Measure HLA: Pros and cons to LA's 'Healthy Streets' initiative
LOS ANGELES - As voters prepare to cast their ballots in Super Tuesday's March 5th primary, Measure HLA has emerged as a focal point of discussion in Los Angeles. Aimed at redesigning streets to reduce traffic deaths by 2035, the measure has sparked a contentious debate among residents, policymakers, and advocacy groups.
Proponents of Measure HLA argue that redesigning street space during repaving and street work will create safer environments for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit users. They emphasize the importance of measures such as creating crosswalks, building bus and bike lanes, and implementing safer spaces for pedestrians.
Brooke Rios, CEO of a charter school network, supports Measure HLA, pointing to alarming incidents of pedestrians being hit and killed in front of schools. She believes that redesigning streets will lead to a decrease in accidents and fatalities, ultimately making streets safer for everyone.
However, opposition to Measure HLA has been vocal, particularly from groups like the LA Firefighters Union. They argue that reducing traffic lanes to accommodate bus and bicycle lanes and crosswalks will impede emergency response times. Freddy Escobar, the union's president, expressed concerns that the measure will worsen traffic congestion and hinder their ability to navigate through city streets efficiently during emergencies.
California Primary 2024: Voter guide
California's Presidential Primary Election is March 5. Here is everything you need to know before hitting the polls.
The contentious debate surrounding Measure HLA revolves around its potential benefits and drawbacks. Proponents highlight its potential to save lives through improved street design, while opponents raise concerns about its impact on emergency response times and traffic flow.
In an interview with FOX 11, Los Angeles City Councilwoman Traci Parks shared her opposition to Measure HLA. While emphasizing her commitment to improving safety, Councilwoman Parks argued that Measure HLA is not the right approach. She highlighted concerns about potential negative impacts on major mobility corridors, increased gridlock, accidents, and delays in emergency response.
Councilwoman Parks also raised concerns about the financial implications of Measure HLA, citing its projected cost of $3.1 billion over a decade. She emphasized the need to consider the diversion of funds from other essential city services.
On the other hand, Michael Schneider, founder of the advocacy group Streets for All, voiced support for Measure HLA also known as Healthy Streets LA. Schneider emphasized the need for street safety improvements and disputed concerns raised by opponents. He cited successful examples of street redesign projects and argued for the affordability of proposed improvements.
As voters weigh their options, the fate of Measure HLA will ultimately be determined by their assessment of its potential benefits and drawbacks.