Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 72

Expand Messages
  • George Plato
    ... ... of ... safer. ... lucky ... ways ... Plymouth,
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      > [Original Message]
      > From: George Plato <bigkis@...>
      > To: LVNA90004yahoogroups.com <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>;
      <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > Date: 6/22/2005 8:36:52 AM
      > Subject: RE: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 72
      >
      > Charlie.Ibelieve the meeting should be set up by our LVNA president-chain
      of
      > command,more clout.
      > George Plato
      > > [Original Message]
      > > From: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > To: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Date: 6/22/2005 7:29:38 AM
      > > Subject: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 72
      > >
      > > There are 3 messages in this issue.
      > >
      > > Topics in this digest:
      > >
      > > 1. RE: Digest Number 71
      > > From: "George Plato" <bigkis@...>
      > > 2. RE: Digest Number 71
      > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > 3. Speed hump discussion
      > > From: "kentrisk" <kentrisk@...>
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > >
      > > Message: 1
      > > Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 09:20:14 -0700
      > > From: "George Plato" <bigkis@...>
      > > Subject: RE: Digest Number 71
      > >
      > > Again why dont we meet with Tom LaBonge himself ,not his staff, and
      > > push him for what the majority wants-STOP SIGNS.
      > > He will listen.
      > > George Plato
      > > > From: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > To: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > Date: 6/21/2005 7:25:51 AM
      > > > Subject: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 71
      > > >
      > > > There are 2 messages in this issue.
      > > >
      > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > >
      > > > 1. Re: Digest Number 69
      > > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > > 2. Plymouth traffic
      > > > From: michele montgomery <michele@...>
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      > > > Message: 1
      > > > Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
      > > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > > Subject: Re: Digest Number 69
      > > >
      > > > AARD-
      > > > I'm not sure where you get your information, but THE
      > > > CITY PAYS FOR SPEED HUMPS. If Plymouth was a private
      > > > street - that would be a different story. Lights, tar,
      > > > street paint, street cleaners...all part of LA CITY
      > > > Public works.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- athein@... wrote:
      > > >
      > > > > Josh,
      > > > > The City will NOT pay for this.
      > > > > Will someone be able to embarrass me on this
      > > > > statement?
      > > > >
      > > > > ~Aard
      > > > >
      > > > > -------------- Original message --------------
      > > > >
      > > > > > There are 3 messages in this issue.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 1. Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > > From: "DENNEHY / LANCASTER"
      > > > > > 2. Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > > From: lowelevin@...
      > > > > > 3. Re: Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > > From: athein@...
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Message: 1
      > > > > > Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 06:51:10 -0700
      > > > > > From: "DENNEHY / LANCASTER"
      > > > > > Subject: Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > >
      > > > > > How do we know if our block is without a captain?
      > > > > Do you have a list?
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Elizabeth Lancaster
      > > > > > Norton Ave
      > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > > > From: LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > To: LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 6:09 AM
      > > > > > Subject: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 68
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > There are 3 messages in this issue.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 1. Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > 2. LAPD Community Walk in Larchmont Village
      > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > 3. Private security 24-hour monitoring
      > > > > > From: "Samantha Karim"
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Message: 1
      > > > > > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:14:48 -0000
      > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > Subject: Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > >
      > > > > > This from Josh Brooks regarding his effort to get
      > > > > speed humps on
      > > > > > Plymouth....
      > > > > >
      > > > > > As of today, June 14th, I am 1 signature away from
      > > > >
      > > > > > turning in the paperwork to the city.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > On Plymouth:
      > > > > > In Between Rosewood and Clinton - over 75% of the
      > > > > > residents signed the petition.
      > > > > > In Between Rosewood and Beverly - I am 1 signature
      > > > >
      > > > > > away from the needed majority.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > It's been a long process to knock on 80 people's
      > > > > doors
      > > > > > and speak with them, but it's just about done. A
      > > > > > pretty insightful experience to say the least.
      > > > > Each
      > > > > > block has about 36 houses on it, so I need no less
      > > > >
      > > > > > than 27 signatures per block.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > My first priority was the stop sign on the corner
      > > > > of
      > > > > > Rosewood and Plymouth. From speaking to our
      > > > > neighbors,
      > > > > > this what we all want....but the city will NOT
      > > > > allow
      > > > > > it. I will continue to hound the councilmens
      > > > > office
      > > > > > and the transportation office - but Georgia and I
      > > > > were
      > > > > > told that there are certain Federal regulations
      > > > > that
      > > > > > are needed that we just don't qualify for.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > I had the Transportation Engineer conduct a study
      > > > > on
      > > > > > Plymouth. His reported cited that the street had
      > > > > > excess speeding. The city's recomendation was to
      > > > > > install 5 speed humps (3 on the 500 block and2 on
      > > > > the
      > > > > > 300/400 block). As quoted from his reported "After
      > > > > a
      > > > > > thorough analysis of available traffic measures,
      > > > > LADOT
      > > > > > has determined that speed humps off the most
      > > > > > appropriate and effective way to deal with the
      > > > > > excessive speeding on Plymouth Blvd."
      > > > > >
      > > > > > THIS STREET IS DANGEROUS. The neigbors agree. The
      > > > > City
      > > > > > agrees. Speed Humps are what is available deal
      > > > > with
      > > > > > this problem.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Feel free to email me back with any questions.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Josh Brooks
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Message: 2
      > > > > > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:01:18 -0000
      > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > Subject: LAPD Community Walk in Larchmont Village
      > > > > >
      > > > > > WHAT: LAPD COMMUNITY WALK IN LARCHMONT VILLAGE
      > > > > >
      > > > > > WHEN: FRIDAY, JULY 22, 2005
      > > > > >
      > > > > > TIME: 7PM - 9PM
      > > > > >
      > > > > > WHERE: CORNER OF PLYMOUTH & ROSEWOOD
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Come meet our Senior Lead Officer (SLO), Paula
      > > > > Davidson from
      > > > > > Hollywood Division of LAPD. Hollywood Division
      > > > > covers our
      > > > > > neighborhood from the east side of the street on
      > > > > Gower to Wilton and
      > > > > > from Melrose to Beverly.
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > The idea is to get residents out into the
      > > > > community so we can
      > > > > > pinpoint trouble spots for the officers.
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Come out on FRIDAY, JULY 22nd from 7-9PM:
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > *If you have questions
      > > > > >
      > > > > > *If you have crime issues you want to discuss
      > > > > >
      > > > > > *To receive crime tips
      > > > > >
      > > > > > *To show that we care about our village
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > This is also a great opportunity to get to know
      > > > > the people who are
      > > > > > looking out for us!
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > FYI: We're still in need of block captains. If
      > > > > you'd
      > > > === message truncated ===
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > __________________________________
      > > > Yahoo! Mail Mobile
      > > > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
      > > > http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      > > > Message: 2
      > > > Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:47:29 -0700
      > > > From: michele montgomery <michele@...>
      > > > Subject: Plymouth traffic
      > > >
      > > > > AARD-
      > > > > I'm not sure where you get your information, but THE
      > > > > CITY PAYS FOR SPEED HUMPS. If Plymouth was a private
      > > > > street - that would be a different story. Lights, tar,
      > > > > street paint, street cleaners...all part of LA CITY
      > > > > Public works.
      > > >
      > > > Josh,
      > > >
      > > > First, I'd like to thank you for trying to make our neighborhood
      safer.
      > > > I know it must take a great deal of effort on your part and we're
      lucky
      > > > to have such interested citizens as part of our local community.
      > > >
      > > > I'm also confused on this issue. If I understand this correctly,
      > > > there's federal regulations that prohibit us from having (less
      > > > expensive) stop signs which necessitate having (more costly) speed
      > > > humps to solve the problem - all of which are paid for by the city
      > > > anyway.
      > > >
      > > > Ok, I understand it's government and they do things in mysterious
      ways
      > > > :-) but can you explain this a bit for us?
      > > >
      > > > I'm also concerned that if we get speed humps on Rosewood or
      Plymouth,
      > > > the speeding problem will just shift to neighboring streets. Do you
      > > > know anything about that?
      > > >
      > > > Thanks!
      > > >
      > > > Michele Montgomery
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      ________________________________________________________________________
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > >
      > > Message: 2
      > > Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
      > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > Subject: RE: Digest Number 71
      > >
      > > George,
      > >
      > > I think it is a great idea. More voices equal more
      > > action.
      > >
      > > When Tom LaBonge came into the community meeting 2
      > > months ago at the Church on Rossmore, I voiced my
      > > concern about this. We set up a meeting with him, his
      > > people and the city engineer. When Goergia and I
      > > arrived, we were told he was stuck in traffic. I had
      > > to return to my office - so waiting around was not an
      > > option for me - so the meeting was done with out him.
      > >
      > > Set up the meeting, alert the group and lets talk
      > > again about the stop signs. I'm all for it.
      > >
      > > Josh
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- George Plato <bigkis@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > > Again why dont we meet with Tom LaBonge himself ,not
      > > > his staff, and
      > > > push him for what the majority wants-STOP SIGNS.
      > > > He will listen.
      > > > George Plato
      > > > > From: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > To: <LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > Date: 6/21/2005 7:25:51 AM
      > > > > Subject: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 71
      > > > >
      > > > > There are 2 messages in this issue.
      > > > >
      > > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > > >
      > > > > 1. Re: Digest Number 69
      > > > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > > > 2. Plymouth traffic
      > > > > From: michele montgomery
      > > > <michele@...>
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > >
      > > > > Message: 1
      > > > > Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
      > > > > From: josh brooks <skoorbmj@...>
      > > > > Subject: Re: Digest Number 69
      > > > >
      > > > > AARD-
      > > > > I'm not sure where you get your information, but
      > > > THE
      > > > > CITY PAYS FOR SPEED HUMPS. If Plymouth was a
      > > > private
      > > > > street - that would be a different story. Lights,
      > > > tar,
      > > > > street paint, street cleaners...all part of LA
      > > > CITY
      > > > > Public works.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > --- athein@... wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > > Josh,
      > > > > > The City will NOT pay for this.
      > > > > > Will someone be able to embarrass me on this
      > > > > > statement?
      > > > > >
      > > > > > ~Aard
      > > > > >
      > > > > > -------------- Original message --------------
      > > > > >
      > > > > > > There are 3 messages in this issue.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > 1. Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > > > From: "DENNEHY / LANCASTER"
      > > > > > > 2. Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > > > From: lowelevin@...
      > > > > > > 3. Re: Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > > > From: athein@...
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Message: 1
      > > > > > > Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 06:51:10 -0700
      > > > > > > From: "DENNEHY / LANCASTER"
      > > > > > > Subject: Re: Digest Number 68
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > How do we know if our block is without a
      > > > captain?
      > > > > > Do you have a list?
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Elizabeth Lancaster
      > > > > > > Norton Ave
      > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > > > > From: LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > > To: LVNA90004@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 6:09 AM
      > > > > > > Subject: [LVNA90004] Digest Number 68
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > There are 3 messages in this issue.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Topics in this digest:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > 1. Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > > 2. LAPD Community Walk in Larchmont Village
      > > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > > 3. Private security 24-hour monitoring
      > > > > > > From: "Samantha Karim"
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Message: 1
      > > > > > > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:14:48 -0000
      > > > > > > From: "larchmontvillageneighborhood"
      > > > > > > > o.com>>
      > > > > > > Subject: Speed Hump Update....
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > This from Josh Brooks regarding his effort to
      > > > get
      > > > > > speed humps on
      > > > > > > Plymouth....
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > As of today, June 14th, I am 1 signature away
      > > > from
      > > > > >
      > > > > > > turning in the paperwork to the city.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > On Plymouth:
      > > > > > > In Between Rosewood and Clinton - over 75% of
      > > > the
      > > > > > > residents signed the petition.
      > > > > > > In Between Rosewood and Beverly - I am 1
      > > > signature
      > > > > >
      > > > > > > away from the needed majority.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > It's been a long process to knock on 80
      > > > people's
      > > > > > doors
      > > > > > > and speak with them, but it's just about done.
      > > > A
      > > > > > > pretty insightful experience to say the least.
      > > > > > Each
      > > > > > > block has about 36 houses on it, so I need no
      > > > less
      > > > > >
      > > > > > > than 27 signatures per block.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > My first priority was the stop sign on the
      > > > corner
      > > > > > of
      > > > > > > Rosewood and Plymouth. From speaking to our
      > > > > > neighbors,
      > > > > > > this what we all want....but the city will NOT
      > > > > > allow
      > > > > > > it. I will continue to hound the councilmens
      > > > > > office
      > > > > > > and the transportation office - but Georgia
      > > > and I
      > > > > > were
      > > > > > > told that there are certain Federal
      > > > regulations
      > > > > > that
      > > > > > > are needed that we just don't qualify for.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > I had the Transportation Engineer conduct a
      > > > study
      > > > > > on
      > > > > > > Plymouth. His reported cited that the street
      > > > had
      > > > > > > excess speeding. The city's recomendation was
      > > > to
      > > > > > > install 5 speed humps (3 on the 500 block and2
      > > > on
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > 300/400 block). As quoted from his reported
      > > > "After
      > > > > > a
      > > > > > > thorough analysis of available traffic
      > > > measures,
      > > > > > LADOT
      > > > > > > has determined that speed humps off the most
      > > > > > > appropriate and effective way to deal with the
      > > >
      > > > > > > excessive speeding on Plymouth Blvd."
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > THIS STREET IS DANGEROUS. The neigbors agree.
      > > > The
      > > > > > City
      > > > > > > agrees. Speed Humps are what is available deal
      > > >
      > > === message truncated ===
      > >
      > >
      > > __________________________________________________
      > > Do You Yahoo!?
      > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      > > http://mail.yahoo.com
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > >
      > > Message: 3
      > > Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:53:58 -0000
      > > From: "kentrisk" <kentrisk@...>
      > > Subject: Speed hump discussion
      > >
      > > Hi,
      > >
      > > I'm on the LVNA Board and was very involved with the process of
      > > putting speed humps on Van Ness between Elmwood and Beverly.
      > >
      > > Hopefully I can help with some of the issues that have come up.
      > >
      > > #1 Although I was told at the time it was a city regulation, it may
      > > be
      > > that the Federal government has rules about when and where to install
      > > stop signs. Certainly, on many of our neighborhood streets, we don't
      > > hit the cross street volume that allows installation of 4 way stops.
      > > If someone wants to work with the City Engineers and establish
      > > exactly
      > > WHAT those thresholds are and work to change the regulation, I'm all
      > > for it. It's going to be a very slow process, if it's at all
      > > possible. (If it's a Federal rule and so is attached to their
      > > highway
      > > funds, the city's not going to deviate.)
      > >
      > > #2 Speed humps absolutely work and slow down traffic. They're not
      > > perfect but I'm not aware of a perfect solution.
      > >
      > > #3 There is no assessment to the homeowners from the installation
      > > and
      > > maintenance of speed humps. It's a budgeted city service, if they
      > > don't do this here, they'll do something else, somewhere else in the
      > > city.
      > >
      > > #4 The noise level is far higher from traffic itself (especially
      > > trucks and SUV's) than from the hump. If someone's driving at or
      > > near
      > > the posted speeds, they're no noisier than the regular street. Some
      > > fools speed and hit the hump but personally, my neighbors and I would
      > > rather have that noise than the sound of a body bouncing off steel.
      > > (Which happened to my neighbor's sister on our block.)
      > >
      > > I really don't think there's a significant difference in the noise
      > > from 4 way stops as opposed to speed humps. If people have to slow
      > > down, you're going to have accelerating/decelerating noise.
      > >
      > > #5 The city will examine the petitions submitted for the super
      > > majority of block homeowners they require. Whether or not someone
      > > chooses to believe it's so, you must have at least 75% of the
      > > residents sign to get humps installed. (In our case on Van Ness, we
      > > were very fortunate, the neighbors all banded together and we had
      > > 100%
      > > participation.)
      > >
      > > In my case, having stood on the street with my neighbor while EMS
      > > ministered to his critically injured sister, having noted that there
      > > were somewhere around 15 children on the block and an over-full
      > > elementary school only 2 blocks down, seeing the excessive speeding
      > > that thoughtless drivers conduct in residential neighborhoods, I
      > > cannot in good conscience imagine someone standing in the way of
      > > reasonable efforts to mitigate traffic speed.
      > >
      > >
      > > Regards,
      > >
      > > Charlie D'Atri
      > >
      > > P.S. Although I don't believe it applies to the blocks in question,
      > > there IS a different set of rules for intersections within X feet of
      > > a
      > > school. Part of the city's process for traffic speed mitigation on
      > > Van Ness became a 3 way stop at Rosewood and Maplewood.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > >
      > >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.