urban planning reading summary
write a short summary (between 1-2 single-spaced pages). The objective is to clearly summarize the key points and main arguments from each article, and demonstrate a solid comprehension of the reading. Summaries should be written in your own words, and should minimize the use of direct quotes.
Summaries are due before the start of class on the day the reading is listed in the schedule, as noted below.
A
Majo
r
Traffic Street Plan
for Los Angeles
Prepared for the
Committee on Los Angeles Plan of Majo
r
Highways of the Traffic Commis-
sion of the City”and County
of Los Angeles
·bJ
FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED
HARLAND BARTHOLOMEW
CHARLES HENRY CHENEY
Consulting Board
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
MAY, 1924
r
10
MAJOR TRAFFIC STREET PLAN
Causes of Street CongestionA program such as thi~ can only be acco,!,plished
over a period of year~. Satisfactory progress wIll ne.ver
be made if the execution of the plan IS left to the whims
of changing political administrations. Some specific
agency must assume the responsibility for pr<;serving
the integrity of the plan. Step by step, as occasIOn l1er-
mits the execution of this, that and the other project
must be secured until gradually a complete and satis-
factory traffic circulation scheme is evolved. Your pres-
. ent committee should be continued, enlarged if neces-
sary and so constituted as to form a permanent sponsor
for the development of a compr.chensive plan of major
streets for the entire metropolitan district.
The prohlem of street ~c congestio~ must be pr~
gressively solved in a groWIng metropohs. The van-
ous steps that should be taken from time to time to
afford the greatest freedom of traffic circulation in Los
Angeles are:
1. Regulation to secure maximum capacity of
existing space (including elimination of park-
iug, prohibition of obstructive turns at par-
ticularly busy intersectio~, ~nkinl? of ve-
hicles, use of most effective slgnalhng, cur-
tailment of unnecessary movements,; and so
forth).
2. Separation of classes of traffic (including
rerouting of transit Jines).
3. Improvement of street plan (including eJl:n-
ination a f jogs and dead-end streets, creaoon
of distributor and by-pass streets for busi-
ness districts and improvement of radial and
inter-district thoroughfares of the major
street plan).
4. Exi;ension of major street plan to cover the
whole metropolitan district, and completion
of a Boulevard and Parkway System plan
supplementing it.
5. Provision for expedited mass transportation
by subways in business district and by rapid
transit lines.
6. ProVision for the readjustment and extension
of steam railroad lines and simplification of
terminals, ,vith gradual elimination of grade
crossings.
To execute such a program” involves much labor and
e”peuse. A broad-visioned, unselfish and unifying
agency is a prerequisite of eJ\.;:ensive accomplishment.
Engineering skill, imprO\’ed legislative measures and an
equitable finandal plan are necessary accompaniments.
Public understanding and support must be secured.
No fixed program can be adopted and rigidly ad-
hered to. Continuous study of conditions, of details,
of plans, and of costs, will alone determine the rela-
tive importance and order in which various measures
should be undertaken. There is no simple single remedy
for the comple.’!: traffic problem in a rapidiy growing
metropolis.
Establisbment of a permanent Citizens’ Committee on
City Plan, similar to that which bas so successfully op-
erated for the past four years in Pittsburgh, or to that
of Chicago which for ten years has been accomplish-
ing most notable results is the procedure most likely,
in the Board’s opinion, to do what needs very much to
be done in Los Angeles. Such a committee will prob-
ably need a budget of one hundred thousand dollars a
year for not less than three to five years, and a lesser,
but still “ery considerable, budget thereafter in order to
do its work adequately and promptly.
The causes of· street congestion in Los Angeles are,
except for the important one of climate, not unlike
those in most other cities. They are:
1. Rapid growth of the city and of the volume
of tr,1flic.
2. Climate and other conditions peculiar to Los
Angeles, intensifying both elements of the
first factor and raising certain special prob-
leros.
3. Unscientific width and arrangement of
streets.
4. Improper use of existing street space.
5. Promiscuous mixing of different types of
traffic.
6. N aturn! or artificial obstructions to circula-
tion.
7. Limiting capacity of street intersections. ‘
8. Conceotration of business.
1. Rapid Growth of the City and of the Volume
of Traffic:
The rapid growth of Los Angeles is without .parallel
among cities. Official census records show an mcrease
in popnlation from 102,479 persons in 1900, to 319,198
in 1910 and 576,673 in 1920. ‘Reliable estimates based
upon school increases, street car riding, telephone users
and other utility company records indicate a present
population (1924) of approximately l,OOO,O~O persons
within the city limits, while the total population of the
city and immediately contiguous cities and tnwus is ap-
proximately 1,500,000.
”
From March I, 1923, to March I, 1924, there were
84,000 new lots created by subdividing acreage in Los
Angeles county and 125,000 houses “,ected, according
to figures presented to the Realty Board recently by
County Assessor Ed. W. Hopkins. In the twelve
months previous there were 8~,000 new lots and 102,-
000 new buildinlls. .
New subdiviSIOn maps filed of record in the city and
county during 1923 were estimated to cover a total
of 65,000 acres, nearly ali withdrawn from agriculture
for’ town lot purposes~
The 1924 assessed valuation of property in Los An-
geles County aggregates $1,992,068,094, a gain of $4
18
,-
649,927 over last year’s. total. The total. assessed
valuation of all property ‘n the county has lOcreased
approximately 1,000 per cent in the last twenty years,
according to Assessor Hopkins, and this assessed valua-
tion is about 50 per cent of the market value placed on
property. The County tax levy for the fiscal year 1923-
1924 which is now being colletted, totals $61,281,000.
U:s Angeles County conta!ns. an area of 4,000 square
miles of whicl. three-fifths .s ‘n the Angeles National
Fores’t Reserve. A little over 400 square miles or 10%
is in ·the. city limits of Los Angeles.
Great as has been the increase in population, build-
ings and property values, vehicular traffic has increased
even faster. Maps 6 and 7 represent the volume of
“‘Compare Detroit’s growth from 160,000 in 1880 to 993,-
000 in 1920 (40 years) and Cbicago’s growth frnm 109,000
in 1860 to 1,099.000 in 1890 (30 years) and then to 2,701,000
(in the succeeding 30 years).
11
traffic upon the main thoroughfares of the t;ity as re-
corded by counts made in 1922 and 1924 respectively.
Observe the general increase throughout the whole city
and particularly the proportionately greater increases
east and south. ‘
No more graphic illustration of the remarkable traf-
fic increase in Los Angeles could be had than that
showing traffic year by year upon certain main thor-
oughfares (Diagram 5).
The total registration of automobiles in California
and particularly in Los Angeles County (Diagram 4)’
further emphasizes the remarkable growth of Los An-
geles traffic. Registrations in Los Angeles County in-
creased from 110,000 in ‘1918. to 430,000 in 1923, an
increase of 400 per cent in five years, and the present
registration in Los Angeles County very nearly equals
the total of ali other counties in the state.
Even in the downtown area, the automobile. brings
in a large percentage of the daily inllu.’!: of people. The
cordon count of the Parking Survey Committee showed
643,374 passengers (including driver) carried by autos
iuto the downtown* district (in 11 hours in November,
1923) as against 750,000 on the street railways in the
same area. For 24 hours it is estimated that automo-
biles carned in and out 800,000 passengers, including
drivers, and the street cars. (all Jines) 950,000 passen-
gers on a typical day in the downtown* district. See
Diagrams Nos. 10 and 11 for actual figures.
What the total passenger movement by automobile
per day may be in Los Angeles ~ difficult to surmise.
Counted in the same way as the trip fares on the street
railroads, it is probably in excess of 2,000,000.
The maximum number of street eat’S in service was
750 per day during the first weelr in December,1918,
and 964- during the first week in December, 1923. The
ma:>cimum number operated any day in December, 1923,
was 1,045 or 28.6% increase in five, years. The aver-‘
age daily passenger haul the first week inlDecember,
1918, was 5
17
,580,and in the same period 011923 was
1,065,000, an increase of more than 100 per cent.”*
This class of traffic (street cars) represents a most
important form of the use of public thoroughfares.
2. Climate and Other Conditions ‘Peculiar to
Los Angeles
The climate of this city has undoubtedly contribnted
much to its remarkable growth. This climatic condi-
tion also contributes much to the traffic problem. When
it is considered that here exists the largest percentage
of aut6mobile ownership in the world-one (1) auto-
mobile for each two and nine-tenths (29) person,-
and that a uniformly mild climate encourages constant
use of cars every day of the year (as against 8 months
enjnyable use at most in the eastern states), it is small
wonder that a street congestion problem of great magui-
tude results.
The place of the automobile in the transportation
problem of Los Angeles is far more important than in
the cities of the East. There is no day in the year when
it is impossible or even uncomfortable to ride in an
~owndistrict taken was from Sunset to Washing-
ton and from Figueroa to San Pedro Streets.
•• From paper by Geo. B. Anderson in fl~erafl for March,
1924.
12 MAJOR TRAFFIC STREET PLAN
CAUSES OF STREET CONGESTION, 13
open car. The widely scattered population, and the
almost universal housing in detached single family
dwellings, situated on lots large enough to admit of
housing automobiles, encourage their use.
Philadelphia is usually spnken of as a city with a
very high proportion of single family dwellings, but
there the houses are in solid rows on, lots 15 or 20
feet wide by 60 feet deep, wbile in Los Angeles the
houses are of the detached bungalow type on lots sel-
dom less than 40 feet and ordinarily 50 feet in front-
age with generally more than’lOO feet of depth. The
number of houses per acre in Philadelphia is thus four
or Jive times that in Los Angeles. The spreading out
of the residential area here naturally leads to greater
use of the automobile.
3. Unscientific Width and Arrangement of Stree~B
Few cities possess street systems that even approach
adequacy in the performance of the functions !’XPecte~
of them, or of demands made upon them. Growth has
heen unexpected and unplanned for. It is not so much
that cities lack sufficient area devoted to streets, or that
there is lack of a snfficient number of streets, as that
there has been no adequate attempt to provide an or-
derly scheme of thoroughfares, differentiated as to
)vidth and arr,mgement so that the growth of the city
and consequent traffic movements might have more of
order and less of chaos and confusion. Map 12 shows
widths of all existing streets of over 65 feet cross-sec-
tion, some of which are so located or on such grades
as to be of no value for through traffic; the whole form-
ing a discontinuous and unsystematic. arrangement that
is the natural result of piecemeal, uncontrolled land sub-
division. .
There are surprisingly few streets of- generous width
in Los Angeles. A width of one hundred feet is quite
exceptional, while greater widths are practically un-
known. There are a respectable number of eighty-foot
.streets but these are noticeably discontinuous and un-
related. The prevailing standard has been the sL”i:y-
foot street, a width totally unsuited for a traffic street
of great capacity.
Standardization in the width and arrangement of·
streets has produced much of present day street con-
gestion, and constant repetition of this improperly re-
lated method of land subdivision iu newly developed
areas has been constanUy producing still greater prob-
lems for future generations to contend with. The at-
tempt to cope with this evil, recenUy inaugurated by the
City and the County Planning Commissions through
control of platting, is of the utmost importance. But
, both these important agencies labor under severe handi-
caps, because of the lack of personnel ana resources to
keep the general planning sufficienUy ahead of the tide
of new suhdivisions. Their offices are crowded with
PtlI:ely administrative duties. Mere regulation of the
laYIng out of such new streets as subdividers can be ex-
pected to dedicate primarily for local benefit, will never,
alolle, meet the needs of a great metropolis.
4. Improper Use of Existing Street Space
Space now avqilabte for street purposes is. most im-
.proVidenUy used. This is more particularly true in the
business districts than upon approach thoroughfares.
It was not to be expected that the ‘Vast increase in street
traffic could be quicldy adjusted to prese,nt street space:
Graduallv throue:h more and more striue:ent traffic ree:u-
lations more efficient use of e.~sting street space will be
secured.
The percentage of area devoted to street space in the
business district of Los Angeles is surprisingly small
as compare(l with that of other cities.
Table r..,-Proportionate Area of Downtown
Business Districts Devoted to Roadways*
PerCent
Washington, D. c.. .._#
San Diego, Cal.._._ _. .__. 41
Oeveland …. __.. ._39.5
Seattle …. . .._.__…_37.5
St. Louis. _…__ 37
San Fraocisco_._._._ __._._ _._34.5
Pittsburgh __ __…..__.._ _.._ .._ ..34
Portiand …__ __._…_ __.__…34.5
Minneapolis _ .._ _._._ _ …_ .._._..30.5
Detroit _ __.__ _._.__ _.29.5
Chicago __ ._.. …..29
Denver …….._ ..__.__..__ _…..27.5
Salt Lake Citj·. …_ _ …….25.5
Toledo __..__ __.._ _._.._ ….24
Los Angeles ~ _ __ __..2J.5
Because of this restriction of street and roadway area
in Los Angeles, improvident use of street space must
be avoided. If the economic losses due to retarded or
prohibited traffic movements are to be reduced to a
minimum the fullest possible use must be made of
roadways for accommodation of the greatest number
of persons and commodities. Tlus applies especially
to reduction of space devoted to automobile parking.
A further handicap in the husiness’ district of Los
Angeles is the lack of alleys ill’ most blocks. This .neces-
sitates loading and unloading of velucles upon the pub-
lic streets, causing interference with pedestrian move-
ment upon the sidewalks and with vehicle movement in
roadways. Alleys should he extended to serve all busi-
ness blocks. Opened only one story high, and bridged
over above, as has been done by Bullock’s Department
Store, very valuable space on.upper fioors can be com-
mer,clally utilized without impeding alley service in the
least.
The present restriction which prohibits parking from
4:00 to 6 :15 P. j\{. has helped conditions markedly
during the evening rush hour and gradually this type of
restriction must be extended for longer periods ahd pre-
sumabl)’ throughout the day on the most heavily nsed
streets. In the narrow streets of the Boston business
district all loading and unloading of goods, as well as
all storage of passenger automobiles, has long been pro-
hibited during da)’light hours. Where tljese streets
lack alle)’s, guods are shipped and received only at,night.
5. Promiscuous Mixing of Different Types of
Traffic
Experience with antomobile traffic congestion prob-
lems is of SUcil comparatively short duration U,at man)’
opportunities for improving freedom of circulation are
yet to be taken ad”antage,of. ,
Traffic is of three distinct types: (1) street cars, (2)
,automobile trucks, and (3) passenger automobiles.
*From article uTraffic Relief in Los Angeles,” in Electric
Raihva}~ Journal, March B, 1924, by George Baker Anderson
Manager of Transportation, Los Angeles Railways (yeUo~
car. surface Jines). .
..
LOS ANGI;.U;’S
MI;.TQOPOLlTAN AI2I;.A
INCIl~AS~ IN POPULATION
nv£ YEARS
1018 TO Ige~
£ACH OaT •.:UloWS 1000 Kl” IHltAtllTAnT.:J
COHIlIU:O fROM DAllY ATT£KOAKC’
‘UOt1;NTAUY SCHOOU
Of CITY AKD COunTY
elf’ SC”otAQ lQUAt$ T’U IUUAIHTAfIT.:l
Diag,.a-m NO.3-Location of Increase in Population, 19r8~I92.~. Compared 7.uith Diagram No.2. the increases on
the ~ast and south sides of lite city aro quite marked.
http:adxantage.of
14 . MAJOR TRAFHC STREET PLAN CAUSES OF STREET CONGESTION 15
Table 2-Total Traffic Entering the
Business District
flc entering the business district (Sunset to ‘Washing-
ton and Figueroa to San Pedrn) from the four com-
pass directions as compiled from the 1924 traffic censns
(11 hnurs) taken by the Parking Survey Board.
These figures in part “”Plain the south and westward
e>.-pansion and drift of the business district so notice-
ably in evideuce the past few years.
In general there are few other serious topographic
barriers to growth and free traffic circulation in Los
Angeles, although poor land subdivision has made dif-
flcn1t good street access in certain areas. The Bald-
win Hills district and the passes of the Santa Monica
Mountains to the e..”treme northwest are e.umples of .
topographic impediments. The large hill in the nnrth-
west corner of the business district (Bunker Hill)
bonnded by Sunset Bonlevard, Hill Street, Fifth Street
and Figoerna Street is a decided handicap to the busi-
ness district. Construction of the Second and Third
Street tnnnels, the Broadway tunnel, the Hill Street
tnnnel and the openIng of Fifth Street, nnw nnder con-
struction, have in part ohviated the difficnlties of ap-
proach. A still further reduction of the serions grades
in this area is desirable and shonld tak-e place as eco-
nomic conditions justify.
The Los Angeles River and the several railroad
yards and terminals have long offered a combined
natural and artificial harrier to growth and free traffic
circn1ation eastward. Fortunately, few streets have
been vacated and several ,~adncts and bridges have al-
ready been cOllstructed, while quite recently the city,
county and railroad authorities have agreed upon ;l pro-
gram of six new viaducts and bridges (First, Fourth,
Seventb, Ninth, IliaC)’ and Aliso Streets) that will elim-
inate several grade crossings and improve access be-
tween opposite sides of the river. Excellent foresight
has been shown in providing sb<: line (56 ft. roadway)
capacity for each of these ,~aducts, for which bonds
have been voted, and construction will soon start.
A comprehensive plan of grade-crossing elimination
should be worked out as soon as possible for the whnle
metropolitan area. For lack of proper grade separa-
tions, much delay occurs that is expensive and no longer
warrauted, to say noUung of the traffic accidents and
dangers to life and property involved. Other stateS
have long ago started on definite programs of elimina-
tion of all grade crossings ani! Los Angeles, with the
greatest anto traffic in the country, cannot afford tn
neglect this matter.
Closely allied is the problem of unification of rail
lines and terminals for which the joint stndy of the
city and State Railroad Commission is an admirable be-
*Traffic actually entering tile central district on its
North, South, East and West sidl!s respectively. On ac~
count of the IUbottle-neck” much traffic from outlying por-
tions of the north sector reaches the central district through
its east and west sides.
The street cars are the mast economical carriers of
people and since the street is the nnlyavai1able present
right of way for most of this class of traffic its freedom
of movement shonld and mnst be provided for. Heavy
trucks, whether horse drawn or motor driven} as yet
constitnte a small prnportinn of total traffic. IIiotor
truck traffic is beginning to increase rapidly, however,
and will continue to increase in even greater proportion
than in the past.
These three types of traffic are more or less incom-
patible, particularly npon streets of limited width. Pas-
senger automobiles obstruct street ,car movements, es-
pecially in congested centers. Street cars obstruct the
freedom of automobile movements on radial highways
of less than eight line (74 ft.) roadway capacities be-
tween curbs. Auto trucks are more or less obstructive
to street car and passenger automobile traffic, depending
somewhat upon the width of roadway. It is desirable to
the utmost practicable e:ctent to provide opportunities
for segreg;>tion of these three classes of street traffic,
thereby facilitating the operation of each and im-
measurably adding to the total volume and speed of
traffic. The present arrangement of street car tracks
and routing in the business. district of Los Angeles and
in approach streets is not such as to facilitate the best
movement of either street cars or automobiles, for there
are few thoroughfares that are not occupied. at least in
part by street cars, and in many cases the lines jog un-
necessarily from one street to another.
6. Natural or Artificial Obstrtlctions to CircnlatIon
The topography of the distriet”in and about the city
of Los Angeles is roughly shown by Map 2. The city
occupies a valley of Iarge dimensions, enclosed on the
north by mountains and on the west and south by the
Pacific Ocean. There is room for much growth to the
west and south, and for unlimited growth eastward. To
the north there is less opportunity for growth, but even
here the splendid Sau Fernando Valley can eventnally
accommodate a population estimated by the Regional
Planning Commission at approximately 400,000 per-
sons. Topographic barriers have not been a serious
handicap to the growth of the city, bnt have caused
some serious obstructions to traffic circulation. The
most notable case of this ·is the pass in the Santa Monica
Mountains immediately north of the present business
district through which the Los Angeles River flows.
This pass was the natnral site of the early city. The
more favorable natnre of the terrain to the south and
west caused new growth in those directions, for the
path of least resistance is the natnral direction of city
growth.
The ·narrowness of tlus pass early reSulted in the
absorption by the railroads of mnch of the level area
not occupied by the river and left a limited street
space. Much additional space for street purposes is
now difficult, if not impossible, of acquisition. “The
Bottle-Neck” is the term now appropriately applied to
this pass. The traffic flow diagram (Map 7) indicates
the ..,-tent of the congestion at this throat. Relief in
the form of increased capacity here or new routes else-
where must be provided.
The limitations of convenient and level building areas
contiguons to the business district on the north, plus
the handicap of “the bottle-neck” accounts for the pre-
ponderance of contiguons growth west, sonth and east.
Tts reflection is most evident in the total vnlume of traI-
In
*North ….__. 21,554
*South .__.__.._. 41,153
*East … . 61,558
*West .. 76.094
TotaL_. 200,589
Out
17,498
39,093
57,085
52,524
175,301
ginning. This shonld be continued to include the har-
bor and whole metropolitan area.*
7. Limiting C.apacity of Street Intersections
The limiting capacit}T of street intersections is one
of the most prolific causes of street congestion. Two
roadways of equal width, intersecting at grade and
fully nsed, each have their capacity reduce.d more than
50 per cent because of. the· alternate stoppmg of traffic
movement. (Theoretically, the capacity of eac]l street
wonld be reduced 50 per cent, bnt actnally it is rednced
far below this figure because of the necessity for slow-
ing down, stopping and starting on each street, and
waiting for left hand tnrns.) How important are the
factors of speed and of interval between vehicles is
iIlnstrated by Diagrams 17 and 18.
While traffic capacity might be increased ·by enlarge-
ment of roadways at street intersections, this is more
or leSs impracticable of accomplishment, except in new
areas. Such a meUlOd cannot be used in areas already
built np and where traffic congestion is now greatest.
What might seem to he a more logical methOd of
avoiding the congestion cau~ed by intersections of
streetS at grade, wonld be to provide for separation of
grades fnr stricU)’ antomobile streets. This method,
however, has distinct and positive limitations. Dia-
gram. 19 and 20 iIlnstrate two methods of street grade
separations where level ground exists and where two
great thoroughfares intersect, as for instance, in some
ouU,~ng district such as Wilslure and Santa Monica
Bonievards.. The plans show opportunity for intercom-
munication as well as for uninterntpted through move~
ment of four lines of traffic on each street.
The limitations of this sort of plan are the ..”pense
of property, 120 feet of street width being required
(a condition seldom possible), U,e cost of construction
($125,216 for viadnct construction and $269,300 for
subway, per intersection), the extr.eme length of ap-
proaches and the possibility of damage claims by abut-
ting property owners. The cost estimates above are
based upon Los Angeles unit prices as of April 1, 1924.
Unnsually difficult soil conditions might increase the
above costs. Occasional favorable grades, such as at
Sunset and Glendale Boulevards, where grades have
already been separated, or at Vermont and Wilshire,
might rednce the above estimates of cost, though at
Sunset and Glendale no satisfactnry pro,oision for in-
tercommunication has yet been made, the cost for which .
wnnld be considerable.
An estimate has been made of -the cost of building
an elevated. street of fonr-Iine capacity, being virtnally
a continuous viaduct similar to the construction shown
by Diagriun 21. This wonld cost $929,808 per mile,
exclusive of proper!:}’ damage, unusual soil conditions,
or ramps for intercommunication with cross streets
(allow $55,000 each).’
The difficulties and expense of single street grade
separations make this device stiII less practicable as a
means of relief of street traffic congestion for general
application: Occasional opportunities at the intersec-
—;;;S;-“Unification of Rail Lines and Terminals.” by Otas.
H. 01eney and Committee in Proceedings of National Con-
ference on City Planning at Cincinnati, 1920.
tion a f two main thoroughfares may be fonnd. The ex-
cessive cost for this type of construction (or for a modi-
fied or mnre intricate type of construction throughont
business districts) is prohibitive becanse of property
damage and the limited ability of the city or abnttlng
frontage to defray the expense. Even if the cost might
be met no permanent solution of the street traffic con-
gestion prohlem would have been found, for the new
thoroughfares thus created wonld soon be crowded tn
capacity. A stiII more intricate system might then be
evolved, providing multi-story streets, to visualize which
is to appreciate that no solution can be found in this
direction. For more detailed discussion, see Appendix
A.
Attention has previously been called to the limited
area in the business district now devoted to street and
roadway space (Table 1 on page 12). This is indeed a
prolific ‘canse of street congestion. Add tn this fact
that the long blocks, 560 feet, are laid ant north and
south, with the narrower streets at greatest intervals in
the direction of heaviest traffic movement (Table 2 on
page 14), and it becomes .evident that much of the
present street congestion is due to an unusual amount
of tnrnIng of coroers and to ob~trncted flow. While
new easl and west streets might be introduced into the
business district, their cost must in each case be J1:tsti-
fied. It is clear, however, that anything which can he
done to facilitate direct and continuous movement on
these streets and to eliminate left-hand tnrns at the
narrow coroers, by getting vehicles. on to the street on
which their destinations lie before they enter the con-
gested zone, wonld be nf great value.
8. Concentration of Business
The next great canse of street traffic congestion is
the concentration of bnsiness within small areas. High
buildings are the greatest producers of congestioo, and
Los Angeles is to be commended for its courage and
foresight in adopting and maintaining a building height
limit of 150 feet in the central business district. From
a traffic standpoint, this height is too great, but other
considerations wiU probably canSe the limit to remain
as at present. Building height limits in oulYfing dis-
tricts and on .certain main thoroughfares, pal’ticularly
Wilshiie Boulevard, are now too great and sbould be
reduced.
It is important in this connection to note that except
in a limited number of special cases, including the case
of a brief flpeak load” of pleasure travel on certain
routes on Sundays and holidays, tJ1e majority of the
vehicles causing traffic congestion are not those en-
gsged in long distance movements hut those circulating
or standing within the limits of a locallzed area of con-
centrated activity. This fact is “,,-pressed in the local
“bnlges” in the volnme of traffic alnng many thorough-
fares, as at Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street
(Diagram No.7). These “bulges” show the “et in-
creases in the long traffic stream due to local movements,
bnt if a complete analyais of the traffic were available
it would prnbably sbow that a very large part of the
apparently continuous flow is made up of relatively
short over-lapping movements.
Solution of the Problem of Street Congestion
Diagram Na. 4-Antamobile Registration in Califoruia a-nd in Los AJlgeles ConJllj’, I9I3-I923.
17
1.100.000
1,
000,000
000,000
coo.ooo
TOO,OOO
tlOa,ODO
500.000
“‘00.000
300,000
200.01;10
100,Otlo
0
UilU, 19t3
which figures are available, there were registered in Los
Angeles County:
391.947 Automobiles
36.124 Pneumatic tired commercial vehicles
(last year these were included
under ti,e heading of automobiles)
13.247 Solid tired trucks
441.318 Total automobiles (io L. A. County.
April 1. 1924)
The passenger automobile traffic is b)’ far the largest
in volunie. How much of this latter type is of a dis-
tinct commercial character, that is to say, is di~ectly
.concerned with the proper activities of the central
business district, it is impossible to determine. Some
of it, and perhaps a large percentage, contributes yery
little to the proper acti\~ties of the business district.
and, when remedial measures have reached their limit
in the avoidance of tl”affic congestion, this portion ought,
as far as possible. to be e.-…:cluded, or at least induced to
use thoroughfares on which it will not interfere with
other more important forms of traffic movement.
It is practically impossible by r~lations to discrimi-
nate between ‘the more necessary and the less necessary
passenger automobiles, but those who have least to gain
by using automobiles in a congeste9- area. are apt to be
1915 1914 IOI~ UlI& nllT IGU!. 1919 102.0
SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OF CONGESTION
In California
Table 3–Autos Registered January 31. 1924
In Los
Angeles Count)’
410.517
15.065
2,151
4,753
I I I I ICALIFORNIA
AUTOMOCJILE. AND -TRUe,,- /RE.GISTRATION
TRAFFIC COMMISSION
or THE CIiY AND COUNTY Of” /LOS ANGELES: 215 wmGlfT &v\UEHOER
CALlFOflHIA — 1/1.0″, ANaIiLtl..3 c;.OUHT’Y ——ALL OT”,”fl eOUNTI’:l ___ ~~
/
/
>—
/
/ ~/
—
./’ / ,
V –,.”,’ —
V V- –
V –“,.'” — —- –
—–V– .0-:– .— —- ..—-‘ Tltue..~ 0″1.'”
VOl < laoa IgOg 11110
Autos Registered April 1, 1924
From February I, .1924. the beginning of the present
registration year, to April 1. 1924. ilie latest date for
Automobiles _.__1.056,756
Trucks .. . ~__ 43.527
Trailers _~_. ._._.._. 5.808
Motorcycles __.._ …__ 14.694
The percentage of traffic that is exclusively of the
motor truck variety differs considerably in various
cities. In Los Angeles this class of traffic comprises
about 11% (1924 census) of the total vehicular traffic
and (from ligures compiled by the L. A. Railway) oc-
cupied 16% of the total occupied roadway space on
streets measured. The growing importance of this ch~
acter of traffic is recognized and must be provided f’5F.
The heaviest traveled trucking street today was found
to be Santa Fe Avenue, at one crossing of which 25’10
of all vehicles were in this cla~s. (Boy Scout count.)
The following table shows l1ie various types of cars
in use:
1
1·
<1, I
j
!
i
J
.
I
I
i
)
.j
I
I
*Figures compiled by the L. A. Railway from counts of
Public Utilities Board. Compare counts in November, 1923.
given in Chapter II. on Diagt’a!tls 10 and 11.
3. Restrict U nneceBsary. Traffic Movements
Once the several openings and widenings suggested
in this report have been e.~eeuted in whole or in part
and traffic regolation has reached its limit. ther~ is but
one alteroative thereafter should congestion still con-
tinue-a distinction will have to be drawn between
necessary and unneceSsary, or between less necessary
and more necessary traffic movements wherever con-
gestion prevails. Even today it is evident that there
is a wide difference in the necessity for traffic move-
ments that take place in the most congested centers.
Traffic censuses in other cities indicate that the street
cars are the most important users 0.£ the street area
downtown. carrying on the average 85% to 95% of
the passenger traffic entering and leaving the business
district. In Los Angeles, however, as shown in Chapte.r
II. ti,e street cars (yellow cars of L. A. Ry. plus local
line red cars of P. E. Ry.) carry only a few more
passengers than carried by automobiles.
The stopping and loadiug of street cars greatly slows
up automobiles on carline stteets, cutting down the
volume of flow probahly as much as 50 per cent. Hence
the segregation of streets, some primarily for carlines
and some primarily for automobiles and free from car-
lines, is very important, so far as tills is possible with~
out limiting the carrying capacity of the street car sys-
tem to less than limit fixed by other factors.
But the street car, owing to its economy of space
and low cost of operation per passenger, must take pre-
cedence over other forms of vehicles in the congested
area whenever the traffic capacity of the arteries ap-
proaches its limit., and prior to reduction in use of sur-
face street cars by the still more intensive mass trans-
portation offered by subways or elevated lines.
A traffic count of what is called the “congested dis-
trict’· of the downtown business district (from 1st to
9th Streets and from Figoeroa to Los Angeles Streets)
covering approximately ninety blocks, showing the
movement therein of all classes of vehicles from 6 A. M.
to 6 P. ],<1. on December 17, 1923. shows. 263,110 auto-
mobiles. 48.556 trucks---a total of 311,666 autmnobiles
of all classes-and 12.025 street cars. During the rush
hour from 5 P. M. to 6 P. lVI.. there was a total of
34-.449 automobiles and trucks, and 1.436 street cars
used. The average car load for this period was 77.7
passengers. and the average automohile load was 1.67
passengers., including drivers.*
derly and well-balanced’ system of thoroughfares
throughout the city, i.e.• a. scheme of thoroughfares of
such width and arrangement as will facilitate direct and
uninterrupted movement from center to center and in-
cidentally facilitate distribution within centers. This is
the purpose of the present study. Several projects of
the character here described and of much l)1erit are now
being .carried out and have~ of course, been incorpo-
rated in the plan later described-Tenth Street widen-
ing. Fifth Street “”-“teosion. Broadway. Olive and
Flower Street extensions, etc.
16
There are three factors involved in any solution of
the problem of street congestion. namely: (1) ti,e
width. (2) arrangement. and (3) use of streets.
The best solution involves. in any city. direct and un-
interrupted movement between centers. and good distri-
bution at these centers. A given city mayor may not
be able to solve its problem of street congestion. depend-
ing upon the nature of its e..xisting street plan, its finan-
cial ability to improve that plan. the extent of owner-
ship and use of motor vehicles; the intensity of develop-
ment permitted in business areas, and the degree of reg-
ulation of use of streets.
Measured by present standards. a certain degre~ of
growth is desirable in cities. Bot the greater the size of
a city and the more rapid its growth usually the more
acute will be its street traffic congestion problems.
Los Angeles is unique in the importaoce of its auto-
mobile traffic, in relation to its general transportation
problem. The checks taken for purposes of study show
that almost as many people daily enter the congested
area of the city by automobile as enter it by all other
means of transportation.
Considering the several factors above mentioned, it
is evident that traffic congestion is a progressive prob-
lem and requires a progressive solution. The measures
to be taken and their approximate order is as follows:
1. Secure maximum use of existing street space
by traffic regulations that speed up move-
ment.” .
2. vVideo and open streets in accordance with
some well defined plan of circulation.
3. Restrict unnecessary traffic movements.
1. Secure Maximum Use of Existing Street Space
Los Angeles has done much toward accomplishing the
first of these steps, i.e., to secure maximum use of ex-
isting street space. An extensive code of traffic regula-
tion- has heen adopted. applicable chielly to the central
business district. Parking is limited to 45 minutes from
7 A. M. to 4 P. M. and prohibited eotirely on certain
streets comprising most of the husiness district from
4 P. 1\£. to 6 :15 P. lVI. Left hand turns have been
eliminated at many corners and aU turns at some. An
automatic synchronized traffic system has been installed.
which provides intervals of 55% of the time for north
and south movement at all intersections. and 37% of
the time for east and west movement. with 8% of the
time in the two pauses between sigoals (4% in each).
Murh relief can still be accomplished by further regula-
tion, including complete prohibition ~~~ parking ~m cer-
tain thoroughfares and the confinement of dllIerent
types of traffic to separate streets.
Los Angeles has a capable and progressive police
traffic squad, but unless public opinion and the courts
are in sympathy with the regulatinns it endeavors to
enforce. the effectiveness of the police department in
.handling traffic matters will-he greatly diminished.
2. Widen and Open Streets in Accordance With a
Definite Plan
Los Angeles’ greatest immediate need in solving its
street congestion problem is the development of an or-
MAJOR TRAFFIC STREET PLAN
::::~–~
~– — .-
— —
a – —- — — — —
W~ I”‘ I~ ~I’ ~ ~~ ~u ~ta ~u
w.1.1.I,’l’ &QUL;V”IlD
it’I
lilT I¥lll 1911J !SIta 191.1
HAIUltlR. llDUL1iYAD.D
-..; ..
capaciti”” at least remotely comparable \vith 20th cen-
tury facts and tendenci”” in a large metropolis; not for
such as were in fact dictated by 19th century condi-
tions, even in the small pro\’:inclal town that Los An-
gel”” then was.
~
‘.aa’ I—t:—-t-+–:;-t::::t=’-;;:..ji”;::'”-+-+–I
~_._-”
/.
./
safety, because no one is allowed to turn in from a side
street without first coming to a dead stop. This is
calIed tbe “boulevard stop” plan. One of the great””t ,
cau.t;es of street accidents has been· found to be from
cars dashing out of minor streets across main arteries.
Los Angel”” will have to consider very 5000 the adop-
tion of an ordinance “”tablishing definitely the maj or
traffic streets, which all vehicl””, particularly hauling
vehid””, must use for travel until the near””t point of
their destination has been reached. Only thus can the
cit)’ furnish enough wide, heavy, through traffic pave-
ments and pay the bills for their maintenance.
Safety Requires Desiguation of Definite Streets
for Through Traffic .
‘Wear and tear is so great, the danger to ehildren and
pedestrians so serious, and the cost of permanent wide
tr,,:ffic pavements and tbeir upkeep so large, that most
citt”” can afford to have only about every sixth or eighth
.street “”tablished and paved as a traffic street in outly-
ing sections. This is becoming particularly true of Los
Angel””.
TRAffiC’ COMMISSION
or TIlE DiY AIIO CClUlrTY Dr’
\.05 “HalLa
2UWlUQrrAAll C\LLElIllltn BUII:L
— —
TIIUC1t.::Ii .. _
110″:110·’ _
t.EGIWO
‘TOTAL Il”H’le.~D,.Vllllc.1.U __
P,U:’1iUQlillC”tlili
____0_- .. _~=–
III.” 1.15 IIlla “IT IDle .1I111 11’1.0 tllll
\'”,NO &&ACII llCUl.ltVAtltl
l~ooO
eOHPIt.lUI BIOH rU;C()tlDS
l.o.:s ANGeLl” COUIln’ COHHI””lO/t
ff
.”,ooa /—j’–t–/–+-t–!–t–j–/’i-j
.II
TIl.A~~IC INCIl.&AS&
1914 TO 19~3
LOS ANG&L~ S COUNTY
iff
‘~aaa /–r-r-r-r-r-+-/-r-+lif-l
i
But the trend of things is so manif””t as to make at
least this mild statement perfectly safe:
When choice is open, and ‘wilen in doubts it is tlls part
of ‘wisdom and of conscruatiS1u to aim for greater
thoronghfare capadl)’ ral”ar t”a” for less. And for
ESTABLISHING A BALANCED PLAN
. Diagram No. 5-b”,rease of Traffic on LOllg BaaeT, Boulevard, Valley Boulevard and Harbor Balliavard.
Establishing a Well Balanced Street Plan
SOME PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE DESIGN OF A MAJOR TRAFFIC
STREET SYSTEM
Distinction Between Major and Mino:Streets
An hnportant point On wbich to have a clear under-
standing is the sharp distinctiou that must ‘be made be-
tween major thoroughfar”” (which form the subject of
this report) and minor or local streets.
~e most of the streets of any city are primarily
r””ldential, and local streets are also needed in indus-
trial districts ood in busin””s districts opening off major
thoroughfares, the reasons for this basic distinction can
be brought out most clearly in r””idential areas.
The main reasons are economy and safety.
With the re~nt rapid increase in vehicles, particu-
larly of fast moving vehicles, citi”” are being driven tu
con~entrate through travel on a limited number of con-
vement and adequate major thoroughfares, where ordi-
nary drivers can know they are reasonably safe, ood
the recldess ones can be more easily and economically
regulated.
Chicago, Los Angel”” and a nnmber of other citi””
have alread)’ desiguated certain traffic ways for through
travel, on which higher speed can be lIlaintained with
r
of traffic wiII be limited b)’ the width or capacity of the
streets, and by that ouly. If that capacity is doubled,
the limit will be raised, but when it is again reached,
the final degree of coog””tion \vill be just as bad as with
a smalIer limit capacity.
When the limit of increasing vehicular travel is fixed
by the physical capacity of a street ood not by other
factors, congestion will reach a.point approximating the
intolerable whether the street is wide or narrow. That
means a degree of cong””tion such that if it gqt any
.worse fewer people would be willing to endure it and
the numbers using it would falI off.
In busin””s districts at least, it is hnprobable that ooy
limitations on the size of buildings and hence on the
concentration of business, or any limitations on the
ability of people to pay for automobiles in which to go
to busin””s, will keep the amount of traffic cong””tion
much below the limits determined by the width or
capacity of the streets, no matter how much the latter
may be increased.
If, then, no matter what we do about increasing
street capacity, we must approach the same degree of
almost but not quite intolerable cong””tion, why not be
fatalistic and do nothing?
There are, among others, two very sound reasons:
1. If the street system.is ill-balanced, so that cooges-
tion at some plac”” caus”” many other plac”” in the sys-
tem to be used far below their capacity and caus”” abut-
ting property to be used below its convenient and
satis factory capacity, there ~s an enormous waste i to
avoid which would justify large expenditur”” for in-
creasing the capacity of the undersized parts. Tbat is
a matter of relatlvo capacity as between different parts
of a street system.
2. A!J a matter of absolnte capacity, if any city with
the mechanisms for transportation now available to us,
including the street car and the automobile, were to
struggle along with streets as narrow and crooked as
prevailed in citi”” in the da)’S of pack-animals and.
humoo porterage streets, the waste of opportunity
would be absurd; and the economic gain of increasing
the avorago scale of the street system as a whole would
justify almost any amount of reconstruction by slash,
ing through a major -street system on a Itmodern” scale
of street width and of directness. That is the sort of
reconstruction Paris did in the 18th ood 19th centuries.
Tokio and Canton are doing it now.
Mechanical transportation has caused a revolution
in the volume of street traffic, and in the space re-
quired for getting the legitimate benefit obtainable from
this new agency; it is precisely comparable with the
revolution wrought by the general introduction and
multiplication of horse-drawn wheeled vehicl”” in the
cities of Europe between the 14th and the 19th cen-
turies.
Los Angeles, like practical1y every other large Amer-
ican city, has a street system laid out on the scale of a
19th century, horse-and-buggy town.
Vie do not yet know enough about the ultimate eco-
nomics of motor troosportation to feel justified in mak-
ing the huge sacrifice of fi:”‘ed capital neC””saty for in-
crea,”” in the scale of capacity of our 19th century
street systems at all comparable with the increase in
scale. which the 19th century showed over the 14th. Ir
is well to be fairly conservative in ~uch matters, even
though America’s industrial progr””s has been due
largely to courage in putting old machinery on the
scrap heap when better was to be had.
squeezed out first by increasing pr””sure. And when
the pressure is heavy enough, passenger automobiles in
general must yield in proportion to· more intensive in-
crease of transport. Automobil”” used exclusively for
passenger trausport occupy 14.3 times as ·much road-
way space per person carried (according to L. A. Rail-
way figur”,,) as do street cars in the Los Angel”” busi-
ness district The flexibility of automobile transport
effects to some extent its higher unit cost, but mass
transportation in whatever fOrID, motor bus, trolley
bus, street car, or rapid transit, is necessary and desir-
able to meet present and future needs in cong””ted
centers. .
The problems of street cong””tion are as yet of such
comparatively recent origin that we have few prec-
edents by which to judge measur”” proposed for relief.
The concentration of busin””s, as previously indicated,
is responsible for much present congestion. Concentra.-
tion of business is more or less necessary and desirable,
however, and to what lengths citi”” may go in r””tric-
tion of concentration is a matter for much further
study, certainly beyond the limits of this inv””tigation.
Zoning ordinanc””, by fixing height limits and ·the area
of the lot which may be covered, and by differentiating
between tJ’pes of residential, commercial and industrial
districts, form a foundation upon which the nltimate so-
lution of traffic congestion \vill in part depend. While
the pr””enl zoning (which applies to use of buildings
only) is helpful, it should be extended as soon as pos-
sible to provide height and area limits to cong””tion, as
weli.
Decentralization is a tenn now much in the minds of
those concerned with problems of city growth. Persons
interested in business property, at least· in large com-
mercial centers, are not over-enthusiastic about proc-
“”s”” of decentralization. And yet a very natural ten-
dency of this character that might perhaps better be de-
scribed as specialization of centers, is already taking
place in no uncertain way in Los Angel””. The new
Hollywood busin””s district and even more recently
the Vermont Avenue and Western Avenue districts, are
evidenc”” of an inevitable tendency. Th””e two districts
are but examples of numerous local retail centers that
will develop at intervals throughout the whole Los An-
gel”” district as the city continn”” to grow. They are
neighborhood centers for local shopping that the cen-
tral business district cannot and should not continue to
draw to itself at the cost of interfering with lclnds of
business which have a better right to a centra1location.
At the very time th””e centers develop, the central
business district continues to grow and expand. Here
is specialization-the central busin””s district for such
offic””, theatr””, hotels, department star”” and specialty
shops, etc., as must have a central location if they are
to do busin””s at alI-the local neighborhood centers
for all business which can be efficiently and profitabl)’
conducted there. Thereby much of the traffic concen-
tration is broken up, graduall), r””ulting in mass trans-
portation for the main center and more of the retail
shopping and delivery traffic distributed throughout the
neighborhood centers. Both will grow; and probabl)’
grow faster than provision for traffic accommodation
can be made, at least as long as the city continu”” to
increase in population.
The Lhnitll of Traffic Congestion
Increasing traffic congestion is ultimately self-limited.
If not previously limited by other factors, the amount
18
20 MAJOR 1;RAFFIC STREE’,l’ PLAN ESTABLISIDNG· A BALANCED PLAN 21
Another type 01 regulation which hecomes logically
possible with the desiguatiqn 01 an adequate system 01
properly selected main thoroughlares, is the exclusion
of commercial vehicles, especially hea”}’ trucks, Irom
local residential streets, except for access to property
abutting on those streets. By thus concentrating the
heaviest and most destructive wear to streets properly
adapted for it, it .is possible to provide, where most
needed, pavements heavy enough to stand up under this
traffic and wide enough to carry it, and at the same’ time
to use narrower and lighter surfacing material an the
local street.’1 and so maintain all the streets in far better
condition at a lower total cost than is possible without
such differentiation. The burden 01 mll,king any and all
streets fit to stand up under heavy trucking would be
too great; and the indiscriminate use 01 heavily loaded
vehicles on streets not fit for them is extravagantly de-
structive. .
But it is not merely an ‘economic problem. Safety
lor children and pedestrians demands that local resi-
dential streets should in general be free from high-
speed through travel and Irom trucking-a condition
which can be maintained only if there are well-recog-
nized tboroughlares desiguated as such, properly paved
and 01 adequate width and directness.
Street Accidents a Most Serious Problem
With. street accidents in Los Angeles reaching such
alarming proportions both in death and injury to per-
sons, and in property damage, a safer and more care-
lully balanced s)’stem 01 streets lor handling traffic, is
essential. The lollowing table shows the situation:
Table +-Street Accidents in Los Angeles”
Fatal Injuries
1918. . ._.__._114 3597
1919 . …_. . … 84- 3302
,1920 .. ._._. ..128 4249
1921- .._.._.._ _.. .._172 5027
1922_ :.._ __ _ _~..__277 5908
1923-. _ __ _ .322 6719
Streets Must Be Arranged to Suit Their Use
To meet these problems it has become necessary) for
economy. safety and convenience) to divide all streets
into three general classes, according to use) width, and
plan of improvement, with regulation of traffic varying
to meet the specific needs 01 each. These three classes
. as now generall,}’ accepted are:
1. Major Traffic Thoroughlares.
2. Parkwavs or Boulevards for Passenger Ve-
hicles onlv.
3. Minor streets, mainly residential but includ-
ing also special local streets lor pther pur-
poses as in industrial districts and’ in some
local retail business districts opening off main
thorough lares.
.Adoption of a well-defined poliC)’ of differentiation
in ·width of street, of roadway.and character of paving
will soon produce results more satisfactory than have
been achieved heretolore. On the radial thorougblares
and cross-town stree,ts the first essential is ample width.
Economy and Safety 01 Tbis Distinction
During the. past twenty years) there h~ been a revo-
lution in all former ideas in ~erica as to streets and
*Fu~nished by the Traffic Bureau of the Police Department.
their use, how they should be laid out, paved) parked
or improved. The coming of the fast motor vehicle and .
01 trucks and trailers with very heavy loads-amount-
ing sometimes to as much as 10 and 12 tons on two
wheels-has made necessary more permanent, wider,
heavier and far more costly hard surface pavements on
streets subjected to this traffic. Nothing less will stand
up under the punishment. There is no economy in the
makeshift of ina4equate pavements constantly break-
ing down and continually in need of repair and renewal.
But the city cannot stand the economic bur~en of .
pro\”‘iding such pavements on all streets or on nearly all
streets. And lor the local purposes 01 the abutters on
most of the streets 01 a city, especially on the minor
residential streets (which enormously outnumber in
mileage all the others put together) there is no need for
wide or costly pavements. Indeed, the more completely
such streets can be kept free Irom the kind 01 traffic
which alone justifies heavy) costly pavements, the better
they are lor local purposes.
Ovenvide and unnecessary pavements on minor
streets involve an “extravagant waste which sometimes
reaches enormous figures. Adoption 01 a Major Traffic
Street Plan should lorestall waste 01 this kind. .
The lollowing table covers some general indication
01 the financial magnitude 01 the paving problem in
Los Angeles:
Table 5-Street Work Done in Los Angeles, 1913-
1924″
(From the records 01 the City Engineer’s Office.)
Miles of Miles of Estimated
Asphalt, Con- Graded and Total Cost of
Year crete, or Hard Oiled, or aU Kinds (in-
Surface Macadam eluding Curbs
Ol.l1dGutters)
1913-14 48+ 20+
1914-15 59+ 20+
1915-16 56+ 14+
. 1916-17 36+ . 20+
1917-18 14+ 6+
1918-19 12+ 8+
1919-20 5+ 3+ $ 455,124
1920-2.1 25+ 9+ 2,386,374
1921-22 26+ 18+ 2,139,263
1922-2J 35+ 19+ 3,608,752
1923-24** 60+ 17+ 5,000,000
During the next five )’ears, it is estimated that $25,-
000,000 to $100,000,000 01 street work will be done by
the city, in the natura[ course of events. Hence the
importance 01 a Major Traffic Street Plan to work to.
As soon as a hard surface pavement is now laid on
a street ,01 any length, it immediately attracts all the
travel from the surrounding neighborhood) becomes
• 10 addition to the above wor~ the City Engineer’s office
has·about two years of petitions for street work, held up until
a larger engineering force can be secured, amounting to an
estimated total cost of $10,000,000.00, and up to $40,000,000.00
of other engineering. work. It is understood that the Qty
Council will make a special appropriation, so that plans may
be gotten out immediately for this work.
“-Estimated.
for something that they want, that would serve their
ueeds and that tlley can afford’to pay, for; and then their
improvement is promptly worn out by others. If not
soon abandoned to them. their street is at best made
dangerous and noisy.
Minor Streets Should Be Narrower and Indirect
Where. city engineers used to think that every street
should be laid out a through street, it is now seen to
he economical to provide wider and heavier pavements
on a limited number 01 selected Major Traffic Streets
and to keep through traffic off the rest 01 the streets
. as far as possible.
On minor residential streets width and directness are
no longer considered essential. In fact, on these minor
residential streets a roadway width sufficient only for
the purely local traffic, when combined ,vith more or less
irregularity in alignment, discourages the use of the
~treet for traffic purposes) gives more room for plant-
mg and adds great;ly, to the desirability 01 the street
for residential purposes. Families with children seek-
ing either to rent or buy a horne~ .give prefere~ce in
nearly every case to a quiet) out-of-the-way”street) free
from the speeder and through traffic.
As a matter 01 city planning, the chiel, il not the
only objections to making all local residential streets
so interrupted and indirect as to exclude C!-utomatically
all through traffic are, first, that direct major streets
are often not provided 01 adequate capacity lor carry-
ing the through traffic 01 the present and the immediate
future; and, second, that Goqditions are Hable to change
so as to demand the conversion of intermediate streets
originally intended and used as local residence streets
into additional major traffic streets, sometimes devoted
to business, as has been recently happening with the
north and south streets between Figueroa and lvrain
Street, south 01 the central business district.
It may be a very wise ‘precaution in citY planning to
la)’ out some 01 the originally local streets intermediate
between the original main thoroughf;!res on such line~
and with such building line setbacks that they can, if
necessary) be converted at some future time) without
extravagant cost, into supplementary intermediate
major thoroughfares i but this does not alter the sound-
ness of the polic)’ 01 deliberately selecting a ‘series 01
major streets adequate lor the through traffic needs
. which call be clearly forecast, 01 concentrating the wide
and heavy pavements on those streets, and 01 seeking
economy and safety and quietude on all the minor
residential· streets that intervene between them.
Minor Industrial Streets May Be Closed •
It is to be noted also that heavy industries need
large~ areas uninterrupted bjt streets than the ordinary
residence blocks offer. If Major Traffic Streets are
properly provided for through hauling, minor streets
in industrial areas can be closed) wherever desired for
!,usines~ reasons.. The Major Street Plan should help
mdustnes b)’ settling the question a I what streets are
needed for through traffic so that the others ma)’ be
closed without question) if proper easements for .sewers)
drainage) utilities, etc., are retained.
. ~1any American municipalities have begun to recog-
mze the necessity for thus settling definitely which are
to be the Major Traffic Streets 01 the city, and a fairly
complete Major Traffic Street Plan bas been worked
out and adopted in St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Memphis
Cleveland, Portland (are.), and in a number olathe;
cities. The Major Traffic Street Plan of Los Angeles
is along similar lines.
Parkways and Boulevards
A parkway or boulevard) in the sense usea in this
report (regardless 01 the occasional misapplication 01
these terms to the most ordinary l-inds of local streets)
is a route limited to passenger vehicles (excluding all
com~ercial vehicles and truck-hauling) and made ex-
ceptionally agreeable as a route 01 pleasure travel by
every possible means, but especially by the feeling 0 I
openness that comes anI}’ with plenty 01 width and by
an ample enframement of trees, shrubs, and other
plan,tations in the parallel wide sidewalk areas. •
There is’ justification ‘Ior pro,-lding such a parkwa)’
or boulevard as one of the main thoroughfares 6£ a city·
wherever conditions are such that commercial traffic
can be taken care of in other or De?Iby routes, and that
the amount and kind 01 passenger traffic over the pro-
posed route would make the extra public enjoyment
afforded by the parkway or boulevard worth its cost.
A parkway or boulevard -may be used mainly hy peo- .
pIe guing to and from business and yet .give them a
great deal 01 incidental recreation· and pleasure; but
ordinarily the justification lor such treatment is great-
est on routes used also.largely by people who’ are travel-
ing solely for pleasure-as to and Irom the beaches, the
mountains) etc.
Such parkway thoroughfares, as far as possible,
should lead past the principal fine buildings and parks
and scenic ‘-lews 01 the city showing it to ·the best ad-
vantage to Yis.itors, while at the same time contributing
mnch to the enjoyment 01 local people. Los Angeles,
with its ever-increasing number of visitors) has more
tl,an usnal justification lor esf;1blishing this kind. 01
thoroughfare.
It is important to note the distinction between the
class 01 parkways and boulevards here discussed as
forming part of the thoroughfares system of the city
and those which are not intended for direct communi-
cation between points, but which are simply elongated
parks in which people circulate for the pleasure they
find in them. The latter may be valuable purely as parts
01 a park system, but are not parts aI, a thoroughlare
s}’stem.
Width in boulevards and parkways is necessary to
secure ample permanent spaces lor planting. Such
parking ‘and planting are what make a boulevard desir-
able, refreshing and useful as distinct from ordinary
traffic streets. ‘ .
A street 100 feet wide would be a street or avenue
’01 handsome ‘vidtll, but a mean boulevard. Residence
. streets commonly have two rows of sidewalk trees. A
boulevard sbould have something more. II it depends
for its distinction on its rows of trees, four rows (two
on each side) are little enough, and three ‘rows on each
side are not uncommon. A ‘vidth of 150 leet would
generall)’ bc a minimum, but more is usually desirable.
. In the case 01 all’boulevards and parkways, houses
should be set back 25 feet or more from the sidewalk,
and suitable legal methods for securing this sbould
always be adopted at the· time allaying out a boulevard
or parkway.
Widths of Major Thoroughfares
W’idths 01 majo, thoroughlares should be determined.
primaril)’ by the lIt1mber of lilies of traffic to be carried.
17
VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC FLOW
1922
12 HOURS .JAN.I
TOTAL VEHiCLES PASSING
_~_~=,-.L-“,,-….J–r.-+,–….J,,…..,.,.—\;-EACH :I~l;~ ~~0l.~:E BY
Diagram No. 7-VahiCIIlor Traffic Fl01u ill 1924. (Dra1uII to.sama scola as that for 1922 all praviolls page.) Nota
the marked incrcases all strcets to south alld south’lClcStJ also Figueroa and ~VBStcrn.
,..,.,.me CI:l”‘-‘”l’lI.IOPf ,,,–~….
TO#JXCHI’4tn’ IlI”CIlT cr .caUIlTIIVIlO1′”~T’
• CQUKT ~ p,o.rn:l~lJ :’UllVI!”t eoA1I1I
VEHICULAR 1924 WIDTH OF” LINt
corresponding addition to the space between buildiugs For routes likely to carry a heavier traffic, it is im- i. ) ./ ~”‘~—+—+””‘=F.
half. Inter-district thoroughfares of any consi~erable And whenever a six-line street is to be developed, as ” I f’RQK lUPOllT TO lfYQU,JlLUILClitlltT
number of such streets in Los Angeles, but this involves A sL'”\:.-line street which carries street car traffic has (Compare with 1Jcxf page for -increase ‘;11 Z ‘j’cars.)Diagram iVO. 6-Vchicular Traffic Flo’w -in I922.
Six-Line Streets should be two lines of rapidly moving vehicles in each , MAJOR TRAFFIC STREET PLAN Legal and Administrative Methods and just fails to carry three lines of moving vehicles . on a street 100 feet between property lines, but again An over all width of 110 or 120 feet for an eight-line A street for which a width of 100 feet between prop- *For further discussion see “Rem~dies for Street Conges~ The present procedure of legal and administrative The city shonld be prepared to prosecute condemna- The provision in existing state law whereby 51 % nf One of the greatest difficnlties to be met in street Taking the large view of the local situation it is evi- . reqnired for the whole metropolis through small in- There should be state legislation, if fonnd tn be neces- 25
years, which legislation might also provide the manner Constitutional Amendment Advisable plied in distributiug the cost nf street opening. Assum- This power is most important, .because when new Many states have by constitotionaJ amendment “:Art. I, Sec. 7. The legislatnre may anthorize cities Once a complete and comprehensi”e street plan has ~urther facts on excess condemnation see Williams- more dangerous lor children, dusty, dirty and noisy lor • 10 addition to the above wor~ the City Engineer’s office VEHICULAR
crn
,accVUQC 1..0… oL”‘:’TU,
……U”l’Ia.o.QTIICl.O.. C1O
t;1U-=tU H.t:HV1-l:”t
TRAFfiC FLOW
7 AM. TO 6:30 P.M. FEB.14
TOTAL vt.H1CLC P,i,5ING
EACH POIHT 3HOWN BY
becomes important. The sina qua nOll is to keep the
central 40 foot width constantly clear for moving
velncles.
Eight-Line Streets
portant to provide for three lines of fast moving velri-
cles in each direction, which with parallel parking next
the curb requires for speed and safety a nriuimum of
74- feet between curbs. Figueroa Street, for most of
its length, bas a width of almost 69 feet between curbs
I
…….
importance for ,’ehicular movement which include or
are likely to include car tracks (in order to give reason-
ably weU distributed street car service), unless closely
paralleled by thoroughfares free from tracks, ought
therefore in general to be eight-line streets.
to the use of the abutting property, in a manner requir-
ing more than the usual amount of sidewalk space or
space for parking of velricles (as by diagonal parking
or backing up to the curb for loading and unloading) a
if·
PlRfTNATIOHlU.lIAf1It
sidewalk widths of ouly 12 or 13 feet. Where a street
is residential in character, such a sidewalk width is
cramped for tree planting, and where it develops as a
business street, as is very apt to be the case sooner or
later on major traffic streets, it is cramped for shoppers.
An over all width of about 90 feet is therefore distinctly
preferable to 80 feet for a six-line thoroughfare.
a mucl, reduced capacity for velnenlar movement. Even
if parking is prolnbited opposite the loading places of
the cars, and one free gangway is thus kept open on
each side even when street cars are stopping, the” peak
vehicular capaci!)· of the street is reduced almost ‘by
Th~ minimum capacity for a major thoroughfare
direction, completely free from obstructi9n by vehicles
stopping or parked at the curb. Under modern con-
ditions as to width of vehicles, speed, and necessity for
clearance, this reqnires approximately 40 feet. Reduc-
tion of this allowance means reduced speed and greater
dauger. Parallel parking at the curb requires a mini-
mum of 7 feet more on each side. Helice a normal
uniform width of 54- feet is necessary between cnrbs,
and 56 feet is preferable. This is called a six-line road-
way. It can be provided on a street 80 feet wide be-
tween property lines, and has been so provided on a
t.
24
abreast, except occasionally when the flow is che:ked
at crossings. It is b}r no means true, as sometimes
stated, that a roadway 60 or 65 or 69 feet wide has no
greater capacity than one 56 feet wide. The extra
width has some ,’alue iu permitting higher speeds with
a given degree of safety (or vice versa) j -but there is
a marked increase of peak load capacity when the full
eight-line dimension is reached, provided th: traffic
is well regulated. A 74-foot roadway can be mstaJled
this allows only 13 foot sidewalks, which for practical
reasons, are very narrow for a main thoroughfare, and
alongside of a 74-foot roadway look extremely cramped.
thoroughfare is very much to be preferred.
erty lines can be secured, and 110 feet is not obtainable
at a cost within reason, may be regarded as a potential
eight..1ine thoroughfare, but the actUal widening of the
roadway to fuJI eight-line width should not be under-
taken without the most careful consideration.*
tico/’ by Harland Batholomew. paper before American Elec-
tric Railway Association, :Marcb 4, 1924, published in Aera for·
March. 1924, and in Engineering News Record for April. 1924.
methods in opening, widening and improving streets, is
fraught with delay-rnany projects have required from
five tn ten years hetween the preparation of the ordi-
nance and the actnal completion of the improvement.
Legislation should be enacted pennitting the city to ex-
pedite work in various ways, inclnding early acqnisition
of title to property in order to insnre early completion
of work, leaving the litigation tn be settled as time will
permit. This is the reverse of present procedure under
which litigation usually precedes and greatly delays the
execution of work. The recommendation aJiove offered
wonld tend to decrease litigation.. A detailed legal dis-
cussion of procednre now followed and pnssible reme-
dies is given in Appendb<:' B.
Permanent Assessment Board
tion work rapidly. It would seem to be wise, if the city
is to enter upon a considerable co~demnation program,
to enlarge the legal departrnellt and to provide for a
permanent board for apportiomoent of damages and
assessment of benefits. In other words, there shonld
be a well-functioning mechanism established for expe-
diting this character of work, which tuday we under-
stand is more or less confused with numerous other ac-
tivities in certain departments of the city gOvernment.
property owners in any given improvement district may,
by protest) cause abandonment of any proceeding is
not to be fonnd in other states. Abutters have a right
to every proper safeguard against unjust or e”,.-travagant
assessments, but this is a very clumsy device for that
purpose, and pennits a local gronp to block an improve-·
ment needed by the city at large even when the local
assessments might be very small and eminently just.
City Should Take lmmediate Possession
openings and widenings in Los Angeles is the increase
in cost that has been and may be brought abont by land
speculation within the thirty day notice required under .
present state law for public hearing previous to enact-
ment of ordinance and in the often much longer period
before the date as of which values are determined.
There is precedent in this county and in municipal
practice elsewhere for procedure which will meet these
conditions. Some means must apparently be found
whereby possession may be secured without long public
notice of intent.
dent that the connty should pOssess powers similar to
those now e-“cisting or here recommended for the citv in
\~rtually all city planning ‘acti\~ties including the crea-
tion of park districts, zoning and ~treet openings. One
of the worst drawbacks in accomplishment of impor-
tant metropolitan projects is the inability of either the
city or the county to bring about the opening of streets
corporated fnunicipalities which by their very nature
are unwilling and usually incapable of viewing public
improvements in any way except in a local manner.
sary, permitting the county as well as the city of Los
Angeles tu establish building lines upon streets by the
condemnation of an easement for a limited period of
. in which the cost of such easement might be deftayed.
There is no rule of tllumb that can universally be ap-
ing that the city of Los Angeles is to enter upon an
exteosive program of street opening and widening it is
belie”ed that the city should possess all powers com-
monly possessed or nsed by other cities undertaking this
character of work. With the exception of the power of
excess condemnation, Los Angeles appears now to pos-
sess adequate legislative authority for undertaking a’
comprehensive prngram of street npening and widening.
It is recommended that a legislative provision for a con-
stitutional amendment on excess condemnation be pre-
pared.
streets are cut through, there are remnants of lots and
uneVen parcels not properly usable for building sites
left by the present law, which only allows the actual
width of street needed for street purposes to be
taken. The damage is often so much to these parcels
that the city practically pays for the whole parcel, and
cannot take the remnant, and must make bad building
sites fronting the new improvement.
authorized their cities to take at least enough land in
addition to the street width to form well-shaped lots
squarely fronting on the new improvement. These in-
clnde Massachusetts (1911), Ohio (1912), Wisconsin
(1912), New York (1913), Rhode Island (1916), and
New Jersey (by statute 1870). The simplest of these
constitutional provisions is ‘that of New York, which
reads as follows:
to take more land and property than is needed fat
actual construction in the laying out) widening) ex-
tending, or re-Iocating parks, public places, highways
or streets; provided, however, that the additional land
and property so authorized to be taken shall be no
mnre than ~ufficient tu fonn suitable building sites
abutting on such park, public place, highway or street.
After so much of the land and property has been
appropriated for such park, public place, highway or
street as is needed therefor, the remainder may be
sold or leased.u *
Revolving Fund Should be Established
been finished, a general program of procedure and nr-
derly financing might be adopted. It sbould make
orderly prO\~sion for the raising of the city’s share of
such costs as may be levied against it. It is here as-
smoed that, generally spealring, costs for street open-
inl:’! will be distrihuted. in part agai~st the city, in part
agamst propert)· abutting on openmgs and widenings
and in part against benefited districts varying in extent
according to the character arid location of each indi-
vidual project. The value of a permanent assessment
board becomes increasingly evident in this connection
in avoiding overlapping and excessive assessments for
benefits. .
“The Law of City Planning and Zoning.” Chap. In. page
128; also Chapter in Lewis-“Planning the Modern City.”
the houses fronting on it, and· therefore less desirable
in many ways for residences, except for the larger type
01 dwelling which can afford to set well back from the
street. And unless it is a very hea,’Y and costly pave-
ment the diversion to it 01 trucking traffic is liable very
promptly to break it down. The abutters are assessed
has·about two years of petitions for street work, held up until
a larger engineering force can be secured, amounting to an
estimated total cost of $10,000,000.00, and up to $40,000,000.00
of other engineering. work. It is understood that the Qty
Council will make a special appropriation, so that plans may
be gotten out immediately for this work.
“-Estimated.
for something that they want, that would serve their
ueeds and that tlley can afford’to pay, for; and then their
improvement is promptly worn out by others. If not
soon abandoned to them. their street is at best made
dangerous and noisy.
Minor Streets Should Be Narrower and Indirect
Where. city engineers used to think that every street
should be laid out a through street, it is now seen to
he economical to provide wider and heavier pavements
on a limited number 01 selected Major Traffic Streets
and to keep through traffic off the rest 01 the streets
. as far as possible.
On minor residential streets width and directness are
no longer considered essential. In fact, on these minor
residential streets a roadway width sufficient only for
the purely local traffic, when combined ,vith more or less
irregularity in alignment, discourages the use of the
~treet for traffic purposes) gives more room for plant-
mg and adds great;ly, to the desirability 01 the street
for residential purposes. Families with children seek-
ing either to rent or buy a horne~ .give prefere~ce in
nearly every case to a quiet) out-of-the-way”street) free
from the speeder and through traffic.
As a matter 01 city planning, the chiel, il not the
only objections to making all local residential streets
so interrupted and indirect as to exclude C!-utomatically
all through traffic are, first, that direct major streets
are often not provided 01 adequate capacity lor carry-
ing the through traffic 01 the present and the immediate
future; and, second, that Goqditions are Hable to change
so as to demand the conversion of intermediate streets
originally intended and used as local residence streets
into additional major traffic streets, sometimes devoted
to business, as has been recently happening with the
north and south streets between Figueroa and lvrain
Street, south 01 the central business district.
It may be a very wise ‘precaution in citY planning to
la)’ out some 01 the originally local streets intermediate
between the original main thoroughf;!res on such line~
and with such building line setbacks that they can, if
necessary) be converted at some future time) without
extravagant cost, into supplementary intermediate
major thoroughfares i but this does not alter the sound-
ness of the polic)’ 01 deliberately selecting a ‘series 01
major streets adequate lor the through traffic needs
. which call be clearly forecast, 01 concentrating the wide
and heavy pavements on those streets, and 01 seeking
economy and safety and quietude on all the minor
residential· streets that intervene between them.
Minor Industrial Streets May Be Closed •
It is to be noted also that heavy industries need
large~ areas uninterrupted bjt streets than the ordinary
residence blocks offer. If Major Traffic Streets are
properly provided for through hauling, minor streets
in industrial areas can be closed) wherever desired for
!,usines~ reasons.. The Major Street Plan should help
mdustnes b)’ settling the question a I what streets are
needed for through traffic so that the others ma)’ be
closed without question) if proper easements for .sewers)
drainage) utilities, etc., are retained.
. ~1any American municipalities have begun to recog-
mze the necessity for thus settling definitely which are
to be the Major Traffic Streets 01 the city, and a fairly
complete Major Traffic Street Plan bas been worked
out and adopted in St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Memphis
Cleveland, Portland (are.), and in a number olathe;
cities. The Major Traffic Street Plan of Los Angeles
is along similar lines.
Parkways and Boulevards
A parkway or boulevard) in the sense usea in this
report (regardless 01 the occasional misapplication 01
these terms to the most ordinary l-inds of local streets)
is a route limited to passenger vehicles (excluding all
com~ercial vehicles and truck-hauling) and made ex-
ceptionally agreeable as a route 01 pleasure travel by
every possible means, but especially by the feeling 0 I
openness that comes anI}’ with plenty 01 width and by
an ample enframement of trees, shrubs, and other
plan,tations in the parallel wide sidewalk areas. •
There is’ justification ‘Ior pro,-lding such a parkwa)’
or boulevard as one of the main thoroughfares 6£ a city·
wherever conditions are such that commercial traffic
can be taken care of in other or De?Iby routes, and that
the amount and kind 01 passenger traffic over the pro-
posed route would make the extra public enjoyment
afforded by the parkway or boulevard worth its cost.
A parkway or boulevard -may be used mainly hy peo- .
pIe guing to and from business and yet .give them a
great deal 01 incidental recreation· and pleasure; but
ordinarily the justification lor such treatment is great-
est on routes used also.largely by people who’ are travel-
ing solely for pleasure-as to and Irom the beaches, the
mountains) etc.
Such parkway thoroughfares, as far as possible,
should lead past the principal fine buildings and parks
and scenic ‘-lews 01 the city showing it to ·the best ad-
vantage to Yis.itors, while at the same time contributing
mnch to the enjoyment 01 local people. Los Angeles,
with its ever-increasing number of visitors) has more
tl,an usnal justification lor esf;1blishing this kind. 01
thoroughfare.
It is important to note the distinction between the
class 01 parkways and boulevards here discussed as
forming part of the thoroughfares system of the city
and those which are not intended for direct communi-
cation between points, but which are simply elongated
parks in which people circulate for the pleasure they
find in them. The latter may be valuable purely as parts
01 a park system, but are not parts aI, a thoroughlare
s}’stem.
Width in boulevards and parkways is necessary to
secure ample permanent spaces lor planting. Such
parking ‘and planting are what make a boulevard desir-
able, refreshing and useful as distinct from ordinary
traffic streets. ‘ .
A street 100 feet wide would be a street or avenue
’01 handsome ‘vidtll, but a mean boulevard. Residence
. streets commonly have two rows of sidewalk trees. A
boulevard sbould have something more. II it depends
for its distinction on its rows of trees, four rows (two
on each side) are little enough, and three ‘rows on each
side are not uncommon. A ‘vidth of 150 leet would
generall)’ bc a minimum, but more is usually desirable.
. In the case 01 all’boulevards and parkways, houses
should be set back 25 feet or more from the sidewalk,
and suitable legal methods for securing this sbould
always be adopted at the· time allaying out a boulevard
or parkway.
Widths of Major Thoroughfares
W’idths 01 majo, thoroughlares should be determined.
primaril)’ by the lIt1mber of lilies of traffic to be carried.
17
TRAFFIC FLOW
1922
12 HOURS .JAN.I
TOTAL VEHiCLES PASSING
_~_~=,-.L-“,,-….J–r.-+,–….J,,…..,.,.—\;-EACH :I~l;~ ~~0l.~:E BY
Diagram No. 7-VahiCIIlor Traffic Fl01u ill 1924. (Dra1uII to.sama scola as that for 1922 all praviolls page.) Nota
the marked incrcases all strcets to south alld south’lClcStJ also Figueroa and ~VBStcrn.
,..,.,.me CI:l”‘-‘”l’lI.IOPf
crn
Top-quality papers guaranteed
100% original papers
We sell only unique pieces of writing completed according to your demands.
Confidential service
We use security encryption to keep your personal data protected.
Money-back guarantee
We can give your money back if something goes wrong with your order.
Enjoy the free features we offer to everyone
-
Title page
Get a free title page formatted according to the specifics of your particular style.
-
Custom formatting
Request us to use APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, or any other style for your essay.
-
Bibliography page
Don’t pay extra for a list of references that perfectly fits your academic needs.
-
24/7 support assistance
Ask us a question anytime you need to—we don’t charge extra for supporting you!
Calculate how much your essay costs
What we are popular for
- English 101
- History
- Business Studies
- Management
- Literature
- Composition
- Psychology
- Philosophy
- Marketing
- Economics
