DOCSLIB.ORG

Metro Measure M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Metro Measure M metro.net/theplan THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN centRAl los Angeles The Metro Board of Directors voted to place a sales tax measure, titled the AdditionAl AnnuAl locAl RetuRn Funding PRojections FoR FiRst Full yeAR Los Angeles County Traffic Improvement Plan, on the November 8, 2016, funding is projected to increase each year ballot. This summarizes the projects and Measure M funding for the Central (For street improvements, pothole repair, signals, etc.) Los Angeles area if the measure passes. city Major Projects (in 2015 $) Los Angeles2 $ 56,216,200 • West Santa Ana Transit Corridor LRT $1.4 billion ($3.9 billion total cost)1 Unincorporated LA County2 $ 14,943,600 • LA River Waterway and System Bikepath $365 million 2 Funding may be used for local transportation projects 1 and programs anywhere within the City of Los Angeles • Vermont Transit Corridor $25 million ($425 million total cost) or Unincorporated LA County as they determine. • Crenshaw Northern Extension $1.7 billion ($2.2 billion total cost)1 • Historic Downtown Streetcar $200 million AdditionAl AnnuAl Funding FoR locAl tRAnsit oPeratoRs FoR FiRst Full yeAR Multi-Year Subregional Programs (in 2015 $) funding is projected to increase each year • Active Transportation, First/Last Mile and Mobility Hubs $215 million operator • Subregional Equity Program $235 million LADOT Local3 $ 3,146,100 • Los Angeles Safe Routes to School Initiative $250 million LADOT Commuter Express3 $ 1,795,700 • Bus Rapid Transit and First/Last Mile Solutions e.g. DASH $250 million 3 Funding may be used to operate LADOT transit service as • Freeway Interchange and Operational Improvements $195 million they determine. • LA Streetscape Enhancement and Great Streets Program $450 million • Public Transit State of Good Repair Program $402 million • Traffic Congestion Relief/Signal Synchronization $50 million • All subregions are eligible to compete for $260 million ($350 million 1,952,013 2017 1 total cost) worth of Bus Rapid Transit projects, and $858 million worth 2,300,217 2047 of Metro Active Transportation Projects source: metro calculation based on 2012 scag rtp data Local Return • Local Return Revenue for the Central Los Angeles area is expected to be $4.5 billion over the next 40 years in escalated dollars 465,690 new jobs Transit source: laedc 2016 study • Metro Transit and Municipal Transit Operators in the Central Los Angeles area will also receive additional funding • Regional Rail (Metrolink) is programmed to receive $1.2 billion over the next 40 years in escalated dollars, with eligibility for an additional $700 million if 2040 performance targets are met 1Total cost includes Measure M funding plus other fund sources. Kern County 138 ANTELOPE VALLEY Kern County 5 14 138 the los Angeles county tRAFFic imPRovement PlAn central los angeles 138 SANTA CLARITA VALLEY 33 North County Inset 36 36 36 36 ANTELOPE VALLEY 33 33 126 5 2 14 36 14 Los Angeles County 1 34 33 36 36 SAN FERNANDO 36 VALLEY 138 36 Ventura County 118 SANTA CLARITA VALLEY 9 210 170 14 5 ARROYO 126 VERDUGO 101 28 2 134 10 14 6 24 CENTRALLos Ange les County 210 LA 11 33 35 405 LAS VIRGENES/ 33 MALIBU 27 15 WESTSIDE SAN FERNANDO 10 CITIES 3 VALLEY 12 23 20 1 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY 71 10 Ventura County 118 21 32 33 4 PACIFIC OCEAN 210 60 29 31 16 San 25 170 37 57 Bernardino 8 5 5 ARROYO 7 33 County 5 105 VERDUGO Transit Projects Completed 101 17 2 30 134 710 110 13 SOUTH BAY Transit Projects Under Construction 19 37 CITIES CENTRAL 91 210 22 LA GATEWAY Orange County Transit Projects Proposed 26 605 LAS VIRGENES/ 405 CITIES MALIBU 18 405 37 Highway/Street Projects Under Construction WESTSIDE 10 1 CITIES Highway/Street Projects Proposed 1 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY 71 10 Map numbers are for reference only. Final project scope will be determined in the environmental process. Visit metro.net/theplan for project descriptions. PACIFIC OCEAN 60 San 57 Bernardino Highway/Street Projects Transit Projects 5 County 1 High Desert Multi-Purpose Corridor Project (Right-of-Way) 8 Airport105 Metro Connector/Green Line Extension Transit Projects Completed 2 I-5 N Capacity Enhancements (SR-14 to Lake Hughes Rd) 9 East San Fernando710 Valley Transit Corridor 110 3 SR-71 Gap: I-10 to Rio Rancho Rd SOUTH BAY 10 BRT Connector Orange/Red Line to Gold Line Transit Projects Under Construction CITIES 91 4 SR-57/SR-60 Interchange Improvements 11 Gold Line FoothillGATEWAY Extension Phase 2B Orange County Transit Projects Proposed CITIES 605 5 I-105 ExpressLane: I-405 to I-605 12 Purple Line Extension Transit Project Section 3 6 SepulvedaHighway/Street Pass Corridor Projects (Busway) Under Construction 13 West Santa Ana Transit405 Corridor Segment 1 1 7 14 I-710Highway/Street South Corridor Projects Project Proposed Phase 1 Orange Line BRT Improvements (Locations TBD) 15 I-605/I-10 Interchange 21 Gold Line Eastside Extension Phase 2 (one alignment) 16 I-5 Corridor Improvements: I-605 to I-710 22 Green Line Extension to Crenshaw Bl in Torrance 17 I-405 South Bay Curve Improvements 23 Vermont Transit Corridor 18 I-710 South Corridor Project Phase 2 24 Sepulveda Pass Corridor (Rail) 19 I-110 ExpressLanes Extension to I-405/I-110 Interchange 25 West Santa Ana Transit Corridor Segment 2 20 SR-60/I-605 Interchange HOV Direct Connectors 27 Crenshaw Line Northern Extension I-405/I-110 Interchange HOV Connect Ramps & 28 26 Orange Line Conversion to Light Rail Interchange Improvements 29 Lincoln Bl BRT 34 High Desert Multi-Purpose Corridor Project (Construction) 30 Green Line to Norwalk Metrolink Station 35 Las Virgenes/Malibu Transportation Improvements (Representative Sample) 31 Sepulveda Pass Corridor Westwood to Airport Metro Connector 36 North County Transportation Improvements (Representative Sample) 32 Gold Line Eastside Extension Phase 2 (second alignment) 37 I-605 Corridor “Hot Spot” Interchange Improvements 33 Regional Rail and Metrolink Improvements Not shown on map: Crenshaw/LAX Track Enhancement Project, Complete LA River Bike Path and LA River Waterway and System Bike Path, City of San Fernando Bike Master Plan, Historic Downtown Streetcar, North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit Improvements, Arroyo Verdugo Transportation Improvements, and South Bay Transportation Improvements 17-0317bg ©2016 lacmta 17-0317bg.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Confronting Sa-I-Gu: Twenty Years After the Los Angeles Riots
    【특집】 Confronting Sa-i-gu: Twenty Years after the Los Angeles Riots Edward Taehan Chang (the Young Oak Kim Center for Korean American Studies) Twenty years ago on April 29, Los Angeles erupted and Koreatown cried as it burned. For six-days, the LAPD was missing in action as rioting, looting, burning, and killing devastated the city. The “not guilty” Rodney King verdict ignited anger and frustration felt by South Los Angeles residents who suffered from years of neglect, despair, hopelessness, injustice, and oppression.1) In the Korean American community, the Los Angeles riot is remembered as Sa-i-gu (April 29 in Korean). Korean Americans suffered disproportionately high economic losses as 2,280 Korean American businesses were looted or burned with $400 million in property damages.2) Without any political clout and power in the city, Koreatown was unprotected and left to burn since it was not a priority for city politicians and 1) Rodney King was found dead in his own swimming pool on June 17, 2012, shortly after publishing his autobiography The Riot Within: My Journey from Rebellion to Redemption Learning How We Can All Get Along, in April 2012. 2) Korea Daily Los Angeles, May 11, 1992. 2 Edward Taehan Chang the LAPD. For the Korean American community, Sa-i-gu is known as its most important historical event, a “turning point,” “watershed event,” or “wake-up call.” Sa-i-gu profoundly altered the Korean American discourse, igniting debates and dialogue in search of new directions.3) The riot served as a catalyst to critically examine what it meant to be Korean American in relation to multicultural politics and race, economics and ideology.
    [Show full text]
  • East Los Angeles Should Not Be Lumped with the Hollywood Hills, Si
    East Los Angeles Should Not Be Lumped with the Hollywood Hills, Si... Subject: East Los Angeles Should Not Be Lumped with the Hollywood Hills, Silver Lake, and Los Feliz! From: Franziska WiƩenstein < Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 10:47:52 -0700 To: Commissioners, CiƟzens RedistricƟng Commission 901 P Street, Suite 154-A Sacramento, CA 95814 Commissioners: When you Commissioners were picked, many of us in Los Angeles (and many in the media) were concerned that none of you lived in the City of Los Angeles. We were told not to worry, that you understood the region and would draw fair maps. We’ve also been told, throughout the process, that the era of odd-shaped, gerrymandered districts, featuring odd pairings of communiƟes, were over. Then, in your iniƟal draŌ maps, you proposed a district lumping together the Hollywood Hills, Los Feliz, Silver Lake, and East Los Angeles! To get there, the district lines cross the Los Angeles River and dart around Downtown Los Angeles, making the district as bizarrely shaped as anything the poliƟcians ever drew. It will be extremely difficult for whomever is in elected in that district to represent those communiƟes. Those communiƟes are as different as can be. We, the undersigned, strongly urge you to draw more sensible maps. East Los Angeles (and Lincoln Heights, etc.) should be together with other eastside communiƟes so that residents there can elect a repeƟƟve of their choosing. The communiƟes of Hollywood Hills, Los Feliz, and Silver Lake are not “eastside.” No porƟon of those communiƟes are east of Downtown or east of the Los Angeles River.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Claremore Public Works Authority Meeting Council Chambers, City Hall, 104 S
    MINUTES OF CLAREMORE PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 104 S. MUSKOGEE, CLAREMORE, OKLAHOMA MARCH 03, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order by Mayor Brant Shallenburger at 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Nan Pope called roll. The following were: Present: Brant Shallenburger, Buddy Robertson, Tony Mullenger, Flo Guthrie, Mick Webber, Terry Chase, Tom Lehman, Paula Watson Absent: Don Myers Staff Present: City Manager Troy Powell, Nan Pope, Serena Kauk, Matt Mueller, Randy Elliott, Cassie Sowers, Phil Stowell, Steve Lett, Daryl Golbek, Joe Kays, Gene Edwards, Tim Miller, Tamryn Cluck, Mark Dowler Pledge of Allegiance by all. Invocation by James Graham, Verdigris United Methodist Church. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Motion by Mullenger, second by Lehman that the agenda for the regular CPWA meeting of March 03, 2008, be approved as written. 8 yes, Mullenger, Lehman, Robertson, Guthrie, Shallenburger, Webber, Chase, Watson. ITEMS UNFORESEEN AT THE TIME AGENDA WAS POSTED None CALL TO THE PUBLIC None CURRENT BUSINESS Motion by Mullenger, second by Lehman to approve the following consent items: (a) Minutes of Claremore Public Works Authority meeting on February 18, 2008, as printed. (b) All claims as printed. (c) Approve budget supplement for upgrading the electric distribution system and adding an additional Substation for the new Oklahoma Plaza Development - $586,985 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment. (Serena Kauk) (d) Approve budget supplement for purchase of an additional concrete control house for new Substation #5 for Oklahoma Plaza Development - $93,946 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment. (Serena Kauk) (e) Approve budget supplement for electrical engineering contract with Ledbetter, Corner and Associates for engineering design phase for Substation #5 - Oklahoma Plaza Development - $198,488 - Leasehold improvements to new project number assignment.
    [Show full text]
  • Btc BETTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 201 N
    btc BETTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 201 N. Los Angeles St., Ste.13A 14540 SylvanSt., Ste; A . Los Angeles, CA .90012 · VanNuys, CA 91411 (213} 617-9600 {818) 779~8866 Fa,Y. {213) 517-9643 Fax(818) 779-8870 MAILING AFFIDAVIT City PlanQing Commission Deputy Ad\lisory Agency Case No. ______ Tentative Traer No. ______ Parcel Map No.------~ Zoning Administrator· ·Private Street No. ______ Case No. ______ Coastal Permit Area Planning Commission Case No.-----'-- Central, Harbor, SV, ELA, SLA, WLA, NV Case No.---------- Design Review Board Case No. ______ siTEAC l o~'1 ~oR..~ S'-\~~VY\o~€. ~~~-r- t, _\_·_ &-,.~,-<t· certrfy that I am an employee of BTC ~contractor of the Crty of Los Anqeles. Department of City Planning, State of California, and I drd, on the d.\~ day of ;::::)f'«<v.._y>.Q...'( 20H mail, postage prepaid, to the applicant and all parties required by the Municipal Code,·as detailed on the official ownership list, a notice of hearing, a true copy of which is attached. · .X' 500-foot radius --'---,--Abutting the subject site __,....-"'- __ Owners and Occupants ____ Tenant Notice ____ 100-foot coastal notice --cc,.--State Coastal Commission -~)(-'::--'-. Adjacent City (ies) _ ___!0><'~- Applicant and Representative (where indicated) _city_ Newspaper Notice · X" LA Unified School District, LA County Regional Planning Y Caltrans --;:---,--- Council's Own Initiative __Y~-- Metropolitan Transit Authority -~><'2?--- Certified Neighborhood Council (dept of Neighborhood Empowerment) X Council Office and Council District Office _city_ Homeowners Associations >< Other \)~ (:%: \?W:: Ll) Z:)J (:::> 'T &r->.~'E:,"('{ There is a regular daily communication and service by mail between the City of Los Angeles and each of the A~J: ~were mailed.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles Transportation Transit History – South LA
    Los Angeles Transportation Transit History – South LA Matthew Barrett Metro Transportation Research Library, Archive & Public Records - metro.net/library Transportation Research Library & Archive • Originally the library of the Los • Transportation research library for Angeles Railway (1895-1945), employees, consultants, students, and intended to serve as both academics, other government public outreach and an agencies and the general public. employee resource. • Partner of the National • Repository of federally funded Transportation Library, member of transportation research starting Transportation Knowledge in 1971. Networks, and affiliate of the National Academies’ Transportation • Began computer cataloging into Research Board (TRB). OCLC’s World Catalog using Library of Congress Subject • Largest transit operator-owned Headings and honoring library, forth largest transportation interlibrary loan requests from library collection after U.C. outside institutions in 1978. Berkeley, Northwestern University and the U.S. DOT’s Volpe Center. • Archive of Los Angeles transit history from 1873-present. • Member of Getty/USC’s L.A. as Subject forum. Accessing the Library • Online: metro.net/library – Library Catalog librarycat.metro.net – Daily aggregated transportation news headlines: headlines.metroprimaryresources.info – Highlights of current and historical documents in our collection: metroprimaryresources.info – Photos: flickr.com/metrolibraryarchive – Film/Video: youtube/metrolibrarian – Social Media: facebook, twitter, tumblr, google+,
    [Show full text]
  • Office Deliveries Continue for Central Los Angeles
    Research & Forecast Report CENTRAL LOS ANGELES | OFFICE Accelerating success. Q2 2017 >> Office Deliveries Continue for Central Los Angeles Key Takeaways Market Indicators | Relative to prior period > Delivery momentum continued in the second quarter with Q2 2017 Forecast J.H. Snyder's 1601 N. Vine St. delivering 115,600 square feet Vacancy (SF) to the market. This leaves 152,500 SF of office product Net Absorption under construction and 811,000 SF of expected proposed Construction construction in the Hollywood submarket. Rental Rate > The average rent for Class A buildings in Central Los Ange- les is $3.42 per square foot (PSF) Full Service Gross (FSG), a 0.7% decrease year-over-year. Summary Statistics | Central Los Angeles, Q2 2017 > Vacancy decreased 10 basis points from one quarter ago Class A Class B All Classes recording 18.0%. Vacancy Rate 12.2% 23.1% 18.0% Change from Q1 ‘17 > Leasing activity rose from last quarter's 122,100 SF total to -110 +80 -10 record 273,300 SF. (Basis Points) Net Absorption* 167.5 -53.4 112.2 > Investment activity consisted of Hudson Pacific acquiring Construction Completions* 115.6 0.0 115.6 Hollywood Center Studios for $200,000,000 ($542 PSF). Under Construction* 152.5 60.5 213.0 *SF, Thousands Central Los Angeles Office Market Asking Rents | Central Los Angeles, Q2 2017 The Central Los Angeles market saw moderate demand activ- ity during second quarter with vacancy decreasing by 10 basis Class A Class B All Classes points from last quarter, and absorption closing at 112,200 SF Average Asking Rent $3.42 $2.48 $2.75 Change from Q1 ‘17 for the quarter.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neighborly Substation the Neighborly Substation Electricity, Zoning, and Urban Design
    MANHATTAN INSTITUTE CENTER FORTHE RETHINKING DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION Hope Cohen 2008 er B ecem D THE NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION THE NEIGHBORLY SUBstATION Electricity, Zoning, and Urban Design Hope Cohen Deputy Director Center for Rethinking Development Manhattan Institute In 1879, the remarkable thing about Edison’s new lightbulb was that it didn’t burst into flames as soon as it was lit. That disposed of the first key problem of the electrical age: how to confine and tame electricity to the point where it could be usefully integrated into offices, homes, and every corner of daily life. Edison then designed and built six twenty-seven-ton, hundred-kilowatt “Jumbo” Engine-Driven Dynamos, deployed them in lower Manhattan, and the rest is history. “We will make electric light so cheap,” Edison promised, “that only the rich will be able to burn candles.” There was more taming to come first, however. An electrical fire caused by faulty wiring seriously FOREWORD damaged the library at one of Edison’s early installations—J. P. Morgan’s Madison Avenue brownstone. Fast-forward to the massive blackout of August 2003. Batteries and standby generators kicked in to keep trading alive on the New York Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ. But the Amex failed to open—it had backup generators for the trading-floor computers but depended on Consolidated Edison to cool them, so that they wouldn’t melt into puddles of silicon. Banks kept their ATM-control computers running at their central offices, but most of the ATMs themselves went dead. Cell-phone service deteriorated fast, because soaring call volumes quickly drained the cell- tower backup batteries.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet
    RECEIVED 2280 NFS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) Oregon WordPerfect 6.0 Format (Revised July 1998) National Register of Historic Places iC PLACES Registration Form • NATIONAL : A SERVICE This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking Y in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A"for "not applicable. For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NFS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name The La Grande Commercial Historic District other names/site number N/A 2. Location street & number Roughly bounded by the U.P Railroad tracts along Jefferson St, on __not for publication the north; Greenwood and Cove streets on the east; Washington St. on __ vicinity the south; & Fourth St. on the west. city or town La Grande state Oregon code OR county Union code 61 zip code 97850 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this ^nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Completeness of Six Los Angeles Cities
    EXAMINING THE COMPLETENESS OF SIX LOS ANGELES CITIES A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Planning by Judy Chang May 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the support of many people. However, for his guidance and tolerance, special thanks go to Dr. Robert Beauregard. And for their relentless encouragement and comaraderie, my deepest gratitude goes to Caroline Bauer, Caitlin Hackett, Doneliza Joaquin, Caroline Massa, Charles-Antoine Perrault, Frederick Sham, Michael Snidal, and Kerensa Wood. 3 4 5 ABSTRACT While Los Angeles provides an array of goods, services, and amenities across its expansive borders in a quintessentially polycentric manner, there continues to appear to be a lack of some of these “urban functions” in some of the densest parts of the city. This thesis serves to identify this mismatch, comparing a set of six southeast Los Angeles municipalities— whose population densities rival and sometimes exceed some of the nation’s largest cities’— and a portion of Central Los Angeles of roughly the same area and density. While this study reveals that only in some cases do the southeast Los Angeles cities lack urban functions relative to the central city, they generally fall under “high-order” categories such as health care facilities and cultural centers. The study concludes with recommendations for increasing these high- order functions, which would at once grant cities a sense of identity and relieve cost- and time-burdens on residents who must continue traveling to a city center for high-order urban functions.
    [Show full text]
  • Light Rail and Tram: the European Outlook November 2019
    STATISTICS BRIEF LIGHT RAIL AND TRAM: THE EUROPEAN OUTLOOK NOVEMBER 2019 INTRODUCTION Tram and light rail systems are available in 389 cit- evolution of light rail transit (LRT) in Europe since ies around the world, with more than half of them 20151, and provides a snapshot of the situation in (204) in Europe. This Statistics Brief describes the 2018. BALTIC/ NORDIC BENELUX REGION BRITISH 12 cities GERMANY 10 cities ISLES 482 km 49 cities 645 km 9 cities 375 m pax/y. 2,966 km 700 m pax/y. 356 km 2,908 m pax/y. 196 m pax/y. POLAND 15 cities 979 km FRANCE 1,051 m pax/y. 28 cities 827 km 1,104 m pax/y. SOUTH- EASTERN WESTERN CENTRAL EUROPE MEDITERRANEAN 29 cities 29 cities EUROPE 992 km 23 cities 809 km 1,277 m pax/y. 1,240 km 623 m pax/y. 2,188 m pax/y. 1 UITP collects rail data according to a three-year cycle (Metro, LRT and Regional & Suburban Railways) 1 A REMARKABLE RENAISSANCE 180 LRT has experienced a renaissance since the new millen- 160 nium, with no less than 108 new cities (re)opening their 140 first line, of which 60 are from Europe. This does not in- 120 Asia-Pacific clude new lines in existing systems and line extensions. 100 Eurasia Europe 80 40 450 South America 60 35 400 MENA & Africa 7 40 350 North America 30 +56% 20 6 300 25 3 2 250 0 2 4 20 2 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 10 1 5 200 15 1 6 1 150 1 1 Figure 3: Evolution of LRT development (km) 2 10 1 19 19 5 100 4 2 15 11 1 5 50 2 7 5 3 0 0 RIDERSHIP pre-1985 1985-89 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09 2010-14 2015-19 Europe North America South America With a total annual ridership in Europe of 10,422 million Eurasia Asia-Pacific MENA & Africa in 2018, LRT carries as many passengers as metros and Cumulative # systems regional/commuter rail, and 10 times more passengers 2 Figure 1: LRT system opening per half-decade, 1985-2019 than air travel in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • 2O2o Annual Report
    COMMUNITY & COMMITMENT 2O2O ANNUAL REPORT DEAR DOWNTOWN STAKEHOLDER It is with deep pride and steadfast commitment that we share with you the 2020 Annual Report for the Downtown Center Business Improvement District (DCBID). Looking back at the most difficult year in our District’s history, we can say with renewed confidence that our organization, and our community, is resilient, resourceful, and built to last. While Downtown Los Angeles (DTLA), like cities across the globe, faced unprecedented circumstances due to the impacts of COVID-19, the core services that the DCBID has provided to its property owners since its inception in 1998 helped keep the District safe, clean, and viable throughout the year, and helped position us for recovery and revitalization as the pandemic begins to recede. Deemed essential workers at the start of the shutdown, our Safe and Clean Teams maintained its commitment to the highest standards of hygiene, sanitation, and safety across the District, 24/7, through months of extremely challenging conditions. In 2020, they responded to over 24,563 calls for service, and removed over 69,766 bags of trash and over 18,108 instances of graffiti. Working with our Homeless Outreach teams, our Safe and Clean teams continued their tireless efforts without interruption, proving just how essential they truly are. Nurturing a sense of community in the District is a key element of our mission and was never more critical than during this crisis. In the distinct absence of office workers and visitors, the District’s residential community filled the void, showing its strength and commitment by supporting local businesses, helping clean-up efforts following demonstrations and celebrations, and just keeping the lights on during a very dark period.
    [Show full text]
  • Third-Party Guidance for Working Near National Grid Electricity Transmission Equipment 02
    Technical Guidance Note 287 Third-party guidance for working near National Grid Electricity Transmission equipment 02 Purpose and scope............................... 3 Risk of impact identification............................... 5 Contact National Grid........................................ 3 Risks or hazards to be aware of.............. 6 How to identify specific National Grid sites........ 3 Land and access............................................... 6 Plant protection................................................. 3 Electrical clearance from overhead lines............ 6 Emergencies...................................................... 3 Underground cables......................................... 7 Impressed voltage............................................ 7 Part 1 – Electricity Transmission Earth potential rise............................................ 8 infrastructure........................................ 4 Noise................................................................ 8 Overhead lines................................................... 4 Maintenance access......................................... 8 Underground cables.......................................... 4 Fires and firefighting.......................................... 9 Substations....................................................... 4 Excavations, piling or tunnelling........................ 9 Microshocks..................................................... 9 Part 2 – Statutory requirements for Specific development guidance............ 10 working near
    [Show full text]