The purpose of a class four bike lane is to reduce collisions at intersections where there is a high volume of people moving throughout the day and a history of collisions. Elenda Street is not classified as a High Injury Network (HIN) street in our adopted Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Most of Washington Blvd is classified in the High Injury Network, as is Jefferson Blvd and Overland Avenue. Parts of Culver Blvd. show up in the HIN, but not Elenda Street at all. How is it possible that the City wanted to install a Class IV protected bike lane for just a short stretch? And why did they lie about it? The email we have shows they wanted to avoid controversy about the High Injury Network, but also they left Elenda Street north of Culver marked as HIN in Table 12 of the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
The problems with Ms. Chin's email are pretty stunning. While there are some collisions on Elenda Street shown in figure 6 above, it is not considered as having a "history of collisions" as compared with other streets that are already classified in the High Injury Network. Furthermore, Ms. Chin was trying to scurry around the issue that was raised at the time (this was in 2017) -- installing a protected Class IV bike path without the data evidence to support it is questionable at best. Residents were asking why we needed a special path in a part of town that does not have very many bicycle riders nor collisions that would suggest (if they happened) that they need protection.
The other language manipulation of 'focus group meetings' to 'stakeholder meetings' is quite interesting to analyze as well. Stakeholders could be used in a variety of ways. Could it be those who ride their bikes? Could it be those who live nearby? As it happened, the overwhelming support for a very short protected bike path came from those who do not live near it, and that is happening yet again in upcoming discussions planned for Elenda Street south of Culver in 2023.
The three-blocks-long protected bike path on Elenda north of Culver was added to the CC Bike/Pedestrian Master Plan after years of process and attempts to fund it, and ultimately, you can see in table 12 that the City marked it as part of the High Injury Network, even though figure six, table four, and table five all contradict that. Elenda Street is NOT in the High Injury Network.
Add to this the email from Helen Chin and you can see a problem in the City’s process. South of Culver, Elenda Street is a tier 2 priority in the Bike/Ped Master Plan and is slated to have a painted class three bike lane and not a class four protected lane at all. The off-the-cuff remarks and actions made at the October 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting were misinformed and also against the law. There is a public process for creating sub-committees and private citizens cannot join them and committees cannot on a whim create them. The very committee charged with discussing these matters acts just as out of control as the City officials do.
In the 2023 Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) meetings, we anticipate attempts to try to make the case for Elenda Street south of Culver Blvd. to install a Class IV Protected Bike Path, however there is no space. And it's also not in the High Injury Network, nor is it marked as Class IV in the Master Plan. The only way to make a separated bike path on Elenda Street south of Culver is to remove parking on one side of the street and cut into the easement where the 80-year-old trees stand.
And for those who were around for this issue back in 2015-2017, there was an effort to actually remove these old-growth trees on Elenda Street in order to make way for a protected bike path. Residents fought back and the ideas were squashed. However, history tends to repeat itself so we are alerting the public. Stay tuned for more news about the BPAC meetings throughout 2023. We will have plenty of action and petitions on this issue.
Below find tables 4, 5, and 12 from the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan adopted June 2020. The plan is wide-reaching, is the result of years of planning and engagement with the public, and is something that our tax dollars paid for -- it is our opinion that the BPAC and Council should focus on implementing the plan instead of changing it on a whim and by trying to bypass the legal, transparent, and public process in place.
