1957 Transportation in the Los Angeles Area

8/20/2019 1957 Transportation in the Los Angeles Area

1/58

RCH Y E


2/58

T R A N S P O R T A Tin the

LOS ANG~S AREA

s . C . R . T . D . L I B R A R Y

T HE F IN AL R EP ORT O FT HE C IT IZ EN S T RA FF IC A N D T RA N SP ORTATIO N C O M M IT TE E

F OR T HE E XT EN DE D L OS A NG EL ES A RE A


3/58

History and Organization of the Citiz ens Trafficand Transportation Committe e Vll

Panel of Cons ultants VlllCommittee Acti vity Vlll Need to Replace the Citi zens Committee with a

New Group IXAck nowled gments . IX

SECTION I - TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT A-TION I N THE LOS ANG ELES BASIN AREA 1What Is Tr aff ic and Trans portation? 1The Trans por tation Dilemm a 1 Natura l Bar rier s 4Po pulation Den sity and Growth 4Vehi cle Owner ship and U se 6Gr owth Char acteristi cs of Business 7Indust r ial Growth and Di s per sion 10Tou rism 10Southern California "Mod e of Living" 11Conclusion 11

SECTION II - WHAT , AND HOW MUCHTRAN SPORTATION? 15What Ar e the Tran s portation R equiremen ts of

the Ar ea? 15Tr ans portation and the Individual .................. ...... 15Trans por tation and Bu siness 15Transpo r tation and Industr y 16Influence of Trans portation on Go vernmenL. ....... 16Conclusion 16

SECTION III - THE NEED FOR MASTER PLA NNING 17What Kind of Tran s portation System Do We

Have? ~.~.......... 17Coordination : 17

Str eets and Highways 17Fr eeways 18Curb P arking 19Off -Str eet Park ing 19Mass Trans portation 19Trucking .. 22

SECTION IV - SCOPE AND ELEMENTS OF ALOS ANGELES BASIN AR EA TRANSPORT A-TION PLAN 23Scope of Are a Trans por tation Plannin g 23Elements of Tr anspor tation Planning 23

SECTION V - RECOMME NDATIONS FOR ESTABLISHIN G AREA -WIDE TRANS-PORTATION PL A NNI NG 25Tr aff ic and Tr ansp ortation Commission 26Tr ansportation Planning B oard 26Dir ector 26Technical Staf f 26Technical and Other Advisors 26Financing 27Conclusion 27

Roster of Members of Exec utive Committee of Citiz ens Tr affic and Trans portation Commi ttee 29

R oster of Memb er s of Panel of Consultants........ 31R ecommended Legislation to Esta blish a Tr ans-

portation Pl anning Com mission 33Recommenda tions f or the Esta blishment of a Free-

way Coordinatin g Committee 35R ecommendation s for Establish ing a Better Oper -

ating Climat e for M ass Transi t 37R ecommendati ons R egar ding Traffic Conge stion in

the Vicini ty of the Los Angeles InternationalAirport 41

Sugges tions f or Creating Staggere d Hour Pro-gr ams in Selected Ar eas 43

Use of the Uni ted State s Census B ur eau f or O btain-ing Basic Origin and De stination Infor mation 47

Policy R egarding Pub lic Ownership of Mass Tran -sit Facilities 49

Transi t Carr iers O per ating Wit hin a 20 MileRadius of D owntow n Los Angeles.................... 53


4/58

CITIZENS TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE for the

EXTENDED Los ANGELES AREAEXECUTIVE CO M MITTEE

D A VID AARON . Secr e ta r y Nut r i lit e P r o ducts , Inc ., B uena P ar k

H ARRISON R . B A KER . Pr esi d entD a vis-B a ker Co m pa ny . Pasadena

HO WAR D BARRE T T . Secreta r y -Mg r.Jur upa D is tri c t C . o f C .• R iverside

M IL O W . BE KINS. Preside nt

Be k in s Va n & s to r age C ompa n yWALTER M . B R IG GS. O wner

W alt 's Auto P ar ts & Gar age sFRANK J . BUCKLE Y. Pre s ide nt

F . J. Bu ckley & Co mp an yHERBERT CAM ER ON . At to r ney

Los An ge lesR . A . C O VI N GT ON . Planninq D ir.

C o un ty of S a n B e r na r d in oH . J. D ON N E R. College ReI .

Pa c . T e l & T el.JO HN C. EL L IO TT . Pr esi dent

J a meson Pe tro le um CompanyMO RRI S G . G AYLE N . Preside n t-Mg r .

V a ll ey C a b Compa n y. Van NuysJ . C. GILBERT, D iv isio n Ma n ager

So . C ounties Gas Co. , Sant a MonicaGEORGE T. GO GG I N. E xe c. Vi ce P r es.

Dou glas Oil C omp any. Par amo un tROBERT L . GORD ON, V ice Pres ide nt

B a nk o f Am eri ca N . T. & S . A .M A X H . GREE N

San B ernar d ino C ou nt y Boa r d of Tr ad eL, O . GRIFFI T H S, P r eside nt

Harbor Dist . Chamber s of Co m m er ce

ROY M. HAGEN , Pr es identCalifo r nia Con sume rs Corp ora tionJ . L. HAUGH. Pr es ide nt

Metropolitan Co ach Lines, Lo s A ngelesJOS. E. HAVENNER. Dir.

Eng. Serv" Auto Club So. Cal .GEORGE N. HAWLEY. Vice Pr esident

Southern California Edison CompanyE. L . HIATT. Vic e President

Union Oil Comp a ny of CaliforniaSAM T . HILL , Pr es id ent

Sam Hill Re a lty Company, In g le w ood CARL J , HOFFM A N , Contractor

Los An gelesG. S. HO N EY, P er sonn e l Dir .

Nor th Am er ican Av iation, Inc .L . E . HOWARD J R .. V ice Pr es id ent

Vinn e ll Compan y . Inc., Alh ambraHAYDEN F, JONES . Rancher

Puent eWENDELL H. KI NNE Y, Vic e Pr es .

St a n da rd St ee l Cor po rat io n , V erno nA. S . KOCH , R oad co mm iss ion er

Count y of Or ange, San ta AnaCH AR LES B . KRAMER, In d ust ri a list

N orth Hol lyw oo d ST AN LEY M. LANHAM, V ic e Pres.

Los Ange les Tr ansit LinesE . W . LEE . O w n er

Vita Foods. Ont a rioSAMUEL E. LU ND E N , Arch ite c t

Lund en, Hay wa r d & O'Connor WILLARD McCL E LLIAN . O w n er

Mack's, Inc., Ri ve rsideROBERT MITC H ELL, President

Con so lidat ed Rock P rodu cts Compan y

FARAON J A Y MOSS, Sa les M an age r Omar t Inve stment Compa ny. Az usa

FRED NA S ON , Pr esiden tB eve rl y Hills Tr an sf e r & S to rage Co.

M . A . NICHOL A S. R o ad Commi ssi oner Count y o f S a n B er n a r di no

DO N H. P AC KER . Pr es ide ntPac ke r Mot or Comp any. G len d ale

E . T , PA '!'TERSO N , Sale s M an age r RIv e rSIde Monum e nt Co., R ive r s id e

FRANK A. PAYNE JR. , Personn e l D ir .Lyon . Van & Stor age Compan y

HARRY S . PAY N E , In suran ceCor ona

L , C . PE M BERTO N , O w n er W a sh e r- Wi ls o n , Los A n ge le sM O N TG OM ER Y PHIS TER , Vi ce Pres .

V an C am p Sea Food Co.• Term . Is.FR ANK W . PI N E . In dust ri al Realtor

Van Nuy s~lED REDDING , Pub lishe r

N ed R ed din g PUb lic a tio ns. Ho llyw oo d J. L, RICHARDS , D ist ri c t Ma na ger

Pac , Tel , & Tel . Co ., Sant a An a

JAMES E. RUMAN , D ir. of Op er a tions20th Century Fox F ilm Co r p .

GORDON H, SA N DBERG , A sst , Secy,Adv anc e Tr uckin g CO " Lon g Beach

LUDWIG SCHI F F, R etired Merc han tLos A ngeles

WILLARD S M IT H . C bro n . ot Boar d The First N a tio na l B an k, O r ange

WILLIA M M. STE WA RTDisneyland, Inc " A nah e im

DR. D. L , VAN VOORHIS , D en ti stColton

P . FREDERICK WELLENSIEK Businessman. Pomona

GWYNN WILSON, Vice Pres . & G ent . Mgr .Los Angeles Turf Club , InC " Arcad ia

108 WEST SIXTH STREETLOS ANGELES 14, CALIF.Telephone MAd ison 9·1I59

OFFICERS

MONTGO M ERY PHISTER , Cha irm anL. E. H OW ARD J R . . Vi ce-Ch a irmanGEORGE C . BOWERS, Ex ecu ti ve Sec retary

H ONORA BL E NO RR IS PO UL SON, M ayor Honora ble City Counc il, City of Los Angele s

Honorab le Board of Super visors , Los Angeles County, Orange CountyRiver sid e County , and San Bernardino County

We a r e pleased to present h erewith the final re port of the Citizens Traffic and Transp ortation Committee for the Extended Los Angeles Area .

Our assigned mission was to encourage surveys and the m aking of a comprehensivestud y of the tr af fic and transportation problems of the Los Ang eles Basin Ar ea, workingtoward the d evelopment of a traffic and transportation plan and program for both sh or tand long range accomplishment .

Based u pon its studies, the Committee has here outlined th e gener al char acteristicsof the area and their impact upon traffic and transportation ; evaluated existing tr anspor -tation f acilities; and has recommended a practic al and economi cal method f or area-wid etrans portation planning.

Although the Committee, as a lay group, had the outstanding services of a Panel of Ex pert Consult ants in analyzing and evaluatin g the various and comple x transport ation pro blems, i t does not attempt in this report to prescribe s pecific or techn ical solution s totransporta tion matter s. Rather, since it was appointed earl y in 1954, the Comm ittee hasattempe d to confine is activity to the policy level in making it s r ecommend ations. Our repor t r ef lects this policy.

Dur ing the three and one-half years of its existence, the Committee frequ ently mad e policy recommendations on individual traffic and transportation problems, Some of th eserecommendation s have been acted upon, others are lying dormant . We again r ecomm end to your attention those matters upon which no action w as tak en.

Though the Citizen s Committee ha s completed it s assigned task , much wor k r emainsto be d one to improve e xisting transportation facilities and to int elligently and econo m-ically progr am necessary additions to th e system. Enli ghtened l ead er ship, using themeans at hand , can accomplish this . .

We ex press our d eep gratitude to the P anel of Consultant s, public officials, civic

grou ps and to the member s of the Committ ee themsel ves for the su p port which mad e theCommit tee's work possible .

MONTGOMERY PHISTER Chai r ma n


5/58

I n the Los Angel es Area the a bility to MOVE PEOPLE A N D GOODS fr eely and ef f iciently can spe ll the diffe r encebetween greatn ess an d medi ocr ity!

A d ynamic and growin g area must have the means toquickly, and with a minimum of conflict, provide for the thousands of mo vement requirements for people and goods generated by the so cial, business and industrialforces of the community. This is the sole mission of trans portation! Traffic conjestion and other related prob-lems are merely symptoms of inadequacy. They are thefirst manifestations that the transportation sys tem is notsufficient to the job of MOVING PEOPLE ANDGOODS, and transportation inefficiencies are inhibitiveof progress and are costly!

Tran s portation delays add to costs in moving both peopleand goods . This means added costs for the manufac-tur er, the wholesaler , and the retailer. Thus, you payextra

for food (added cents per item)

for clothing (added dollars for a suit)

for shelter (added dollars of rent or mortgage-interest)

for medical care (higher charges)

for insurance (higher rates)

for gasoline or bus fares (added distances)

for entertainment (higher prices)

for taxes (higher governmental costs)

for ever y item purchased (added dollars or cents)

If you were bill ed for these extra costs in a lump sumyearly instead of payin g them out in small hiddenamounts daily, the total would shock you .

The traffic and trans portation prob lem is a r ea-wide , not confined with in politica l jurisdictio na l boun da r ies .

Hence the approa ch must be ar ea-wide , not piecemeal by individual political bodies operating within boun-d aries. A permanent ar ea-wide body is needed to dealwith the problem-to make a thorough study and de-vise a com preh ensive area -wid e pla n. Piecemeal studiesand piecemeal attempts to deal with the problem have

allowed it to get mor e and mor e out of hand . Althoughthere have been many studies and sur veys by indi viduallocal jurisdictions, t here has no t been an ar ea-wide studysince 1938!

This at· ea h as uni que d i ff iculti es not e ncounter ed manyother met r opol it an are a in t he world.

-Surrounded by mountains, yet having a large suburbansegment living beyond the mountains and necessarilyfunneled through a restricted number of passes . . .

-Cut up by rivers, ravines, railways, freeways, drainageareas, and other internal flow bar~iers . . .

-Blocked on the west by the Pacific Ocean and thevarious water inlets therefrom ...

-Having the lowest pop ulation density of any metro - politan area -4,370 per squ are mile in the cit y of Los Angeles , as compared to 24,950 for New York City ...

-Having the highest motor vehi cle registration of anymetropolitan area -44 per hundred people, as com - pared to 16 for New York ...

-Having fast-growing, widely dispersed industries em- ploying a highly mobile labor force . . .

-Having experienced a population "explosion " un-

precedented in the history of urban growth . .-Conditioned by favorable climate to outdoor-living

pursuits that involve a great deal of travel within thearea to beaches, playground areas, social gatherings,shopping and entertainment centers . . .

-Endowed with many touri st attractions that bringtraffic from hundreds and thousands of miles away . ..

(1) That a represent ative area-wide Traffic and Tran s-

portation Plannin g Commission be establi shed , properly constituted and financed, 'to utili ze highlycompetent local technical people in de velop ing anarea-wide tran s portation plan .

(2) That a Citizens Committee, area-wide in scope and independently financed, be organized to inform th e public and enlist support for the plan thus dev el-oped.


6/58

In the Los Angeles Area the ability to MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS freely and efficiently can spell the differencebetween greatness and mediocrity!

A dynamic and growing area must have the means toquickly, and with a minim um of conflic t, provide for the thousands of movement requirements for people and goods generated by the social , business and industrialforces of the community. This is the sole mission of transportation! Traffic conjest ion and other related prob -lems are merely symptoms of inadequacy. They are thefirst manifestations that the transpor tation sys tem is notsufficient to the job of MOVING PEOPLE ANDGOODS, and transportation inefficiencies are inhibi tiveof progress and are costly!

Transportation delays add to cost s in moving both peopleand goods . This means added costs for the manufac-turer, the wholesaler, and the retailer. Thus, you payextra

for food (added cents per item)

for clothing (added dollars for a suit)

for shelter (added dollars of rent or mortgage-interest)

for medical care (higher charges)

for insurance (higher rates)

for gasoline or bus fares (added distances)

for entertainment (higher prices)

for taxes (higher governmental costs)

for every item purchased (added dollars or cents)

If you were billed for these extra costs in a lump sumyearly instead of paying them out in small hiddenamounts daily, the total would shock you.

The traffic and transportation problem is area-wide, not confined within political jurisdictional boundaries.

Hence the approach must be area -wide, not piecemeal by individual political bodies operating within boun-daries. A permanent area -wide body is needed to dealwith the problem-to make a thorough study and de-vise a comprehensive area -wide plan. Piecemeal studiesand piecemeal attempts to deal with the problem have

allowed it to get more and more out of hand. Althoughthere have been many studies and surveys by individuallocal jurisdictions, there has not been an area-wide studysince 1938!

This area has unique difficulties not encountered In anyother metropolitan area in the world .

-Surrounded by mountains, yet having a large suburbansegment living beyond the mountains and necessarilyfunneled through a restricted number of passes . . .

-Cut up by rivers, ravines, railways, freeways, drainageareas, and other internal flow bar~iers . . .

-Blocked on the west by the Pacific Ocean and thevarious water inlets therefrom . . .

-Having the lowest population density of any metropolitan area-4,370 per square mile in the city of Los Angeles, as compared to 24,950 for New York City ...

-Having the highest motor vehicle registration of anymetropolitan area -44 per hundred people, as compared to 16 for New York ...

-Having fast -growing, widely dispersed industries em- ploying a highly mobile labor force . . .

-Having experienced a population "explosion" un-

precedented in the history of urban growth . . .-Conditioned by favorable climate to outdoor-living

pursuits that involve a great deal of travel within thearea to beaches, playground areas, social gatherings,shopping and entertainment centers . . .

-Endowed with many tourist attractions that bringtraffic from hundreds and thousands of miles away . ..

(1) That a representative area-wide Traffic and Trans-

portation Planning Commission be established, properly constituted and financed, 'to utilize highlycompetent local technical people in developing anarea-wide transportation plan.

(2) That a .Citizens Committee, area-wide in scope and independently financed, be organized to inform the pu blic and enlist support for the plan thus devel-oped.


7/58

(3) That the necessary information for traffic and transportation planning be obtained by an area-wide survey to determine present and future move-ment requirements for people and goods. In thisconnection, a study of the economic impact of con-gestion on the people of the area is an importantfactor necessary to intelligent planning.

(4) That traffic and transportation planning must de-termine priorities and methods of improving exist-ing facilities such as:

Surface streets

Freeways

Parking and terminal facilities

Mass transit service

(5) That planning for the future expansion of the areashould delineate:

Projected patterns of growth

Type, scope and location of facilities

Methods of financing and construction

Methods of administration and operation

(6) That all studies and planning activities be carried out on a continuing basis , and that all data relat-

ing to traffic and transportation be continuouslyreviewed and evaluated by the Commission and theCitizens Committee, to the end that unforeseentrends and needs shall be taken into account im-mediately.

(7) That all feasible steps be taken as soon as possible

to make more eff ic ient use of exist ing facil it ies ,

pending the necessary legislative and administrative

steps for the 'establishment of the Traffic and Trans-

portation Commission and the supporting Citizens

Committee.


8/58

His tory and Org a nization of the Citizens

Tra ffi c and T r ansportation Committee

The Citizens Tr af f ic and Transp ortation Committee f or the Extended Los Angeles Area was f or med late in 1953,at the req uest of the Honor a ble Nor ris Poulson, Mayor ,City of Los Angeles, to stud y traf f ic and transportation problems in the City of Los Angeles. Because i t wasap par ent at the outset that these pr oblems were int imatelyrelated with similar p r oblems in Los Angeles and OrangeCounties, and with parts of San B ernardino and RiversideCounti es, the Committee w as reconstituted in 1954. LosAngeles Coun ty represent atives wer e appointed jointly byMayor Poulson and th e Honora ble John Anson Ford,Chair man, Los Angeles County Boar d of Supervisors . TheBoar d s of Su per visors of San Bernardino , Riverside and Or ange Countie s later nomin ated member s to representtheir res pective ar eas. Appendix A is a roster of membersof the Executive Committee .

Excep t f or a two-member pai d staf f, the Committ ee wasa lay citizen group. I t f unctioned without influence f romany political or ganization or person. Fund s for supportin gthe Committee's work were app ro pr iated by the City of Los Angeles and the Count y of Los Angeles and weremade ava ila ble to the Commit tee through contracts for spec if ic ser vice between these politi cal jurisd ictions and theComm ittee's Executive Secr etar y.

In ad dition to the 5 4 member s of the Executive Com-mittee, over 400 leadin g citizens of the area formed the bod y of the Committ ee. This active citizen support groupmaterially assis ted in shapin g Committee policy.

The activities of the Citizens Traf fic and TransportationCom mittee were based on the pr emise that:

1. The Metropol itan Los Angeles Ar ea has serioustraf f ic pr oblem s; some r emed ies must be found .

2. Traffic a nd tr ans portation problem s are metropolitanwid e and reach into all of Los Angeles and Oran ge

Counties and large por tions of Riverside, and SanBer nard ino Coun ties. .

3. Any pr ogram undertaken to s olve these traff ic and trans por tation pr o blems should b e an area-wide , com-munity program, not mer ely an activity of a singleor ganization , association , or civic group .

4. Maximum utili zation of h ighways and freeway s isessenti al; and addition al means of improving traffic

condi tions and relieving traffic c ongestion must befound b y:

a. Compl etely coord inating all traffic and transpor -

tation;

b. Increa sing publ ic tr ansportation f acilities and en-coura ging the public to patr onize such facilities ;

c. Exped iting the com pletion of the fr eeway system .

5. Numerous limit ed stud ies of traf fic and tran sportation problems in the Lo s Angeles area have been mad e inthe pas t. However , no comprehensive ar ea-wid etraffic and tran s portation study has been co m pleted since 1938 , and all pre vious studies are obsol ete nowlargely becaus e of the phenom enal gr owth of the

area. Failur e to agree on ap propriate remed ies hasheretofore p ar alyzed action . New inform ation isneeded as a ba sis for action.

6. Because of the impor tance pu blic transport ation bearsto the tr aff ic pr oblem, the first ste p in any new studyshould b e to learn what can be done to encouragethe impro vement and expansion of existing facili tiesand thus d evelop greater patronage by the pu blic.

7. The mere factor of ownershi p, whethe r by pr ivateoperator s or by municipal ities , d oes not in itself d e-termine the eff ectiveness of public tr ans por tation;

ex perience of tr ansit car r iers, both pri vately and pu b-licly owned and oper ated , d emonstrates th e need f or exami nation of th e economic factors involv ed .

8. Based on past experience, it is essential that, pr e-liminary to ac cumu lation of n eeded dat a, the lead ersamong those concerned with tr affi c and trans por ta-tion plannin g r esolve d iverge nt opinions and reachagreement amon g themse lves wi th regard to ste pswhich should b e tak en to insur e adoption o f a sound program.

The Committe e's pr imar y mission was t o make necessarystud ies and to r ecomm end principles, policies and action

pertinent to the de velopment and maintenance of a co-

ordinat ed tr affic and tr anspor tation system, and to develo p

public support fo r concerned official agencies. Thus the

Committee wa s a ble to give support and en cour agement

to going programs, encourage and work for th e d evelo p-

ment of new programs and exert necessar y pressur e f or


9/58

the correction of exi sting deficiencies. To do this, theCommitt ee adopted these aims:

1 . To encour age sur veys and t he mak ing of a compre-hensive study of the tr af fic and tr ansportati on prob-lems of the area,

2. To su p port tr affic and transportat ion projects whichcould be accompli shed in the immediate f uture ,

j. To work toward a tr af fic and trans portation plan and progr am for long-r ange accom plishmen t,

4. To suggest administr ative and o perational policiesconce r ning tr affic and tr ans portation management ,

5. To encourag e improved coordination be tween the'the many political juri sd ictions and other agenciesconcerned wi th traffic and transportation,

6. To disseminate information to the general pu blic inord er to alert the communit y to the need s of thearea, and to deve lop stron g public support for the

proposed solution to th e tr af f ic and transportation problem, an d to encourage public use of mass transportation facilities .

With few exceptio ns, member s of the Citizens Commit-tee were not associated or acquainted with the technical problems of traffic and transpo r tation. This gap was filled bythe formation of a Panel of Consult ants to give technical

advice and counsel to the Commi ttee and its sub -commit-tees. Members of the Pan el of Consultants are te chniciansof recogniz ed abili ty in the traffic and trans por tation branches of state, county and cit y governme nt and in thevarious organizations i n the area having some in ter est intraffic or transpor tation. Appendix B is a ros ter of thePanel of Consul tants.

1 . To assist the Committe e in the impleme ntation of the Committee premis e and aims,

2. To pr e pare report s for the Committee on assigned project s,

3. To recommend lon g-r ange pro jects and policies for Com mittee consider ation,

4. To r ecommend sp ecific pr ojects for immediate or short term accomplishment ,

5. To give technical a ssistance to sub-committees of the Committee ,

6. To review and make recommen d ations, as a Pan el,with r egard to sub-committee reports .

The Panel considered all technical matters referred t oit by the Committee or i ts sub-committees . It sought outand analyze d d ata, prepared report s and gave general te ch-nical guidance to the Committe e. Although its mo st im-

por tant contribu tion was the developmen t of the basicrecomme nd ations and data for this repo rt, the Panel con-ducted r esearch into, and prepared eva luation report s toguide Comm ittee action on such specific ma tters as:

1 . Staggere d working hours.

2. Los Angeles Interna tional Airpor t area traffic con -gestion and control .

3. Freeway traffic control and coor dination.

4. Better oper ating climate for privately owned masstransit.

5. Use of the United State s Census Bureau to obtain basic origin and destination informa tion.

7. R egulation of commercial vehi cle and taxi standin gzones.

The Citizens Committee made a thoro ugh stud y of thegener al transport ation needs of the ar ea and particularl y

the r elationshi p of mass tr ansit to the tota l problem .

In add ition to scor es of Panel and su b-committee meet -ings, the Comm ittee as a whole met over 46 times to d is-cuss and d e bate these stud ies and to for mulate policy.

The ma jor activity of the Commi ttee was the develop-ment of a method for creat ing an area-wi d e transportation planning agency and the encourageme nt of su pport for thismethod f rom the many po litica l jurisdictions within thear ea. A ppend ix C is a copy of legis lation designed toimplemen t the recommendation s of the Committee . Thislegis lation was intr oducted into the 1957 session of th e

Califo rnia State Leg islature but fai led to reach th e floor of the Assembly.

Official C ommit tee action was taken on several s pecifictranspor tation and traffic pr o blems such as :

1 . Freeway t r affic control and coor d ination. Appen-dix D.

2. Better oper ating climate for mass t r ansit . Appen-di x E .


10/58

3. International Airport Area traffic congestion and control . Appendix F.

4. Staggered working hours. Appendix G.

5. Use of the United States Census Bureau for obtain-ing basic origin and destination information. Ap- pendix H.

6. Pedestrian control .

Official action has been taken on some of these reports. No action has been taken on others. Reconsideration of these specific reports by the concerned jurisdictions is againrecommended.

A substantial collateral actlVltY -OPposltIon to the pro-gram of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority-resulted from the Committee's work on transportation plan-ning. The general Committee policy on this matter isgiven in Appendix I . It is quite probable that the Com-

mittee's opposition to the original program of the TransitAuthority resulted in a greater public awareness of theAuthority's proposals and ultimately in an improvement infinal enabling legislation.

One of the most rewarding effects of Committee activi-ties grew out of the appointment of the Panel of Con-sultants as an advisory group. For the first time in thehistory of the area representatives from pertinent publicdepartments and from interested agencies sat down to-gether to work out traffic and transportation problems. Thecoordination which resulted was fruitful and could be far reaching.

The Need to Replace This Committeewith a New Group

Effective with the submission of this report, the CitizensTraffic and Transportation Committee will dissolve itself as an active group.

Although the Committee, operating within its organiza-tional and financial limitations, has fulfilled its assigned mission, much remains to be done. An area-wide transpor-

tation planning agency must be created, and the task of bringing about the necessary coordination in inter-jurisdic-tional traffic management still remains to be accomplished.The urgency to replace this Committee with a strong citi-zen support group to carryon this important work is quiteobvious. Such a citizens group should be equitably repre-sentative of the entire Basin Area and should be organized and financed in such a manner as to be completely freefrom political or other pressures. It must function objec-tively for the welfare of the area as a whole and must beable to overcome or reconcile localized subjecti ve oppo-sition.

It is the hope of the Citizens Traffic and TransportationCommittee that in vacating the field, enlightened leader-ship will step into the breach and create this necessarycitizens support group.

This report would not have been possible without theable, enthusiastic and constant support and guidance fromthe Panel of Consultants, many members of which devoted much of their personal time to the affairs of the Committee .The Committee acknowledges this with grateful apprecia-tion.

We are indebted to many of the state, county and citydepartments for data and material which went into thisreport . The Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce and The All Year Club supplied valuable information .

The Committee expresses its thanks to the Brewster Mapping Service for permission to reproduce two of itsmaps, and to the Southern California Research Council,froni whose publication, "The Next Fifteen Years," theCommittee took many of the illustrations for this report .

Finally, to the Boards of Supervisors, the Mayors and City Councils, Chambers of Commerce and other civic or-ganizations and the public press, the Committee expressesits appreciation for their fine support of its activities duringthe past three and one-half years .


11/58

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

CITY HALL

Los ANGELES 12. CALIFORNIA

Mr . Mont gomer y Phi st er , Chai r manCi t i zens Tr af f i c and Tr ans por t at i on Commi t t eeFor t he Ext ended Los Angel es Ar ea108 West 6t h St r eetLos Angel es 14, Cal i f or ni a

Dear Mr . Phi s t er :

I t has come t o my at t ent i on t hat t he pr i mar y mi ss i onof t he Ci t i zens Tr af f i c and Tr anspor t at i on Commi t t ee f or t he Ex-t ended Los Angel es Ar ea has been compl et ed and t he Commi t t ee i sd i ss ol Vi ng i t se l f as an ac t i ve gr oup.

May I t ake t h i s oppor t uni t y t o expr ess t o you andt o your pr edecessor s , Messr s . Rober t L . Gor don, Rober t Mi t chel land H. C. McCl el l an, and t o each member of t hi s f i ne commi t t eemy si ncer e and deep appr eci at i on f or a j ob wel l done.

Under t he excel l ent l eader shi p of i t s sever a l chai r -men, t he Commi t t ee has made a t hor ough st udy of our mount i ng t r af f i c

and t r anspor t at i on pr obl ems and, i n addi t i on t o evol v i ng aspl endi dl y pr act i cal f or mul a f or coor di nat ed pl anni ng, hasdevel oped s ever al i mpor t ant and per t i nent r ecommendat i ons f ormaki ng bet t er use of our exi s t i ng t r anspor t at i on f aci l i t i es andagenci es .

As a ci t i zens commi t t ee you have wor ked har d andf ai t hf ul l y t o poi nt t he way t o r easonabl e and wor kabl e met hodsf o r a t t acki ng some of our pr obl ems. I t now becomes t he r esponsi -bi l i t y o f a l l ci vi c gr oups, and par t i cul ar l y t he Ci t y of LosAngel es and ot her of f i c i al agenci es , t o assume l eader shi p i nput t i ng your r ecommenda t i ons i nt o f ul l f o r ce and e f f ec t . Youhave my assur ance t hat t hi s of f i ce wi l l make ever y ef f or t t oi mpl ement your i mpor t ant pr el i mi nar y wor k.


12/58

The myriad social , business and industrial forces of ametro politan area generate de f inite movement requirements!People must be able to mo ve a bout in the conduct of their d iverse ac tivities, and , in support of these activities , busi-ness and industry mu st move vast quantities of goods.Meeting these requirements is the prime consideration of mod ern traffic and transportation.

It is dangerous over-simplifi cation to think of traffic and tr ansportation merely in terms 'of mass transi t, freeways or tr af f ic congestion .

PEOPLE must mo ve or be moved to and from their places of occupation , to shoppin g and service centers and to r ecreat ion facilit ies. GOODS , in the form of raw mate-rials, ag ricultur al produ ce and finished products, must bemoved to and from pro cessing, distributing and ser vicecenters . Tr affic and tr ansportation must be concerned withthe manner and methods b y which these many movementrequ ir ements, often simult aneously demanded, will be sat-isfied .

In the Los Angeles B asin Ar ea,l all methods or t y pesof transportation are emplo yed , to a greater or lesser de -gree, to ser ve these movem ent r equirements . The Los An-geles-Long Beach Harbor s passed almost 6000 commer cialships, over 28 million ton s of goods and over 481,000 people through these facilities in 1956.

The Los Ange les Basin Area ranked third in the nationin total air passenger traffic. Over 4 .3 million passengersand more than 168 million pounds of freight and mailwer e handled by the air carriers of the area last year.

The railroads handled 1,276, 400 freight cars within thef our-county area. ,

~ 1-

Pi pe line transportation i s a growin g arid important fac-tor in the movement of s pecial materials, and helicopters

are now ser ving the entir e basin, moving passengers, mailand freight.

This substantial volum e of passengers and freight, han -d led by r ail, air and water carrier s, must eventuall y bemove d within and throu gh the area by motor vehicles

1 The Los Angeles Basin Are a, as referr ed to in this report, i sdefined as the total urban ar ea of Los Angeles County south of the San Ga briel Mountain s and east of the Santa Susanna Moun-tains, and the urban areas of San B ernardino, Riverside and OrangeCounties continguous there to.

which use the same street and highway network which

ser ves the local industria l, comm er cial and social move-ment requirements.

Traffic and tr ans por tation must, therefor e, be concerned with the coordin ation and integr ation of the se essentialrequirements for MOVING PEOPLE AND GOODS .

The increasing demands for transportation , greater d is-tances and the comp etition for sp ace in the Los AngelesBasin , and particula r ly cer tain localized areas with in it,threaten to mire it in the tr ansportation dilemma whichhas been called "the most pr essing urban issue of the 20thCentury ."

Transportation fa cilities, to a large extent , shaped thed evelopment of the m etro politan ar ea. But r a pid po pula-tion growth , the trend towar d urban living, the ste pped-u peconomy and the shi f t f rom mass tr ansportation to the

private automob ile, threate n to strangle the ver y f or ceswhich cr eated the mod ern ur ban ar ea. Excessively highcosts of cong estion ar e d e pr eciating the ad vantages of urban living and ma y be pr icing them out of reach.

The dilemma will not b e r esolved by the "easy answer "

method of appl ying techniqu es or treatments u sed in other areas, or by superfi cially tr eating symptoms. A pr acticaland economical solution to transportation problems canonly result from a basic und er standing of the economic ,topographical and ecological cha 'racteristics of an area, and by progressively sati sf ying the needs resulting from thesechara cteristics. Thi s is manif estly true in the 'Los AngelesArea where, becaus e of its d evelopment during th e age of the automobile, its gener al char acteristics differ from tho seof other metropolitan ar eas.

Although the gener al outline of the Basin Ar ea d evelop-ment was influen ced by the fir st mass transit s ystem, theautomobile finall y charac terized the area and brou ght a bouta development wh ich, by its ver y nature , compl icates and intensif ies the task of provid ing adequate and efficienttr ans portation . Some of these compli cating char acteristicsare:

2, Low population dens ity.

3. High motor vehicle registration.


13/58


14/58

SANTA FESPRINGS

NORWALK .••.S ' _--~~...:,ARTESIA "

~ ORANGE,~,>

/

$

The~iona1 Plannin&Com~si~nCounty o f Los Angeles. califorrua

ferclEGrADlDL Sta1f~


15/58

4. Gr owth characteristics of business and industry.

5. The Souther n California "mode of living. "

6. The attraction to tourists .

The Los Angeles B asin Area has all the natural barriersto the f ree circulation of people and goods. It is sur-r ound ed on the north and east by mountains and h ills, and on the west and south b y the ocean. It is cut up by moun-tain ranges, hills, canyons , rivers and dam s. While theseobstr uction s have not seriou sly handi capped gro wth, theyhave tended to guide land use and to create situations which

INDEX

300

o1930

COMPARATIVE GROWTH19 .40=100

the natural barriers to free movement and th e limited potentials of e xisting transportation fac ilities.

Although population in creases of some magnitude arecommon to most metropolitan areas today, the Lo s AngelesBasin Area grow th can only be d escribed as ex plosive.This unpreced ented population incre ase, cou pled with thelow population d ensity factor , cr eates a unique pr oblemf or tr ans portation.

The population of the Los Angel es area grew f rom 3530in 1850 to 189,99 4 in 1900 , and to 2,327 ,16 6 by 1930.

POPULATION INMilLIONS

Population

now make the solution of traffic problems more difficult .Contained within this Basin are a pproximately 2200 squaremiles of land whic!J. are 4eveloped or h ave fu!ure de velop-ment potential. .

Popula tion growth in some areas is creating gra ve prob- .lems of inter-commun ication with other areas because of

But in the next 26 years it had mor e than doubl ed thegrowth of the pr evious 80 year s, and by July, 1956 , wasestimated to b e 5.9 mill ion. This amazing r ate of growthf ar exceed s the nation's populat ion growth r ate, and if itcontinue s, wiJI probabl y r aise local population f igures to between 8 and 11 million by 1970. One new resident is being added every 2-1 /3 minutes!


16/58

In 1950, Los Angeles and Orange Counties had anaver age population d ensity of 900 people per squar e mile.Although Los Angel es County alone showed a d ensity of 1020 per square mile, this calcu lation included many sq uaremiles of r elatively uninhab ited mounta in and d eser t area.

The City of Los Angeles had an aver age d ensity o f 4370 people per square mil e.

The Southern Cali f or nia R esearch Council , in its report, "The Next 15 Year s," stated : " ... For some timether e has been a net loss of po pulation in the old er resi-dentia l areas of the City of Los Angeles. This trend toward d ecentralization and suburbaniz ation, which has been apparent for man y years, can be ex pected to continue

that some of the mor e spar sely populated areas will haveenormou s growth potential during the next 15 year s."

Based on th e R esear ch Council's analysis, it is estimated that by 1970, the population d ensity in the Los Angeles-

Oran ge County area will var y from a pproximately 3200 people per squar e mile, in Orange County, to 1 2,800 people per square mile in the heavily concentrated Central and Wilsh ire areas of the City of Los Angeles. 1 It is estimated that the major port ion of this two-count y area will var y indensit y f rom 6400 to 9600 peo ple per squar e mile.

Even with the e x pected increase in populat ion density ,and except for the two areas of heavy concentration re-

Population Densityof the

Major Economic Area Divisions

A. San Fernan do

8. GlendaleC. Pasa dena

O. Pomona.Foot hill

E. Alhambraf o Nor thea st

G. East

H. Centra lI . W ilsh ir e

J. Hollywaad K. Bever ly Hi II s·W eltwoo d

L. Santa Mo nica Bay

M. Adams.l nglewood

N. Southeast

O. Whit tier "No r wolk

P. South Coast

R. North west-Wes t

Orange Co u nty

D~ ~2 . 5 10

- -15 20 25 30

in the f utur e. . . . Althou gh population den sity cannot beex pected to decline gr eatly in any major ar ea, we can expecta more even distribution of population . In terms of existing ty pes of housin g, it is evident that some areas havereached what amount s to a terminal d ensity. Even for th ecentr al ar eas, however , populat ion density by 1970 will beconsider a bly below that o f other ma jor metropolitan areas.... The spill-over of new r esid ents must be into areas inwhich the d ensity i s still comp ar atively low. Thi s means

ferred to, th e population d ensity of the Los Ang eles Bas inArea will be far b elow the d ensity o f other major metro-

politan areas .

1 This re presents a decrease in the Central area from the pr esentlyestimated 16,000 peo ple per sq uar e mile. No d ensity change is pr ed icted f or the Wilshir e ar ea whic h cur rently is estimated to bea bout 12,800 peopl e per square mile. . .


17/58

on motor vehicles as the principal means of transportationis clearly evident in the trends in motor vehicle registrationand use.

POPULATION DENSITY PER SQUARE MILE OF

MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS

Manhattan 89,095

New York City 24,950

Chicago 17,335

Boston 17,190

Philadelphia 16,310

St. Louis 13,985

Detroit 13,320

Washington, D. C. 13,150

Cleveland 12,075

Baltimore 11,950

LOS ANGELES AREA(Estimated -1970) 9,600

In 1955 there was approximately one automobile for

every 2.7 people in Los Angeles County . By now thenumber would be closer to one for every two people. Infact, the Los Angeles area has more vehicles per personthan any other metropolitan area.

176,000 vehicles were registered in the area in 1920.By 1939 there were 1 ,100,000, and records show 2,900,000vehicle registrations on January 1, 1957. We are told toexpect something in excess of 4.1 million vehicles in theBasin Area by 1970.

If present trends continue, vehicle mileage will increase

about 90 per cent, to approximately 43 billion vehicle miles per year by 1970.

That the Los Angeles Area has been described as "anarea on wheels" may be trite, but that the area is dependent

This trend toward the more flexible mode of privatetransportation is borne out by declining public transporta-tion patronage. Approximately 575 million passenger tripswere recorded on public transportation in 1947. This patronage steadily declined until in 1956, less than 250

Automotive Travel and Vehicle Registrations


18/58

million pa ssengers used publ ic trans portation-fewer thanin 1936 when the popul ation was less than half the 1956f igure .

TABLE 2

VEHICLES P ER O NE HUNDR ED PEOPLE(In counties of o ver 1 million population)

New York (f ive boroughs) 16Baltimore, Md . 19Philadelphia , Pa. 21Allegheny (Pittsburgh) , Pa. 26Cook (Chicago), Ill . 27Middlesex (Lowell) , Mass. 28St. Louis, Mo. 30Cuyahoga (Cleveland), Ohio 33Wayne (Detroit), Mi ch. 34LOS ANGELES 44

Source: Automob ile Facts and Figures, 1954What hap pened to the passenger trips made on public

transit in 1947 that wer e not made in 1956? The peoplewho mad e these trips, together with the thousands of newresiden ts, ar e either walkin g or are using private automo-

biles. We can assume from the degree of traffic congestionthat few are walking.

Millions ot Passenger sCar r i ed

600

/ "'" . . . . • • • . • • .

" ' - . • • . • . . . • . • . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . •- . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . .

Ther e is a marked tend ency to describe the businessgr owth of the Los Angeles Basin Area as a "decentraliza-tion." What looked lik e d ecentralization a short whileago is really new growth which settled in outlying areaswhere room f or ex pansion was available .

R etai l business has followed the population to th esuburb s to pr ovide proximate shoppin g facilitie s.

Ther e ar e well over 100 suburb an shopping centers inthe Los Angeles area. Althou gh Downtown Lo s Angeles

still commands a good share of area retail sales, r etaildisper sion has continu ally lowered th e ratio of Downtownsales to total County sales.

The December, 1956, Monthly Summary of the Se curity-First National Bank repor ted : "A tr end toward the sub-urbaniz ation of dep artment store sales has been e vid ent inthe Los Angeles are a f or more th an 20 years, and h as been particularly marked dur ing the past 10 years. Thi s trend continu ed in 1956 . Data for the f ir st 11 month s of theyear indicate that dep artment stor es in Downto wn LosAngeles have experi enced a 4% reduction in sales f rom1955, whereas department stores in the balance of themetropolitan area have shown a ga in o f 8% ... "

D E P A R T M E N T S T O R E S A L E SS E A S O N A llY A D J U S T E D I N D E X E S

1 9 4 6 = 1 0 0

.;i~I. ,"~. o . • ,r~

" " J . . • • • ; : : s ' .'g

In 1929, the Downtown area commanded 75 % of totalDepartment store sale s in the Count y. By 1939, this lead had slipped to 54 % of the Count y total, and to 3 8.1 % in1948 . Downtown d epartment store sales were estimated to be $134,000,000 in 1956 - only 22.9% of the Countytotal of $587,000,00 0.

TABLE 3

DOWNTOWN Los AN GE LES DEPARTMENT S TO R ESALES AS A P ERC E NT AGE OF TOTAL CO U NTY

DEPART ME NT STORE SALES

194819491950195119521953195419551956

38.137.736.4

35.329.928.627.325.022.9


19/58

7 7 78

7 72 N lL NI

77

-- - ~~ f o , , _s r

50_ ~

3

S P

L RTHE N T l O ~ S ~ ~TO TlN G E


20/58

PINGo f

CENTERS

LLION DOLLARSil sales

SAUS AlIA WITH 700 PfOPUTAL POPULATION 0' 6,350,000

122 12 126 lall 13 132 13'" - - - • . . • . . . . . •- ~ . . = = r ~ i~~ - _ . -~" ' " ,. • . . -'-- U ~ -,. . _ l O U.•= u.,• - ' • ..~ l'


21/58

This pattern of dis per sion and ex pansion is perhapsmor e ty pical of this ar ea than of any other major metr o-

politan ar ea. The automobile keep s this process going,and it is doubtful that th e area ever will develop as atr adition al, centr alized metropolit an ar ea where mo st of

the movement is into and out of the core area each d ay.Instead, the Los Angeles a r ea is com posed of scor es of relative ly self -suf f icient satellite ar eas sur roundi ng an atypi-cal center core. Ther e is no other metr o politan area lik e it.

Industr y, too, has disper sed widely throughout th e area,into numerous indus trial districts rather than into a f ewlar ge, concentrated zones.

The widespread disp er sion of industr y results fr om:(1) its freedom from absolut e depend ence on railr oad sf or moving its good s, and (2) the mobility of it s la bor f or ce. Of the more than 519 communiti es in t he metro-

politan area , 321 have no r ail facilities and ar e served exclusively by truck and pri vate automobile .

The industrial dis persion, like the retail counterp ar t, islarge ly new growth, not a decentralization of the old er centr al manufacturin g d istr ict. New plants are b einglocated close to la bor sour ces and tr ansportation fa cilities .The d evelopm ent of new indust r y close to fr eeways is

illustr ative of this point.

The Los Angeles area is now the nation 's thir d largestind ustrial center . It moved f r om fifth to thir d place inthe short s pace of 10 years . Continued growth and dis per-sion can be expected , and along with it will come greater demand s on existing tr ans por tation facilities , par ticularlythe highway and fr eeway system .

Tourism

The Southern C alif ornia area, with its many internat ion-ally k nown and famous scenic attractions , is one of the primary vaca tion and tourist r egions of the world . It isestimate d that tour ist travel in the Los Angele s area nowaccounts f or fr om 7 to 8 per cent of total reta il sales. Dur-ing 1956, in excess of 4,000,000 tourists visited the are a.They s pent a p pr oximate ly $595 million dollar s.

T O U R IS T V O L U M E5,000,000

4,500,000

4,000,000

3,500,000

3,000,00 0

2,500,000

2,000,00 0

1,500,000

1,000,000

500,000

o1922

.~··"'I •".

. -' . - J•• /'I- >91

, I , / ! J; \ " ••

- . . . . • . . .- . ".

--~

• • • • • • .• • ; ' 1 '\ - = " '- -

~

•lit ••• •• ••• . . - 1 " 1 '"• I'

~. . . -~.• I ' , N t

T O U R IS T E X P E N D IT U R E S$600,000,00 0

500,000,000

400,000,00 0

300,000,000

200,000,000

10 0,000,000

o1922

,''V if '.Ii: ••••


22/58

The five southern check s tations recorded 958,481 outof state motor vehicles carrying 2 ,568,778 pe o ple enteringSouthern Calif or nia in 1956. It is believed that one-third of these vehic les and people were touris ts. The others

were pr ospective residents.

To urism of such mag nitude becomes a significant fac tor in traffic and tra nsportation management .

The Southern California "mode of living" is the resultof clima te and to pography. T he area is located in one of five rather small regions of the wor ld which have beencharacterized by what is called a Mediterranean type cli-mate . The warm to hot, relatively dry , summers, unusually

mild winters an d a high percentage of sunshine are uniqueto these coasta l areas.

The various a rr angements of mou ntains, valleys, hil ls,ocean and desert offer a series of s u b-clima tes which rangefrom the mild and often foggy coastal areas to the warmer and drier valley regions . Residents have a wide choice of area and sub -climate, and the exercise of this choice often

adds to the transportation problem because residence lo ca-tion very often does not coincide with the area of o ccu- pation.

Appr oximately three -quarters of the people of the Lo s

Angeles area reside in single-family dwellings with th eaccent on' openness and space. Building a nd zoning regu-lations and policies will perpetuate this type of develop-ment , with its low population density, until the peoplethemselves decree otherwise.

These fac tors - "mode of living," business and indus-trial dispersion , population g r owth and density and the popular use of the automobile - are related one to theother in terms of traffic cir culation by patterns so compli-

cated as to become the major difficulty in solving the prob-lem itself. Area population , industrial concentrations and business centers c r eate demands for movemen t within, be-tween, ar ound or across such centers, with a resultingtraffic situa tion which is almost beyond comprehension .These centers can no longer exist as isolated ar eas. Pros- pective growth and development lends urgency to the earl ysolution of area mo vement and circulation problems.


23/58

.RIIWSTI:R MA••••ING KRVIC.'110 HUNTINGTON D•• SOUTHLOa ANGELE. 311. CALlP'O.NIA

CA•. •~'·snl

If 24 30 32 34 36 38 40

~' J' ;"''' lG UU O OU /flY . . . • .' . , - • . . • . . .,- P < o _, _ •••••.••'...,'* J . . ! " , , , ,

~~

1!1 0." " 1ID ."J :I

'.-"~ ~ ""'W t1!I . 1:1 "- . !I"

"'lICl . •• . _

U.l"l:l ".-

'0 , '. •••.•, .

P• • ~ •• •• • - ••• (".-. _ ~--~

. . . . • . •

_ ~~r •• ..- .• • •••• r •• • • . ••. • . • . . • • . . . . . . .

:'9.1". _ ,16. _ U.",.

"" 1f',7'JlI

1o0S ANGEI oES ABEA NOW$5,11

•••• •••••• Serving the West's huge mass-consuming


24/58

STRIALo f

AREAS

c. ,...,.'O ", ,• • . • • .,eRlEWSTER MA• • ••I NG SER VI CE• ..OS "" 'G lL .U " " • • ••00 ,.' - S U I

11 8 1 20 122 1 2 1 26 1 28 I 0 1 32 1 34

10. :I INDUS'rBIAI. CEII'rEB14,000• all I •••

. . •• . . . . . . . •-..• . . . . ... . . . •. . . . . • . - . '. • . . . .• . . .

" '

• . . ., ~.

. . .~:.. ;': : ~: . -


25/58

What Are the Transportati o n Requirementsof the Area?

This question h as never been answered, and wi th thecurr ent lack of coordin ated tr ans portation plannin g, we ar euna ble to delineate th e need with the precis{on necessaryf or intelligent, economi cal progress. We can only take thenegative approach and evaluate the ef f ects that transporta-tion inadequa cies have upon the people and economy byaskin g such questions as : How do transp ortat ion d eficiencesand traffic congestion affect th e individual and the com-munit y in terms of the costs of livin g and doing business?What will be the result of increased c ongestion? How

eff ective is our present tran s portation system?

Each year we spend m illions of dollars to ad vance thefreew ay system and improv e streets and highwa ys. Yetar ea gr owth creates congestion faster than we are able tocope with it. All segments of urban living feel the impact .

Tr affic and transporta tion f acilities which are inadequ ateor incomp atible to the needs of th e ar ea appreciably affectthe cost of living of each citizen.

Consider, f or a moment, the increased cost of c onsumer good s resulting dir ectly f r om traffic delays to trucks alo ne.Eight per cen t of all commodi ties used in t he United Statestoday are moved by truck . In Calif ornia, t he amount of consumer goods moved by this method ex ceed s the nationalaver age many times . josts attributed to c ongestion are inexcess of eight times greater in Los A ngeles than in thenation as a whole.

Wages and other fixed time cost s are the major part of o perating costs . Tr af f ic d elays r esult in higher cost s to both the proprietor y and regulated carriers . These higher o per ating costs are either includ ed directly in the price of the product or are passed on thr ough higher mileage rates .The net result is higher cost per unit of merchandise.

The ex pandin g resid ential d evelopment has increased dis-tances between home and work and betwee n home and theold established central shoppin g centers . The individual pays more to get to work , and he pays more for merchan -d ise which must be transported greater d istances from cen ·tral sources of sup ply.

Industrial ex pansion, too, has its financial eff ects on theindividual. C ongesti on and travel distance have f or ced many people to move to ar eas wher e pr o perty values arehigher than thei r a bility to pay in order to be nearer their work . Conver sely, many have been for ced to move to lower level areas to avoid un pleasant transpor tation d eficiencies.

Traffic and transport ation plays an important p ar t in the physica l well being of the individual . It is estimated that because of modern warehousing and delivery practices , onlya one-week suppl y of food exists in markets. Perishablessuch as mi lk , fruit and vegetable s must be moved in daily .The shut-do wn of hay truck s for two days would signifi -

cantly affect th e sup ply of milk and other dairy products .The expeditiou s handling of trash and waste has an important relation shi p to public h ealth.

Although fi gur es ar e not availa ble to document it , thereis no doubt but th at congestion create s some d egr ee of mental disturbance. In ad d ition to othe r effects that tr af ficf rustrations m ay produce, there appears to be a d irect re-lationship bet ween these fr ustr ations and indust rial acci-dents. Records show an in cr ease in this ty pe of accidentand a large share ar e attributed to dela ys and irritatingconditions enroute to the job.

Dispe r sion of residen ce, business and industry h as madethe private automobile th e princi pal mode of transportation .Although the e conomy of the Metropolitan area is stillstrong and vigorous ly progr essive, conti nued pr ogress willlargely d epend u pon our a bility to wise ly use our land areasand avoid the saturat ion of street space which cou ld raisethe cos t of living in this urb an area to a point beyond thereach of the individu al.

Tr ansportation inad equacies have forced many businessr elocations. In spite of the ca pital costs involved , firmsexpe r iencing h igh tard iness r ates d ue to tr ansportationdeficiences have been f orced to seek loc ations closer tosources of labor and mor e convenient for the ir customers.Healthy business must have adequate facilities for customer parkin g, either as str eet space or off -street accommodations .Customers will go elsewh er e if they find it diff icult to reachtheir shopping d estinat ions, or if after rea ching them , itis d ifficult to park . Salesmen, serving business, find itincreasingly difficult to service as many contacts as bef ore.


26/58

Tr affic d elays and lack of parking ar e for cing upward the

costs for mai ntenance of sales personnel .

The d eliveries of good s, vital to business surv ival, un-

f ortunately of ten must b e timed so that they are in con -

f lict with peak traffic movements: The economic impact

u pon business of d elays due to these conflicts is alread y

alarmin g.

One of the most exciting characteristics of the Los An-

geles Basin Area is its expanding industr ial potential which

some observers claim will ultima tely carry it to the first

position among indu strial areas . Transportat ion will play

a k ey part in this exp ansion .

Because of its d epend ence u pon tr ans por tation , this great

indu str ial potential is super -sensitive to the influences ot

tr ans por tation inadequ acies.( A large labor for ce must be

tr ans por ted to and f r om inaustr y. Congestion and trans-

por tation inadequacies cause tardin ess and a high incidenc e

of turnover, both of which influence operational costs .

Tardin ess means loss o f production , and turnover means

higher tr aining costs . Industries ar e being forced to de-

vote more management tim e to trans portation matters.

'Eq ually im portant to indu str y is the economical and

r a pid movem ent of good s. The specializ ation of industry

has cr eated a unique tr anspor tation problem of its o wn.

Not only must raw material s and finished products be de-

liver ed , but subcontract ing within indu str y requires a vast

and complicat ed cr oss-movement of components to larger

assembly centers.

If the costs of these vital movement r equirement s are

disproportionate ly raised by congestion and inadequa te

transpor tation, ind ustrial gr owth will be adver sely affected .

It is evident that the cost of all governmental ser vices isdir ectly influenced b y traf fic and transportation . Conges·tion often force s governm ent to add more people to its

staff in order t o maintain a satisf actory level of essentialser vIces.

Traffic con gestion has been a major factor in the de clineof public transit patrona ge. As transit vehicles are slowed down , more people abandon the service in favor of the pr ivate automobil e. In some ar eas this trend has reached an alarming level and in o r d er to save the mass transitser vice, so vital to the econom y of any large city , govern -ment has been forced to buy and operate transit ser vices .From an economic standpoint , gover nmental ownership of transit has many unde sirable features .

Traffic and transportation de f iciencies reflect themselvesin taxes as the cost of governmental services increase . Taxincr eases often are b orne by large segments of the publicwho do not benefit di r ectly from the increase. An exampleof this is the tax subsid y often required to offset operationaldeficiencies in publi cly operated transit . Those peoplewho never patroniz e the ser vice must bear their share o f the cost .

It is obvious that traff ic and trans portation pla y impor-tant roles in the healthy growth and development of urbanar eas, and particul arly in the Los Angeles Bas in. Inade-quacies make living in these urban areas troublesome and costly, inhibit developm ent and caus e unnecessary mentaland physical sufferin g.

Altho ugh the point has not yet been reached , ther e areunmistakab le sym ptoms of traf fic and transportation inade·quacies which, if continued unchecked, could se r iousl yimpair future gro wth potentials. These are symptom swhich signal the need f or a d etailed econom ic evaluationand stud y of our traffic a nd tr ans portation problems.


27/58

Ar ea-wide transportation plannin g is as vital to the Los

Ange les Basin Area as oil is to the machines of its indus-tr ial colossus.

Old metho d s of solving transportatio n head aches by piecemea l or localized action are d emonstra bly insufficien t.Ex plosive ur banizat ion now demand s br oad, far-sighted , planned action. Thi s was r ecognized by the Univer sityPresid ents' Ad visor y Committee on Los Angeles Tr anspor-tation P r oblems se ven year s ago when, in its May, 1950,r e port, it stated:

"The Committee i s convinced that a comprehen sive area-wid e surveyor stud y is necessary bef or e an acce pta blesolution can be found . It recomme nd s that a stud y beundertaken which will cover not only the engineeringfeatures of possible systems, but also the patter n of gr owth of the Los Angeles County Metropol itan Areaand the relation of a coordinated tr ans portation systemto a healthy econo mic developm ent. If the stud y werelimited to no mor e than preliminary designs, cost esti·mates and financi al studies, it would not come to gripswith the real problem.

'The specific pu~ose of the stud y is to determine thelocation a nd ty pe, or ty pes of r a pid tr ansit , if any,which will best serve not only the present, but also the

f uture needs of the Los Ange les County Metro politanAr ea. The proba ble effec t of each economic ally f eas-i ble system upon th e d evelopment of the are a, uponease and s peed of tr ans portation and upon tr affic con-gestion should be car efully consider ed. The eff ect of automobile traffic on th e variou s systems consid er ed must be f ully investigated ."

A master p lan must be d r awn to guid e the developm entand integra tion of transport ation facilities. Only thr oughthe detailed stud ies on which such planning must be based ,will we k now the answers to suc h important questions as:How many miles of freeway do we r eally need ? How

much and where should we plan f or the use of mass rapid transit? What special pro visions must be made for mov-ing good s? Wher e and how do we park vehicle s? Howcan we f inance the ord erly d evelopm ent of a system ? Howdo we coor d inate the elemen ts of the system? Wh at arethe economics involved -how much can we afford and howmuch tnt/st we affor d to r emain economical ly d ynamic?

These questions, and many m ore lik e them, must beanswer ed by making trans portation pl anning the fir st order

of ur ban business. Then tr anspor tation will serve r ather

than r estr ict ar ea developme nt.

What Kind of a Transpo r tation SystemDo We Have?

Until now, any consideration of the tr ans portation systemusually tended to ward only one phase of the total problemor tend ed toward o ver-simplified or one-shot answers. Atrans portation s ystem is not mass rapid transit alone! It isnot fr eeways and highways alone! A transportat ion systemis a planned , intelligent, econom ically feasi ble d evelopment

and inter-r elationship of all facilities for moving peopleand goods into , within, through, ar ound and b etwee n allar eas of commer cial, industrial and resident ial concentration.

How well does our present system meet the se specif ica-tions?

C oor dination. Coordination and cooperation pla y important roles in tr ans por tation and are the k ey to many problems. Well over 100 separ ate political ju risdict ionsor community center s ar e located within the Los AngelesBasin Area. Most of these have some res ponsi bility f or planning, develo ping or controllin g the segment of the areatrans por tation system which lies within their jur isd ictionallimits. When a segment of the transpor tation system fallswithin several jurisdictions, each with power to control or regulate, diff erences of o pinion and philosophy often createconfus ion and sometimes inhibit pr ogress.

Dif ferences in policy relating to traf fic control on str eets passing through severa l jurisdictions has measur a bly re-duced the ef f iciency of these vital arter ies. The ina bilityto agree on location has need lessly delayed the building of importan t f aciliti es. A lack of inter est or und erstandingof the impor tance of trans por tation to the ar ea has some-times per petuated self -interest grou ps.

Differ ences in philoso phy and opinion must b e resolved and r econciled and a satisfactor y method for d evelopingcoord inated action must b e found .

St r ee t s and H ighwa ys. The physical char acter istics of local str eets and highways are d e pendent to a considerabl eextent u pon local cond itions. Resid ential communi ties need stree ts d iffer ent in d esign and character of constr uction fromindustrial center s. Business areas may r equire s pecial con-sid er ations.


28/58

Design standards for major t r af fic, indu str ial and resi-d ential streets have been esta blished and are usuall y closelyf ollowed by the engineers of the individual cities and coun-ties. Cross s ection, cont inui ty and alignment of int r a-city streets handling local t r affic can saf ely be left to the

individual jurisd iction s who best know their o wn localrequireme nts. They are usually staffed with competentengineers ca pa ble of such plann ing.

The Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commi s-

sion has prepa r ed Master Plans of Hi ghway s and Fr ee-

ways . It has encouraged local ju r isdic tions to appro ve the

portion s of those plans which lie within their respecti ve

limits. It is impor tant to the ar ea as a whole that each

city within the area prot ect and implem ent these master

plans of highways and freeways .

\\-\

\\\\

\\\

M AS H R P L A N O~

~ Q ~ ~ W A Y SCOUNTY O ~ L OS ANG~L~S

Although regulatory d evices for the control of tr afficmovement within local areas should be gover ned locally, insome insta nces, as for examp le ma jor highways, such con-trol as shown on the Mas ter Plan of Highways should b einclud ed in the routing and d esign features drawn b y local

jur isdict ions.

Inter-c ity and county major highways should be laid ou tand d eveloped in confor mity with the Master Plan as tolocatio n, r ights-of-way and r oad way widths and d esignstandard s.

F reeways. The concept of f reeways as the pr imary ele-ments of mod ern trans portation was not ad vanced and ad opted until the present st reet and highway system waswell d eveloped. It must be recognized that althou gh fr ee-ways will greatl y relieve the thr ough traff ic load on the

iiiii\

iii

)i.Jiii

J

~.kI

LEc. £ HD

-- FRE£W AYS

-- IolIG HW AY S

.t.$" -"C " o(O

. ." ' --

g~


29/58

sur face str eet system, they will not in any sense r eplace theneed t o d evelop and com plete an adequate surface s treetsystem. Neithe r will their constr uction lessen the respon-sibility for the proper maintena nce of the local streetsystem.

Freeways are a su pplement to the street system. They provid e high ca pacity, high s peed, smoot h flowing, safetr aff ic ways f or lar ge str eams of tr aff ic. Their locationand constru ction must ena ble them to effecti vely collectand distribute traff ic, and as integr al units of the street and highway syste m should , therefor e, be as definitely planne d for as any surf ace ar ter y. Heretofor e, lack of plann ing hasr esulted in disturb ance and alarm to some communitieswhen new fr eeways are proposed eve n thoug h they mayhave been par t of the Master Plan of Highways and Free-ways. Sma ller communitie s, es pecially, have not recognized the need f or or desirabi lity of a f reeway passi ng throughtheir juris d ictions and h ave not planned their streets ac-cordin gly.

Failur e to recognize the tr emendou s value of these ar -teries and to thus provide suf ficient funds for their con-str uction has forced fre eways to be d eveloped pr ogressivelyin units. Until a major portion of the system is com pleted it will not function to th e best ad vantage. People tr avelf ar out of their way to use the compl eted sections of free-ways, thus tendin g to over load them and create d elays and bottlenecks at tem porary ter mini of these sections. It isessenti al that ad equate fin ancing be f ound to permit the

ex ped itii-t:s com pletion of the fr eeway sys tem.Curb Par king. In the Los Angeles Area the need for

restriction, reg ulat ion and pr ohibition of cur b parking has been r ecognized f or a num ber of year s with the r esult thattraf fic regulation is generally based on the princi ple of maximum uti lization of streets, roads and highways.

As congestion increases, it becomes necessary n ot onlyto r estrict and prohibit curb park ing along traffic arteriesand in business section s, but also to offset cente r lines toincr ease str eet ca pacity during rush hours.

There is some need f or more unif or m curb parkin g regu-lations in the var ious political jurisd ictions including theCity of Los Angele s itself . The char acteristics of traf f icshould be, and frequently are used to govern the no - parking periods. Th ere is need for more f lexib ility, how-. ever, in the hour s of par king r estr ictions to fit these char -acteris tics throughout the entire metropolitan area .

O ff -S t reet Parking. While it is true that the gr owinguse of automo biles cr eates d emand for par k ing space, italso cr eates demand f or mor e str eet space in which to o per -ate them. If the str eets and off -street faci lities together cann ot co pe with the num ber of automo biles, the pr ovisi on

of more off -street parki ng alone will not invite .motor iststo brave the str eet jams to r each the space. Str eets ar ed esigned for the movemen t of people and goods , not f or stor ing vehicles. The pu blic must be suf f icientl y inf or med of these basic cons id er ations s o it will accept th e principle

of r eserving major str eets primarily f or the movement of intr a-comm unity tr af fic.

In general, the creat ion of additio nal off -str eet park ings paces in d evelo ped areas is local pr oblem. Methods and techniq ues are at hand to do t his through assessm ent or the issuance of revenue bonds . Pu blic bod ies ar e author -ized to constru ct pu blic par king lots and issue revenue bonds and to pledge parking meter r e~enues as secur ity for the payment of such bonds .

The zoning or dinances of the ma ny cities and countiesin the ar ea vary in the ir requireme nts for pr oviding of f-street pa r king facilities in new building construction . Theseordinances should b e r eviewed t o promot e unif ormity and to assure adequ ate off-str eet par king thr oughout the area based on propo sed land use.

M ass Tr ans por t at ion. The need for a centralized in ven-tor y of all existing local and long-haul transit facilities haslong been recogniz ed in past stud ies of the stubject . Withina 20 mile r adius of downtown Los Angeles, 31 separatecarriers provi d e mass tr ansit ser vice thr ough 178 carrier connections and 1400 points of interchange. One of thesecarriers pr ovides both local and inter ur ban ser vice. A list

of the tr ansportation companie s referre d to above is f ound in Appe ndix J.

Service ra nges from 24 hours per d ay, seven days per week, to 10 to 12 hours per day, six days per week . Head -ways vary from five minutes to in excess of two hours.

Ten basic rate stm ctures a pply, r anging from 10 to 20cents; and 21 carr ier s provide for zone i ncrements r angingfrom 3 to 10 cents per zone.

Joint fares with tr ansf er privi leges ar e i n limited effect,involving only 11 of the tr ansit companies. Except f or one

carrier which maint ains joint f ar e agr eements with threeother carrie r s each of the agr eements is between two or thr ee of these eleven com panies.

In addition to th e need f or knowin g more about loc altr ansit ser vice, intemr ban bus and rail lines have had nos pecial stud y exce pt such portions of t he MetropolitanCoach Lines system as might come und er this classifica tion.Such a study is an im portant part of a genera l transporta-tion investigation.

Pro posals have been made to stud y the inter -city and interst ate bus and rail systems i n the Los Angeles Ar ea,


30/58

lIIAJO III ",," .••• 'S TO R . 'O (" Eo TO 1 0 r EET~o - • ••~ . . " TO I( W IC£~O T O 1 0 0 rUT"""-'O l' •••IGH.••• " TO II[ 0P£1E0 TO 100 '[£ T

W C ~ H lG >


31/58

" . . .. . . .~.•...~ .~ ~~~• . . .~

. . . . . "",(;--. .~~: ; ' ; ' . . ; . . . : : ~ . . . ., ~h o " ~ : ; :


32/58

and in 1943 some wo r k was done on this subject . It wasnever compl eted.

The Los Angeles Metropolitan Traffic Association pre -' pared and publ ished a comprehen sive plan for use of free-

ways by mass tr ansit buses. This stud y r ecommends: •L Freeway exp ress coach ser vice f or all freeways as

r apid ly as they are completed and ser vice is war-r anted by population and ar ea d evelopment .

2. That freeways be d esigned with s pecial regard f or bus loading z ones at important tr ansf er points .

3. That coach extension s of local lines-with extensivetermin al transfer-b e eliminated if freeway expressroute s provide thrOl igh service .

4. The esta blishment of f eed er routes for some of the proposed through f r eeway ex press coach service.

5. A study be made of time savi ngs in tr avel to and fromoutlying industrial and business centers.

Ther e is ur gent need to develo p at the highest possibl edegr ee of ef ficiency and ef fectivenss a mod ern mass rap id transit system in the Los Angeles Basin Area as a part of an integr ated tr ansportation system. Such a mass rapid tr ansit system mus t be p lanned and constructed solely onthe basis of the need for this serv ice within the total s ys-tem. Many questions must be asked ' and answered befor e

real progr ess results, The typ'e, sco pe and location of ser vice; the matter of "f ree enter pr ise" tr ansit as oppo sed

- to publicly subsidiz ed tr ansit; the general circum stances of operation s, all must be met on the basis of economi c need , public necess ity and convenience ,

Because most mass rapid transit sy stems tod ay ar e beingsu bsid ized to some d egree, we can not think in terms of grandiose sys tems, but rather must d etermine w hat isneed ed , how much it will cost, and allow the pu blic, whic hwill eventually subsidize it, to d ecide whe ther or not theeconomi c benef its to be d er ived f r om the system are worththe price.

T rucking. Southern California 's d ependence u pon ef f i-cient truck operations m ake it im per ative that these o pera-tions become an integr al part of any stud y of tr affic an d trans portation.

Little is known about the requ irements f or moving gJod sin the area. Without some detailed knowled ge of thesereq uirements how can we plan highway and termina l facili-ties to accommod ate them with the least amount of frictionwith other essential moveme nts? When these requi reme ntsar e known, such matter s as fr eeway d esign and gr ad es tohandle tr uck s, legislation req uir ing s~and ar d s of perform -ance and other pertinent questions can be weig hed and r e-solved prop er ly.


33/58

As heretofore indicated, an area-wide TRAFFIC and

TRANSPORT ATION PLAN should be based upon asound and adequate factual investigation of area move-ment requirements for people and goods.

Transportation in all of its elements and appurtenantconsiderations is an exceedingly complex matter in anymetropolitan area. Particularly is this so in a dynamic ,rapidly growing and changing area such as the Los AngelesBasin Area where, due to unusual conditions, the patternsof growth are not those of the typical, conventional big citywith its satellite communities.

There are no precedents for integrating all existing or proposed transportation facilities in any metropolitan area,and certainly not for this area. It is important that plan-ning be done now for maximum utilization of existingfacilities and the provision of new facilities to meet therequirements of Los Angeles Basin Area community life.

Comprehensive transportation planning should includeall existing forms of transportation for moving people and goods into; out of, and within the Los Angeles Basin Areaand each of its component communities. It should include

transportation facilities not currently in use in the area butnecessary for its future, planned development .

Included in such planning should be the most practicalmethod of administration and operation of each of thevarious forms of transportation determined to be necessaryand provision for their proper integration and coordinationas a system to serve all geographical and component inter-ests of the Basin Area most economically and effectively.

There is no question that one of the most, if not themost important of considerations is the planning of prac-tical methods of financing the improvement of existingfacilities and the supplying of transportation elements now

lacking. Inadequate financing has seriously handicapped the improvement of several existing facilities which arerecognized elements of a transportation system, such as:

1 . Adequate traffic engineering departments in city,county and state governments to regulate the use of present streets and highways.

2. Adquate enforcement personnel and equipment toassure the proper operation of existing streets, high-ways and freeways.

3. Elimination of deficiencies in the street and high-

way systems.4. Elimination of deficiencies in the state highway sys-

tem and the early construction of an adequate free-way system in this metropolitan area.

5. Elimination of hazardous railway grade crossings.

6. Provision of adequate bus loading facilities alongurban and rural freeways.

7. Measures to improve existing mass transit systemsand make them more attractive to riders.

8. Collection and analysis of data on land use, move-ments of people and goods and other pertinent transportation matters essential for intelligent, effective planning.

Inherent in a master plan of transportation should be a program for the development of the plan which should begin with the improvement of existing facilities and beso organized that it may be developed progressively in stepswhich are within the practical realms of accomplishment .The first steps should be of immediate application and eachsucceeding step should be of value in the progressive relief of traffic and transportation problems.

In a constantly expanding community such as the LosAngeles Basin Area, it is unrealistic to sit back and wait for a comprehensive solution of the entire problem and thenlaunch forth on its solution. There must be a constant,aggressive program of action within the abilities of theagencies concerned, from the standpoint of financing, man- power and other factors, to solve the components of the problem as they now exist or as they arise.

Many elements of the social, political and economic lifeof this area must be analyzed and correlated to develop anintegrated transportation plan. Some of these elementsare listed here -others could undoubtedly be added:

1 . Continuing Physical and Operational Inventory of Existing Transportation Facilities.

a. Facilities for movement of people.

b. Facilities for movement of goods.


34/58

2. A study of the Los Ang eles Basin Geography

a. Physical geography

b. Economic geograph y

c. Political geograph y

3. A Related Study of all Traffic and Transit Move -ments

a. Movement s into, out of , and within the Area

b. Movement s within com ponent commun ities of the Area

c. Movements b etween the communit ies of theArea

4. Land Use, Population and Motor Vehi cle Distribu -tion Studies

7. Determination of Desirable Standards of Transpor "tation for the Ar ea

8. New Transport ation Facilities Needed

a. Determin ation of d esir a ble add itional fac ilities

b. Pr ogrammin g these on f easibl e schedule of ac -complishment

c. Interrelatin g of public and pri vate operat ions

9. Economic Consider ations

a. Measur ing the need for f acilities

b. The eff ect of transportation on the economy of the Area

10. Sociological Con siderations

a. Behavior p atterns and attitudes of people as theyaffect or ar e af fected by tr ans portation choices

b. Effect of tr ans por tation on social f a bric of Area

1 1 . Financial Consider ations

a. Estim ating proba ble costs of constru ction, Im- provement and op eration .

b. Abilit y of Ar ea t o pay necessar y costs

c. Appli ca ble me

Documents

1957 Transportation in the Los Angeles Area