussed in the Plan.
Enforce parking permints on streets This recommendation will be provided to the Police Dept.
begin "bike-bus" and "walking-bus" to take kids to and from school These programs are suggested in the Plan.
bike lane from school to carlson park Bike lanes are not feasible along Braddock.
Cars drive too fast on Braddock--need to slow them down (put in speed bump!) Traffic calming will be implemented only after traffic engineering analysis
deems it appropriate.
Enforce existing parking regulation on Van Buren This recommendation will be provided to the Police Dept.
Encourage carpooling for out-of-district kids (incentives coordinator at school) This suggestion will be considered for future Safe Routes to School grant
applications.
bigger drop-off space at Irving Place Lin. Howe Recommendations to the elementary school are a part of a separate Safe
Routes to School Grant.
Bulb out makes sense for traffic calming, but a problem for bicyclists (Irving Bl at Braddock Dr.
and Irving Pl at School St.)
Both bicycle and pedestrian impacts are considered before recommending
bulb outs.
How do you legall go on this street? Go wrong way? Ride on Sidewalk? (Irving Pl at School St). Bicyclists are required to obey all traffic laws, including following the flow
of traffic
Needs share road signage for cyclists. Needs diverters like Bike Blvds and sharrows (Higuera at
Carson St.)
The Plan proposes Share the Road signs and Sharrows at appropriate
locations.
Discourage cars on Ince, or close Ince at Washington Traffic calming will be implemented only after traffic engineering analysis
deems it appropriate.
Traffic Calming is useful--generally but these aren't appropriate bike routes/too much parking
and slim streets
See above response.
Can we encourage cars down different street than Lucerne? It's already narrow and maybe made
more bike friendly. No left turn from Culver?
Lucerne is an important connection between East Culver City and
Downtown. It will feature recommendations that help make it safer for
bicyclists and motorists to use simultaneously.
If this is always no parking (refering to one side of Lucerne Ave between Ince and Higuera Sts),
it's a good bike zone and could be marked as such.
See above response.
Lucerne and Higuera has 1700 car's per evening peek and 1900 cars per morning bike's and car's
will fight for right and away
These totals are very low for residential streets, and as such support
identifying it as a street that bicyclists can use if they are uncomfortable
on streets with higher traffic volumes.
need lots of bike racks at new metro station See previous response re: Expo bike parking.
Safe Corridor (pointing to Venice and Jefferson to Main and Culver Thanks for your comment.
35 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Suggested route to bypass Downtown area: From 10 fwy and Washington, South on Washington,
to Higuera to Lucerne to Duqesne to Jefferson.
Thanks for your comment.
Irving Pl (one way) hilighted Irving is included in the Bicycle and Pedestrian networks.
Braddock Dr, hilighted Braddock Drive is included on the Bicycle and Pedestrian network.
Need to add ped bridge to map at Westwood to Culver city HS. Maps will be updated in the final version of the document.
Close Higuera off from being a through street. Divert traffic from east bound north to Hayden
Pl. and westbound north to Hayden Ave
Traffic calming will be implemented only after traffic engineering analysis
deems it appropriate.
Rotary Circles at Krueger, Hubbard and Carson on Higuera. See above response.
Sawtelle between Havelock and Utopia (not in Culver City) marked with X The Plan only covers the City of Culver City.
Connect Washington Blvd Bike Path to Downtown CC (meanning Culver?) There is currently no bike path on Washington Blvd. The portion of
Culver Blvd. that does not have a bike path is recommended as a bike
route.
Circle around National bridge over Ballona Creek, asking "When will this open?" The northern National bridge is temporarily closed for construction for
the Exposition Light Rail Transit Project and should be reopened
sometime in 2011.
hilighted streets: National from the Expo Line departure east to Wesley St-E to Rode Rd, S on
Carson W to Ince
National is included on the bicycle network.
Jefferson between Hitzler Rd and Culver City Park Rd: No Sidewalk Jefferson Blvd is a pedestrian corridor and includes the recommendation
of pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks.
Westly is too Crowded; Lucerne going west from Higuera is unsafe. No sidwalk on Jefferson
between Hitzler Rd and Park
Wesley is busy at school pick up and drop off times, and otherwise
features very low traffic volumes making it an ideal street to ride on most
times of day. Lucerne features recommendations to make bicyclists
position on the road more prominent, making it easier for motorists and
bicyclists to use the road simultaneously.
No room on Jefferson for Bike and car. Bikes need to ride on sidewalk. A combination of bike lanes, routes, and sharrows are recommended for
Jefferson Blvd. as part of the proposed bike network.
I commute along Jefferson from Sepulveda to Downtown LA. Would be good to put in bike lane
on northboud side and fix pavement. Southbound complete construction.
See above response.
Playa, Washington, Sepulveda, Overland are too: scary, polluted, badly maintained to ride on
regular basis (commute).
The Plan addresses the importance of maintenance. The purpose of the
network is to provide options and alternative routes to cyclists. There are
a number of alternative streets that provide connectivity, and not all of
them will be appropriate for riders of all comfort levels.
show bridge, Ralphs, and Target The map will be revised in the final version.
Connect Hannum to bikes only Assuming the commenter meant the cul-de-sac at the northerly side of
the “T” intersection of Hannum Ave. and Playa St., this was added to the
BPMP as a potential project depending on the availability of staff and
funding.
36 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
Berryman Ave and Washjington. Safe to cross Washington at light. North Bound now blocked b
Right Lane Turn Only sign
This intersection is proposed to receive some modifications in conjunction
with a new traffic signal being installed at the Washington Bl./McLaughli
Ave. intersection. Installation of striping and signage to allow cyclist to
proceed north through the intersection will be considered as a part of the
project.
Note: The Sepulveda Shoping Area is a destination with small business like hardware store and
staples
Thanks for your comment.
Difficult to cross Washington and Mclaughlin Ave A new traffic signal is being installed at the Washington Bl./McLaughlin
Ave. intersection.
Route car traffic to Venice Blvd, around Culver City Downtown The Plan does not propose rerouting traffic or traffic calming. Traffic
calming will only be proposed following traffic engineering analysis.
Hilighted Streets: Overland Ave, Sepulveda, Sawtelle Blvd, Berryman Ave, Mclaghlin/Centinela
(North/South arterials)
Bike lanes and other on street facilities are proposed these streets, except
portions of Berryman Ave., as part of the bicycle network in the Plan.
Need North and South Route See above response.
Welodrome - WLAC: track racers and fitness fun The Plan does not propose any velodromes. West LA College is outside
the City's boundaries.
Would like to see safe bike path along all of Jefferson There is insufficient right of way for a bike path. A combination of on-
street facilities are proposed for Jefferson in the bicycle network.
Need safe access for bikes coming from the south of Culver City on Sepulveda, Only route into
city.
Sepulveda is recommended as a bike facility and will accommodate
bicyclists to the greatest extent possible.
Open up south/east side of Ballona Creek to bike path to create a loop within Culver City, for
bike exercise and training, bridges at either end. Open gates on both sides, at Jackson Ave,
Baldwin Ave, Madison Ave, and Van Buren Ave
The Plan does not propose additional bridges or access points. The BPMP
has been revised to include a more detailed discussion of the Ballona Creek
Bike Path, including the potential for a separate walking path along the
southside of the Creek, between Higuera St. and the Pedestrian Bridge
west of Overland Ave.
Circled Farragut and Jackson Ped "jail" facility. Improvements have been made to this area and further improvements are
recommended in the Plan.
Ballona Creek Problem Area - more dangerous for runners and bikers Also last week, I saw a
motorcycle on the bike path. Needs supervision.
The Plan addresses perceived safety concerns and proposes placing
volunteers on the Ballona Creek Path.
Hayden Ave and Higuera St circled Higuera will be discussed further in the final version of the document.
1) Bike Path Maitnentnace - lights; 2) North-South Routes; 3) Driver Awareness - courtesy;
4)Bike Racks - e.g. At Vets Auditorium
The Plan acknowledges the importance of maintenance and bike racks,
and proposes north-south routes and an education program.
I would like a bike path next to the Exposition Blvd. light rail line A multi-use path is being constructed.
37 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
The CC Redev agency has just approved building islands on West Washington Blvd. This will
narrow the street and limit a bike path on Washington Blvd. Alta's website talks about a bike
path in the center of the street in SF tahat is in the middle of the islands - we also need storm
water (TMDL's control) filtration along the curbs so all of these need to be incorporated before
things are built
The proposed medians are not large enough to accommodate bike paths.
Ensure landscaping utlizes drought-tolerant, native plants wherever possible (unlike
CALTRANS which used only H20-friendly plants not native to NoAmerica for the Culver Blvd.
paths).
Landscaping is not part of the BPMP scope.
I will volunter for bike counts Volunteers will continue to be needed for follow up counts after the Plan
is adopted.
Bike path lighting hopefully could use solar energy for power and powe/storage (cloudy
days/night)
This will be explored, thank you.
More Access points from La Ballona Creek to streets; publicize website that will create routes for
bicyclists ( I will send it in for LA and Orange Co. I believe)
The Plan does not propose additional access points to residential areas.
Ballona Creek has two banks in Culver City between Sawtelle and Duquesne: One side is
developed as a bike path; Too dangerous to have bikes and pedestrians on the same path;
Developing other side as a pedestrian path should be considered; Pedestrian path can be
developed as an Art Walk with public sculpture such as the harbor in San Diego; Make Art Walk
a destination as part of Culver City’s redevelopment
The BPMP has been revised to include a more detailed discussion of the
Ballona Creek Bike Path, including the potential for a separate walking
path along the southside of the Creek, between Higuera St. and the
Pedestrian Bridge west of Overland Ave. Development of improvements
along the Creek must comply with the Municipal Code.
Make PEDESTRIAN WALK WAY/ART WALK into “front yard” rather than “back alley”: Have
businesses: cafes, restaurants; Have lights; More use will decrease “Attractive Nuisance”
tendency, such as graffiti, gang activity; Make it more appealing a place to exercise, jog, e.g. park
development along Hudson River in NYC, Battery Park and San Diego Harbor Area.
See above response.
Schools, including El Marino and El Rincon are adjacent to parks used for afterschool activities,
sports practice and camps during school breaks and summer. They are difficult to access as a
pedestrian or cyclist; Need crosswalks on main roads to facilitate pedestrian access; Flashing
crosswalks would provide a safer environment; Longer lights at key intersections and no right on
red would also make it safer for pedestrians.
This suggestion will be passed on to traffic engineering staff and these
suggestions will be considered in future Safe Routes to Schools
applications.
Flashing crosswalks would provide safer crossing at: Ballona Creek Bike Path at Sepulveda Blvd.;
Sepulveda near the ice rink and the YMCA; Ballona Creek Bike Path at Sawtelle Blvd.; Ballona
Creek Bike Path at Overland; Hayter Ave. and Sawtelle Blvd.; Overland near the Adult School and
Julian Dixon Library
There have been signals proposed at Blanco/Hayter, but they have not
been installed due to community opposition.
Longer red lights and no turn on red in all directions at Braddock and Sepulveda This suggestion will be passed on to traffic engineering staff.
Example of properly working pedestrian controlled red light: Light at the corner of Lindblade
and Sepulveda
Thanks for your comment.
38 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
I think its terrific the [physical project] is being proposed and I would love to see it extending to
and around the high school - it would make sense for high school students to be able to safely
cycle to school - at present I see people using the sidewalks rather than risk the busy streets
Lucerne, Braddock and Farragut are all recommended bikeways which will
allow better bicyclist access to the High School.
La Ballona Creek path which is wonderfully direct but at present not safe enough to send our
children onto alone
The Plan recognizes safety concerns along the Creek and proposes some
solutions.
I love taking Ballona bike path from Overland Ave down to Centinela Ave. The path is a little
rough, and feels unsafe at night. But I usually ride there only in the morning. My biggest concern
is that theres no bike path down Overland Ave to Jefferson Blvd. I truly believe that a bike path
and some newly painted lanes would increase the appeal of Overland Ave. Also it would increase
the amount of safety for those who chose to ride bicycles to help the environment.
The Plan does not propose a bike path for Overland, but on-street
facilities are being proposed.
Today I was nearly run over trying to cross Jefferson Blvd at Machado Road. Returning from
Pavilions, I waited for the walk signal. However,
once I stepped into the crosswalk, I could see I was taking my life in my hands. Cars turning
North on Jefferson, including two cars from the shopping area and two from Machado Lane,
would have run me over if I hadn\'t gotten back on the sidewalk. We need a four-way red light at
this corner so that pedestrians can cross Jefferson safely!
This suggestion will be passed on to traffic engineering staff.
Green the Ballona Bikeway to include trees Landscaping is not part of the BPMP scope.
I live in Culver City and would love to see bike lanes/trails available in the city. I live so close to
the beach but yet so far considering that I don\'t have a bike lane when riding to the beach. I
barely ride my bike anymore in the Culver City area because it is so dangerous...
Bike lanes are available on Venice Blvd. and proposed for Washington
Place, and segments of Washington Bl. Also, Ballona Creek Path and
Culver Bike Path, via McConnell Ave., provide connectivity to the beach.
I\'d like to preface by saying that I hold no grudge against any particular police officer. I was
riding home from dinner with my girlfriend, travelling south on Centinela. We were just north of
Culver City, when I was pulled over by a CC police officer and cited for CVC 21202, for riding tw
abreast. What I did was legal, Culver City even specifically permits me to ride two abreast. I just
wish your officers knew this. Since then, I\'ve avoided your city like the plague. Please educate
them.
Depending on the situation, CVC 21202 may be interpreted to prohibit
riding two abreast. CCMC 7.04.230 explicitly prohibits riding more than
two abreast (except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the
exclusive use of bicycles), but that does not mean it allows cyclists to ride
two abreast when that is in conflict with other state or local code sections
relating to cyclists position on the road. The Plan recommends education
on both the rights and also the responsibilities of cyclists.
It would be great to have more safe ways toaccess the Ballona Creek bike path. With two of the
busiest streets in the city,Sepulveda and Slauson,I\'ll be adding a bright orange safety vest to my
cycling wardrobe. From Fox Hills I usually take Slauson to McDonald t/l,to Inglewood Bl.,and
catch B.C. bikepath there.
The Plan does not propose additional access points.
Culver city needs well defined bikeways, wide strips of pavement (like the beachwalk) that is
designated only for cyclists. I have seen them used to great effect in Irvine and Davis, so why not
Culver city? Have them run along the creeks or maybe in the center of some of the larger roads
The Ballona Creek Path runs adjacent to the creek and the Culver Bike
Path runs adjacent to portions of Culver Blvd. However, there is not
currently sufficient right of way to add bike paths along other large roads.
39 of 40ATTACHMENT 2
Responses to Comments Received on the Culver City DRAFT Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
9/29/10
Comment Response
I am a middle-aged lady who rides largely within Culver City--to the store, to church, to
restaurants. The problem is Jefferson, where cars line the road and the traffic whizzes past--and
the sidewalk at points is either non-existent or too narrow. If the 2 small bridges over Bellona
Creek (just west of Duquesne)could be opened to connect Jefferson to the bike path, that would
be a vast improvement. It would also allow cyclists easy access to West LA College via the new
entrance.
The Plan recommends bike facilities and ped facilities along Jefferson
making it a better road for bicyclists and pedestrians to use. The two
structures crossing the Creek, west of Duquesne Ave., are for utilities and
not bridges.
I usually walk to work but during summers it really gets too hot. Having more trees along the
sidewalks would certainly help.
The Plan mentions trees as a component of pedestrian oriented areas, but
they are not a focus of the Plan.
I am a planning analyst for UCLA Transportation. I would like to spread
the word about the Culver City Bike/Ped Initiative, as many of our employees live around Culver
City. We have an upcoming Bike to Campus Week Event, where I think tabling any flyers
regarding the Initiative may be useful. If you would like to provide anything, please feel free to
email me.
Thanks for your offer.
40 of 40