About Our Safe Streets Campaign

Congestion on Santa Monica Boulevard

Our Campaign for Better Transportation Choices

bike jump

Beverly Hills: Rollin’ like it’s 1977!

Better Bike is all about making our streets safe and accessible for all travelers. Since 2010 we have pressed City of Beverly Hills to leave behind our outdated transportation policies and join our Westside municipal neighbors to support safe, ‘multimodal mobility’ alternatives to the automobile.

Today we don’t have practical transportation options in Beverly Hills. While each of us expects to arrive safely at our destination regardless of whether we travel by bike, foot or car, too often choosing to walk or ride a bicycle summons fear of injury. These travel modes simply must be safe and practical options too.

As our own city plans recognize, multimodal mobility for Beverly Hills is the best solution to problems like increased congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. And our General Plan’s Circulation Element talks  about making streets safe for road users. But it’s just talk if no policy supports it. Indeed collisions injure too many non-motor travelers on city streets. Bike-involved collisions account for ten percent of total collisions, for example, which is too many since people on bicycles make up less than 1% of all road users. Worse, in Beverly Hills nearly 300 collisions every year are hit-and-run. Where are the policies to address these problems?

We know from other cities that bicycle lanes and similar state-approved safety improvements not only make cyclists safer, they make cyclists feel safer too. And that encourages more of us to take a bicycle instead of a car – particularly women who often say they feel particularly vulnerable sharing the streets with harried drivers.

Yet facilities like bicycle lanes, bike ‘boxes,’ and bike-priority signaling find no welcome in Beverly Hills. Though we have a Bicycle Master Plan that calls for a bike route network, the plan dates from 1977 (as in ‘disco’ era 1977) and has yet to be revisited in the five years since our General Plan called for an update.

The First Step to Safer Streets is a A Real Bike Plan

Since 2010 Better Bike has called for the creation of a plan and implementation of programs and improvements that would make cycling safe. We’ve asked for dedicated bike lanes, intersection improvements, safety signage, and bike parking – all measures that we see in other cities that signals a bike-friendly environment – but to no avail. Why can’t we create streets that are safe for kids and adults biking to school, work, and shops?

Well we can. We need only look back to that 1970-era plan for guidance. From it we can begin to discuss what could be the citywide bike route network that we need. Here’s our first draft of what a comprehensive bicycle network should look like:

Bike routes Bevery Hills proposed map

A bike network in the making: Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville provide east-west through routes while Beverly and Crescent drives afford north-south travel. Major points of access to surrounding cities come at the western gateway, Burton Way in the east, Sunset to the north and Beverly to the south.

We believe that at a minimum a Beverly Hills bike route network should include:

  • Routes that connect our five city schools and our key business districts;
  • Pavement markings and signage that show motorists and cyclists alike how to safely traverse major intersections;
  • Marked bike lanes on key corridors and shared-lane markings called “sharrows” on all secondary streets;
  • Bicycle racks where people need them and bike rack ‘corrals’ at high bike traffic points;
  • City-sponsored riding skills & road safety classes for all age groups and integrated into our Summer recreation program; and,
  • Changes to transportation and development policies to discourage auto commuting and encourage mass transit with the bicycle providing the proverbial ‘last mile’ connection between work, home, and transit.

Where Are We Now?

Four years ago our Traffic & Parking Commission created an ad-hoc Bike Plan Update committee to bring our 1977-era Bicycle Master Plan into the modern era, but it has made no recommendations. Three years ago, staff began to talk about more bicycle racks, but the fewer-than-25 to be installed haven’t yet found a place on our our sidewalks. No sign advises riders and drivers to share the road. Not even a simple city webpage offers safe-riding tips. We haven’t come a long way baby.

By calling attention to the safety hazards of cycling in Beverly Hills, we hope to highlight the challenges of simply choosing to ride a bike here. In the face of intransigent city officials and a population unschooled in the joys and practical benefits of cycling, have you any suggestions to offer? Let us know.

Recent Posts

NIMBYs Whiffed on Bike Lanes But Killed the Dog Park

Roxbury dog park visualization

This year northside Beverly Hills residents swung for the fences but whiffed when they tried to kill bicycle lanes for North Santa Monica (Council kept lanes on the table). But two years ago, the southwest NIMBYs scored a base by killing off a preliminary proposal for an off-leash dog run for Roxbury Park. And it took only a bunt: just five dog park opponents persuaded City Council to nix the whole idea… even though it came recommended by staff, was endorsed unanimously by the parks commission and was supported by local dog-keepers.

The Backstory

The city had been looking to create a dog park for years. Dogs need outdoor recreation, of course, and every morning dogs of all stripes make the trek to one or another city park. But no Beverly Hills park is a place to run a dog: like every inch of the city, our parks are no-go for off-leash activity; a substantial fine awaits those who flout the law. But an off-leash dog area would give our furry friends a place to roam.

Nearby cities already provide dog parks. Moreover, they provide this amenity for Beverly Hills residents too. Popular dog park destinations for our pooches include Brentwood, Culver City, West Hollywood, and Rancho Park. But none is within walking distance. That makes a dog park a no-brainer, right? City Council even elevated the dog park search to an ‘A’ level priority this year:

City Council dog park priority ABut back in 2012 parks staff had already evaluated local options and recommended a dog park for Roxbury. It is the best choice of the options, staff said. Conveniently, the park’s unused croquet court (below) is not close to any park-adjacent apartments and is buffered from homes to the north by Olympic Boulevard. And like the adjacent unused putting green, this forlorn field cries out for re-purposing.

Roxbury croquet court todayNext, the Recreation and Parks Commission evaluated the Roxbury Park option and the commissioners unanimously agreed. The commission then sent it on to City Council.

But what do dog-keepers think about the idea? Generally, residents support creating an off-leash area by a 4:1 margin, but is Roxbury the right place? When staff held a meeting at Roxbury Park to present it, dog park supporters outnumbered opponents. But when the proposal came back to Council, however, some opponents spoke against it. The theme: Hey, we love dogs but don’t put a dog park in my backyard. Classic NIMBY!

Yet NIMBYs adhered to the usual playbook. They raised parking, public safety, noise and property values concerns. One homeowner worried about new people making our park “a destination.” That would take up precious parking spaces and, as another speaker cautioned, tax our limited police patrols.

Ken Goldman, Southwest Homeowners Association president, said he polled his association and “100% of responses were opposed.” Beverly/Roxbury Homeowners Association president Steve Dahlerbruch chimed in. “We polled our homeowners association and we got the overwhelming response, ‘We don’t want it in our area.'” For good measure Mr. Dahlerbruch added, “I live on Olympic and every day dog owners leave (crap) on my lawn.”

That’s the nimby cry: “We don’t want it in our area.” “Not in my backyard.” And of course the property values argument: “I want to preserve the residential nature of this community,” said homeowner Rochelle Ginsburg. “I will protect what I value.” How many such speakers did it take to put the kibosh on the Roxbury dog park idea? Just five.

But this area of the park is in nobody’s backyard. Nevertheless, after hearing from them our City Council simply nixed the proposal. And ever since, this unused croquet court has withered on the vine (n fact, the entire northern tier of this park is typically underused except by dog walkers).

For just twenty-thousand bucks we could have a dog park (according to staff estimates). Let’s put that in perspective: West Hollywood’s City Council is committed to building its second dog park and is poised to budget $750k for it as part of the West Hollywood Park phase II renovation.

In the meanwhile here in Beverly Hills, the a dog park  option – at a site located in the industrial section of the city, near Maple Drive – inches forward. But slowly: City Council gave the OK to test the environmentally contaminated parcel last summer, but no report has yet come forward. (Construction is expected to be completed by the end of the year, marking three-plus years of talking about a dog park.)
We ask you: would you rather take your dog out to play in a lovely park only a short walk from your home, or drive to run your pooch on an environmentally-remediated parcel to run your dog?

Friends of Roxbury Dog Park

In the weeks leading up to last weekend’s dog-friendly Woofstock event, a campaign coalesced to bring the Roxbury proposal back to City Council. Friends of Roxbury Park agree with staff and the Rec and Parks Commission that Roxbury is the best option for the city’s first dog park. But it need not be the only one: dogs need outdoor recreation whether they reside in the north, southwest or southeast part of the city. A few months ago, at a preliminary meeting for the redesign of La Cienega Park, we suggested the city include a dog area.

Roxbury dog park visualization

Roxbury Park’s croquet court repurposed as an off-leash dog area (illustration courtesy Friends of Roxbury Dog Park)

Letting just five NIMBYs nix a good idea like a dog park for Roxbury should feel like a thorn in the paw for every dog and dog-keeper. Just as we can’t let a few negative voices tank bike lanes for Santa Monica Boulevard, we shouldn’t let a few NIMBYs and homeowner association despots dictate the use of a city park either.

  1. Tracking Hazards and Collisions: Maps and More Maps! Comments Off
  2. Are You a ‘Team Player’? Traffic Commission Has Two Vacancies Comments Off
  3. Our 1977 Bicycle Master Plan: Will It Ever Be Updated? Comments Off
  4. Is a Mandatory Bike Helmet Law the Answer? Comments Off
  5. Beverly Hills OKs Bike-share Feasibility Study Comments Off
  6. File Under ‘Crap Facilities': Dangerous Crescent Dr. Sharrows [Updated] 3 Replies
  7. Beverly Hills Should Take the Foxx US DOT Challenge Comments Off
  8. TPC Commissioner Alan Gruschow Passes Comments Off
  9. Bike Share for Beverly Hills? Comments Off
  10. Recapping the Recappers: How Local Media Covered SM Blvd 1 Reply
  11. News Flash! City Council Keeps Bike Lanes on the Table 5 Replies
  12. LA Councilman’s Hostility Toward Complete Streets Sounds Familiar 14 Replies
  13. Passing Safely: It’s the Law! 1 Reply