Spring Street Contraflow Stop Date Set
Eric Richardson
[Flickr]
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Those of you in the Historic Core take note, the Spring St. contraflow lane will be going away on June 25th (though service will actually change a week earlier). If you've followed the blog for a while, you'll know this is an issue I've followed closely. If you haven't, here's some catch-up reading material.
Today I got a chance to meet again with DOT about the project, and I think it's really going to work out nicely. Spring St. will get a nice jump in on-street parking between 3rd and 9th Street as spaces are added to the east side (where the contraflow lane is now). The exact number and placement of spaces isn't set yet, but that'll be coming soon.
I also expressed a desire to see overnight parking, removing the current (pictured) "No Parking 2am - 5am nightly" signs. DOT agreed that the signs were likely not needed any more, so I think we'll see that change when they replace the existing signage.
The shocker from today's meeting: MTA is choosing to move most of its northbound bus service from Spring to Hill instead of following the bus lane to Main St. I think that's a bad move on MTA's part as far as traffic is concerned, but I'm sure the residents of Main won't mind getting the extra transit lighting and only having to put up with the extra sounds of the DASH D route.
Background Reading
- Background from January 2005
- Illustrating the lane's problems
- Board of Transportation Commissioners' pending action to make removal possible and a follow-up after the meeting
- Illustrated look at Spring St parking
- Op-ed I wrote for the Downtown News titled Slow Down Before Speeding Up Spring and Main
- More perspective after meeting with DOT
- Contraflow removal approved by Transportation Committee and by City Council
- Hollywood closes the lane before DOT
Like I said, I've been following it closely...
Hank on May 04, 2006, at 09:43PM – #1
Hill Street is also more centrally located for bus riders (with buses on all northbound Downtown streets from Figueroa east to Los Angeles) and is a better location for boardings to happen, especially at night. (Currently, most of the buses on Main are discharge only.) It also puts buses closer to the Broadway shopping core. I don't see how traffic would be affected at all.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on May 05, 2006, at 08:24AM – #2
The problem is that Hill Street is two lanes and already runs a lot of buses, so they're going to reach capacity issues with the number of buses fighting for bays and get a lot of disruption from deliveries and miscellaneous Jewelry traffic.
But you're right, it is closer to Broadway and MTA thinks more ridership was headed that direction. I don't have a problem with that.
Main is going to get some nice pedestrian lighting out of all of this, so I think the boarding conditions are a moot point. But if buses turn out not to be impacted by the traffic it could be a win-win for everyone.
David Kennedy on May 09, 2006, at 09:49AM – #3
I think their are two other factors which are driving the MTA decision. One, better connections with the Red Line at Pershing Square and Civic Center stations. Two, less noise for local residents. I don't think there are any existing residential conversion projects along the Hill Street corridor. I'm sure those who homes overlook Spring will greatly appreciate the decreased noise.
Scott Mercer on May 17, 2006, at 04:28AM – #4
Metro 417 is a pretty big residential project on Hill Street. The Guaranty Building at Fifth and Hill is lofts, and opening later this year. Plans are in the works (but may never come to pass) for the Zen Tower at Third and Hill. Fifty stories of condos. So much for no residential development on Hill.
Scott Mercer on May 17, 2006, at 04:48AM – #5
By the way, full disclosure: I live on Main and would like more transit service on Main, not on Hill. I guess if they only move one or two bus lines over to Main I could live with it. What would make the most sense is moving the eastbound lines (that go toward Pasadena, the San Gabriel Valley, El Monte, etc.) on to Main, while moving the westbound bus lines on to Hill. Of course, since that makes sense, I am anticipating they won't do that. But maybe they'll give me a pleasant surpise.
David Kennedy on May 17, 2006, at 12:25PM – #6
You're right. I stand corrected.
ken on May 22, 2006, at 12:24PM – #7
I live on Main, and will miss the buses discharging there. I've thought for a while that part of that part of the reason Spring feels so much safer at night is because of the bus-related foto traffic.
On the other hand, I'm sure bus riders would rather get off on Hill than on Main.
Kym on May 24, 2006, at 10:48PM – #8
Let's be a little more accurate, please. MTA is NOT "choosing to move most of its northbound bus service from Spring to Hill instead of following the bus lane to Main St."
Only a handful of lines are being rerouted. Since the contraflow lane will still be operating on Spring north of 1st St., all the lines that presently turn onto the contraflow lane at Spring & 1st won't be rerouted at all.
MTA Lines 70-370 will operate southbound on Grand, northbound on Olive. Line 71 will be northbound on Main and southbound will remain on Spring. Lines 83-84-85 will operate northbound on Hill and southbound will remain on Spring. Lines 90-91 and 94-394 are the only ones being moved to Hill in both directions.
This information comes to me from one of the service development managers at Metro.
wendy on June 08, 2006, at 08:46AM – #9
So, going back to this subject, I am a little concerned about whether this is going to happen. Before the weekend, they seemed to have rubbed the contraflow yellow lines out, and then on Tuesday I noticed that they had been freshly repainted. Doesn't seem like a very consistent action if the lane is about to be removed...I really hope that doesn't mean they are not removing that lane or delaying.