A Chastened Caltrans Gets Public Input on Easing 101 Congestion

Call it Grass-Roots Planning 101.

Residents and community leaders along the 101 Freeway have come up with a list of nearly 300 ideas to relieve bottlenecks along the corridor from downtown Los Angeles to the west San Fernando Valley that would not require massive widening of the route.

Their proposals, the result of a dozen community brainstorming sessions organized by the city of Los Angeles, range from big-money construction projects, such as overhauling freeway interchanges, to the itty-bitty, including adjusting traffic signals at certain intersections to make them stay green longer.

At least one suggestion -- erecting giant screens along the freeway to shield drivers from sun glare -- was met with snickers. And more than a few ideas, such as eliminating rush-hour parking on Ventura Boulevard, are sure to foment opposition.

But no matter how mundane, ambitious, controversial or wacky, the ideas have all been respectfully placed on a preliminary list of short- and medium-term “proposed projects” by the L.A. Department of Transportation.

Such heightened attention to community concerns is a departure from the process used in previous efforts to upgrade the 101. Until recently, observers say, a California Department of Transportation-led group of “technocrats” -- many of whom were planners, engineers and consultants -- dominated project planning while residents were asked to comment only after proposals were unveiled.

“It was top-down planning. Caltrans decided what they wanted on the freeway, then they tried to force it on the public,” said Gerald A. Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino and of the Coalition of Freeway Residents, who led a grass-roots campaign against a recent freeway-widening proposal. “That might be fine in a communist country, but not in a democracy.”

In its earlier planning efforts for the 101, Caltrans held public meetings, presented ideas and then gathered feedback. But many residents, who played no role in generating the ideas or making decisions, regarded the planners and their proposals with suspicion.

In April, the technical team unveiled what it believed to be the best solution: widening portions of the freeway from Thousand Oaks to Studio City by at least two lanes in each direction.

An outcry by residents who feared that their neighborhoods could be destroyed by any widening swiftly drowned out the voices of supporters. Officials dropped the plan like a hot potato.

Chastened by the backlash, planners are now treading lightly. In the last few months, they have been asking residents along the corridor: Tell us what projects you’d like to see.

Ideas poured forth.

Among the more unusual was a request to raze a dilapidated motel on Cahuenga Boulevard to make way for more Hollywood Bowl parking. Others asked for beefed-up transit service, information kiosks at all bus stops and the construction of missing connectors for the Hollywood-Ventura freeway interchange.

“These are community-suggested improvements based on our knowledge of local conditions,” said Michael Meyer, president of Outpost Estates Homeowners Assn.

Now, the citizen-generated list of projects -- some similar to earlier proposals by Caltrans and other agencies -- is being screened by neighborhood councils as well as a task force of residents, transportation professionals and representatives of elected officials. An edited list will be presented early next year to the Los Angeles City Council and to state and local transportation agencies for review.

Some of the ideas, such as installing new turn signals, cost little money and will likely be quickly implemented, according to L.A. transportation officials. But it is difficult to estimate when bigger projects, such as extending streets or widening ramps, would become a reality because of the state budget crisis and transportation funding shortfalls, those involved say.

So far, community leaders -- as well as transportation planners involved with earlier efforts to improve the 101 -- are praising the approach.

“It’s bottom-up, grass-roots,” said Linda Taira, the Caltrans branch chief who oversaw the development of the now-abandoned freeway-widening proposal and has since attended community brainstorming meetings. “In L.A. County, it’s an approach we’ll probably see more of. It’s something all the agencies are looking at.”

Taira, who has worked in planning for more than 25 years, recently gave speeches on “lessons learned from the 101” to her Caltrans colleagues. “If you don’t get buy-in from the community,” she advised, “you’re not going to [make] progress.”

Bob Huddy, a senior planner for the Southern California Assn. of Governments, added: “We learned to listen to the public. A lot of the suggestions they gave were very constructive.”

But some observers caution that overemphasizing community participation could also lead to bad public policy.

The latest turn of events over the 101 “is tied to a broader philosophical issue of the role of experts,” said Cal Poly Pomona professor Richard Willson, who specializes in transportation planning. “If that expertise is devalued ... sometimes, people develop solutions that are symbolic rather than effective.”

Others disagree.

Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge, whose office is spearheading the idea-collecting effort, said he believed the best decisions come from “getting everyone around the table” and having community discussions.

Ordinary folks “sometimes make the greatest engineers,” LaBonge said. “They fight the battle going through the Cahuenga Pass every night.”