news

Survey: Millennials Willing to Relocate for Better Transportation Options

Photo: Flickr Gareth Williams

Young people around the country express a preference for places that are walkable and provide access to transit. Photo: Gareth Williams/Flickr

Young people want to live in cities that give them a variety of transportation options and make it easy to get around without a car. That’s the key finding from a new survey of more than 700 young adults by the Global Strategy Group. The survey was commissioned by the Rockefeller Foundation and Transportation for America.

Researchers surveyed people aged 18 to 34 across 10 metro regions with varying levels of transit service. From Chicago to Tampa to Los Angeles, young people reported a preference for places that are walkable and transit-friendly.

Four in five respondents reported they would like to live in a city where they could get around without a car. And almost three in four said neighborhoods without transit access were less appealing places to live.

A strong majority — 66 percent — said that access to high-quality transportation is one of the top three criteria for choosing a place to live. And 54 percent even said they would consider moving to a city with better transportation options.

Even when considering cities and neighborhoods to visit, young people don’t want to be forced to drive — 65 percent called it a “major inconvenience” to visit an area where transit connections are poor.

“These findings confirm what we have heard from the business and elected leaders we work with across the country,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “The talented young workforce that every region is trying to recruit expects to live in places where they can find walkable neighborhoods with convenient access to public transportation.”

The researchers cautioned that the results might suffer from a bit of a “self-selection bias” because the survey only examined young people already living in cities. But there was surprising consistency between responses from millennials living in stronger transit cities like San Francisco and weaker ones like Indianapolis.

Young people in cities with strong transportation systems were more likely not to own a car. Only 45 percent of respondents in Chicago, New York, and San Francisco reported they had access to a household car, compared to 80 percent in less transit-friendly cities such as Indianapolis, Nashville, and Tampa.

But among those who lived in cities with weak transit, 72 percent reported they would drive less if they had more options. In those cities, 84 percent of respondents confirmed they would like more transit options.

Michael Myers, a managing director of the Rockefeller Foundation, said these findings should impress on civic leaders around the U.S. the importance of transit and walkability to local economies.

“Young people are the key to advancing innovation and economic competitiveness in our urban areas,” he said. “This survey reinforces that cities that don’t invest in effective transportation options stand to lose out in the long run.”


Crenshaw Boulevard closure between MLK and Stocker May 2 for traffic control change

Here’s the notice from Metro regarding the traffic control change on Crenshaw Boulevard that will be starting May 2. The implementation requires a full street closure of Crenshaw Blvd. between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Stocker Street starting at 10 p.m. on May 2, lasting through 1 p.m. on May 3. The work is necessary for the construction activities of the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Project.

If you have questions or concerns about this closure, upcoming closures or other construction work taking place for the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Project, join us for a live chat with Metro on April 29 from 6 – 7 p.m. You can leave your advance questions at the chat page on Reddit, email CrenshawCorridor@metro.net or call in during the chat at 213.922-4601.


Last Month Was The Fourth-Hottest March On Record

NOAAMarch2014

CREDIT: NOAA

The Midwest’s corn crop may be delayed because the ground is still too wet or too cold to plant, and much of the United States is still not quite sure if spring has arrived.

But looking at the entire globe — as scientists do when they track things like global warming — 2014′s month of March was the fourth-hottest one on record. Only 2002, 2010, and 1990 were warmer. Data from 135 years of records show that the average global temperature in March 2014 was 1.3°F warmer than the 20th century average of 54.9°F. This was the 38th March that was hotter than average.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) climate scientist Jessica Blunden said that “the change was primarily due to warmer-than-average temperatures over central Asia in March, compared with cooler-than-average temperatures in February.”

NOAA’s data analysis matches that of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which also found March to be the warmer than all but three other Marches on record.

The land surface temperature anomaly from December through February in North America. The record warmth in the west vied with the extreme cold in the east.

The land surface temperature anomaly from December through February in North America. The record warmth in the west vied with the extreme cold in the east.

CREDIT: NASA

Yes, the U.S. experienced its 34th-coldest winter in 119 years of data. But the U.S. National Climatic Data Center reported last month that the winter of 2013-2014 ended up being the 8th-warmest, globally, on record.

NASA’s Earth Observatory noted in a blog post that “human memory is not a scientific measure, and long-term perspective tends to get lost in everyday conversation and news coverage”:

The winter of 2013-14 followed two winters that were significantly warmer than the norm, which likely made this season feel worse than it was. Researchers at the U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that the average temperature of the contiguous U.S. for the winter was just 0.4° Celsius (31.3° Fahrenheit), about 1°F below average.

Why was it only the 34th coldest winter in 119 years of records? Because most of the land west of the Rocky Mountains was warmer and drier than average, so those warmer temperatures offset the cold snaps to the east. California had its hottest winter on record, and several other states came close. Though it is not included in the contiguous U.S. measurements, Alaska also thawed in spring-like heat and rain that melted snow and ice.

This temperature schism in North America, caused by a kink in the jet stream, could also become the norm due to climate change, according to Climate Central.

The warm March manifested mostly in higher latitudes. For the first time since its records began, Slovakia’s average March temperature exceeded 50°F — which means it was the warmest March the country had experienced since records began in 1871. Austria saw its second-warmest March since 1767. Norway saw its third-warmest since records began — so did Germany. South Korea’s March was the second-warmest since its records began in 1971. Parts of northern Siberia saw temperatures averaging 9°F warmer than normal, and the mid-summer temperatures were matched by unexpected major wildfires.

Temperature is not the only way to see that March was actually warmer than normal. Last month, the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado announced that Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum on March 21, which is good for the fifth-lowest winter ice cover extent since satellite records began in 1978.

Still, not much of the observable evidence reaches political circles. On Tuesday, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s chief business advisor, Maurice Newman, pushed the regularly debunked trope that there has been a “pause” in warming for the last 17 years.

The post Last Month Was The Fourth-Hottest March On Record appeared first on ThinkProgress.


Federal Report Shines Light On Health Impacts Of West Virginia Chemical Spill

The Freedom Industries site, which released 10,000 gallons of chemicals into West Virginia water, is seen in this Jan. 13, 2014, photo.

The Freedom Industries site, which released 10,000 gallons of chemicals into West Virginia water, is seen in this Jan. 13, 2014, photo.

CREDIT: AP Photo/Steve Helber

People who went to the Emergency Room after the notorious chemical spill in West Virginia experienced symptoms that were “consistent” with the mysterious substance involved in the leak, a joint report by both the West Virginia and federal Departments of Health said Wednesday.

After 10,000 gallons of crude MCHM — a licorice-scented chemical mixture used in the coal production process — spilled into the Elk River and tainted the water supply for 300,000 West Virginians in January, nearly 600 people checked themselves into local hospitals. The most common symptoms were what federal epidemiologists called “mild” illnesses, such as rash, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea.

But little was known about MCHM at the time of the spill, and it was unclear whether people were experiencing real problems, or just seeing symptoms out of sheer paranoia. At the time, the U.S. Department of Health would not say whether the chemical had any negative health effect until it released Wednesday’s study, called an “epi-aid” study, which reviews medical records for those who went to the hospital after the spill.

As of Wednesday’s report, the connection between the symptoms and the chemical is still cloudy — but the agencies acknowledge its possibility.

“These data can not ‘prove’ that MCHM caused the reported symptoms; however, these data are consistent with what is known about MCHM from animal studies,” the report said, noting that there is no scientific way to “reliably distinguish” mild illness caused by the chemical from normal mild illness. “These symptoms are consistent with known health effects of MCHM.”

Though the study does little in terms of conclusive results, it does shine a light on something greater: the amount of mystery that still surrounds both short- and long-term health impacts from the chemical spill, which is still a large part of life in some of the places where it occurred. Even though the spill happened in January, some residents still detect MCHM’s licorice-like scent coming from their faucets, and question whether the water is safe to drink.

The data analyzed in the joint study was from hospital admissions from January 9, the day the spill was first reported, and January 23, a few days after West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin told residents that it was “their decision” whether or not to use tap water. From that time 584 patients were treated, but only 369 records were included because of either a lack of symptoms, duplicate records, or other inconsistencies. More than 96 percent of those patients were treated and released, while 3.5 percent were hospitalized — all of whom had chronic illnesses such as kidney, liver or lung disease.

It is unclear how many people have experienced symptoms after that time, and if they did, whether they would know to be able to trace it to MCHM. Repeated or prolonged exposure to the chemical has been found to “cause headaches, irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, and can also cause a skin rash.” But comprehensive health effects — what happens if the diluted chemical is ingested, or how exposure to the chemical could affect people in the long term — are largely a mystery, and residents there have largely had to figure out their symptoms for themselves.

Long-term effects are also unclear. There is currently no data on crude MCHM’s carcinogenic effects, ability to cause DNA mutations and physical deformities, or its ability to interfere with human development, according to the chemical’s Material Safety Data Sheet.

The issue is clearly important for those who may still be being exposed to the chemical on a daily basis. On Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) wrote to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention asking for the agency to provide details about its effort to determine a safe level of exposure to the chemical.

“[The] spill has made it clear that additional information needs to be available for chemicals circulating in the marketplace that may impact human health,” she wrote. “In cases where that information is not available, however, health officials should error on the side of informing that public of the uncertainty.”

The post Federal Report Shines Light On Health Impacts Of West Virginia Chemical Spill appeared first on ThinkProgress.


Which U.S. Universities Are The Greenest?

wind_project_50_-_Aerial_view_of_turbine_and_campus

In a recently released free book by the Princeton Review, three-hundred and thirty universities in the United States and two in Canada are profiled as green four-year higher education institutions. The Princeton Review’s Guide to 332 Green Colleges, released on April 17, set out to profile these institutions for “[demonstrating] a strong commitment to sustainability in their academic offerings, campus infrastructure, activities, and career preparation.” The schools were scored on a Green Rating system based on data obtained from schools using a ten point survey questionnaire which included queries on a range of topics such as: mass transit programs like bike sharing and local housing, whether a school has a formal committee dedicated to sustainability on campus, and whether the school has a sustainability-focused undergraduate degree programs or an equivalent.

The guide, the result of a collaboration between the Princeton Review and the Center for Green Schools at the U.S. Green Building Council, began production after the Review took notice of a growing number of student and school-based sustainability initiatives on university campuses around the 2007-2008 school year. This observation led the company to begin incorporating questions on environmental responsibility in annual university surveys. The book was ultimately released for free online in line with the company’s commitment to allow access to data that may be difficult for prospective students to obtain in order to find a “best fit” school.

In each university profile, the guide highlights individual accomplishments a school has made in promoting environmentalism and sustainability. Brandeis University, for example, is noted for four funding cycles of its Sustainability Fund which awards student-run sustainability projects $50,000 annually. Florida State University is recognized for their robust alternative transportation system with their bike sharing program and special GOTCHA green taxi service. The George Washington University is noted for its unrivaled roster of over 100 courses on sustainability that span a variety of majors and fields of study including anthropology, religion, and political science.

Of the three-hundred and thirty universities featured in the United States, eighteen of the schools reside in the states of Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire, making Northern New England the region with the highest number of green campuses per capita in the country, although the Review emphasizes that the guide is meant to be purely quantitative and qualitative and, ultimately, not a ranking of any kind.

Not everyone is for universities adopting green energy practices and educating students about sustainability. Some, such as the Wall Street Journal’s Paul Tice, argue that universities that educate students about clean, renewable energy sources are pushing an agenda. However, as a survey done last year by the Princeton Review finds, sixty-two percent of prospective students say they would value information about a school’s commitment to environmental and sustainability issues. With over half of pre-undergraduate students showing that a school’s commitment to environmental issues has an influence over their choice of school, it’s clear that an America in support of green initiatives is not the fault of any college.

The post Which U.S. Universities Are The Greenest? appeared first on ThinkProgress.


SB 1183: From Bike Tax to Car Fee

Senate Bill 1183, the bill from Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) which was originally proposed as a “bike tax,” is no longer a bike tax. This time the change is not just in the bill’s title, but in the proposed law change itself. Still aiming to create a stable source of funding for regional parks to maintain bicycle facilities, including trails, the author now proposes a fee on motor vehicle registrations instead of a point-of-sales tax on bicycles.

The Iron Horse Regional Trail in Contra Costa County, one of the East Bay Regional Parks facilities.

The Iron Horse Regional Trail in Contra Costa County, one of the East Bay Regional Parks facilities. Photo: Rails to Trails

If passed, S.B. 1183 does not automatically  impose any fees, but allows cities, counties, or regional parks to propose one, which would then have to be approved by 2/3 of local voters. The new vehicle registration surcharge would be capped at $5.

The original proposed tax was opposed by the California Retailers Association as well as the usual anti-tax organizations including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. In addition, the Senate’s Governance and Finance Committee analysis pointed out serious concerns with how a bicycle tax would be administered. It would have necessitated the unfunded creation of a new set of procedures by the Board of Equalization.

A motor vehicle registration fee, on the other hand, could be administered easily by the DMV without having to set up anything new.

“We were looking for a different mechanism to raise the funds,” said Doug Houston, legislative advocate for the East Bay Regional Park District, the sponsor of the bill. “There was consternation about a sales tax on bicycles, a social good, with some advocates asking why we would want to penalize or discourage bike riding.”

The fee was conceived as a way for regional parks to create a stable, if small, source of funds to pay for the maintenance of bike facilities, including paved trails.

“We’re doing great on capital projects,” said Robert Doyle, General Manager of the East Bay Regional Park District, sponsor of the bill. The district has grants to complete ten projects that link existing trails in the system. “But then we have to patrol and maintain them,” said Doyle.

However, the capital grants that pay for construction of the trails cannot be used for operating and maintaining them. “We don’t get money that other transportation agencies get to repair potholes, even though our trails connect cities and parks, as well as transportation hubs like BART.” (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

“We paved our first trail in 1971,” said Doyle. “And now it’s really old.” He estimated that repair of one trail in particular, the Contra Costa Canal trail from Briones through Central Contra Costa County, would require at least $1 million, because the trees that shade it have grown, breaking up the pavement with their roots. Repair would require pruning and in some cases removing trees in addition to repaving.

Other trails in the system, including the Iron Horse Trail in Contra Costa County and parts of the San Francisco Bay Trail, which will eventually circle the entire bay, are used by commuters as well as kids riding to school. “These are class 1 exclusive trails for pedestrians and bikes,” said Doyle. “They are used for transportation as well as recreation.”

The California Bicycle Coalition favors the change. “This has become a good bill,” said Dave Snyder, Executive Director of CalBike. “It has the potential to raise funds for bike infrastructure without relying on the false supposition that subsidies flow more heavily toward bike riding than driving or other forms of transportation.”

The amendment takes the bill out of the Governance and Finance Committee hearing process and sends it to the Transportation Committee, where it is scheduled to be heard on April 30.


Big Cuts in Store for Seattle Transit After Voters Reject Ballot Measure

It looks like Seattle’s Prop 1, the ballot measure that could have fended off major cuts for Seattle transit, did not win a majority of the votes in yesterday’s election.

Counting will likely go on for a while now, but early returns show Prop 1 failing by about 10 points. Passage would have prevented Seattle Metro from cutting 17 percent of its service, secured through an additional annual $40 car registration fee and a 0.1 percent sales tax hike.

As Martin Duke at Seattle Transit Blog put it, “The impact will be most severe on the transit-dependent, but commuters of all modes, businesses in dense areas, clean air and water, and public health are all losers.”

Shane Phillips at Better Institutions says state leaders are at fault for deliberately structuring the tax to undermine transit:

The ultimate blame for this failure lies with the state legislature, with it’s Republican-led house, which denied the County the right to adopt more progressive (and more popular) revenue measures. As a result of their failure of leadership, King County had no choice but to propose a regressive, unpopular car tab fee paired with a sales tax increase, and here we are.

Meanwhile, Duke says public officials have to make the most of a bad hand:

It is always imperative that Metro spend its dollars wisely. The King County Executive and Council must exercise real political courage to overcome the forces that resist reform of our route structure. In an expanding service environment, it would be possible to rationalize the system and take care of the scattered losers from any restructure, but today Metro must focus on the serving the most people it can, and the casualties are regrettable but inevitable.

One effect of the cuts will to be consolidate desirable service into a few trunk lines. It is more important than ever that these lines function effectively to avoid the total collapse of the system. In these corridors, cities must ignore complaints from other stakeholders and remove parking or general-purpose lanes to ensure these buses are not stuck in traffic. Moreover, future city transportation levies must invest in priority treatments for buses. The returns from these projects are often astronomical, and if anything the case for them has improved.

In these struggles, we look forward to the support of the many Proposition 1 opponents who were concerned that Metro was not spending its dollars effectively.

Elsewhere on the Network today: NRDC’s Switchboard blog explains how Agenda 21 conspiracy theorists continue to have an outsized impact on policy around the United States. And Bike Portland dishes about the first major speech from the city’s new transportation director, Leah Treat.


After Some Counties In Texas Released Air Pollution Data, A State Agency Cut Their Funding

Drilling at night in the Eagle Ford shale.

Drilling at night in the Eagle Ford shale.

CREDIT: Shutterstock

Earlier this month, a coalition of county governments in Texas posted a study that air pollution would increase significantly by 2018 thanks to a local drilling boom. One week later, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality slashed the coalition’s budget for air quality planning.

The study in question was an inventory of emissions from the Eagle Ford shale, which, with the advent of hydraulic fracturing, has seen a boom in natural gas and oil drilling over the past few years. The analysis was put together at the behest of the Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG), a coalition that oversees thirteen counties in and around San Antonio. An initial draft of the study came out in November of last year, and the final version was completed on April 4.

About a week later, the Center for Public Integrity reports, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), slashed AACOG’s air-quality planning budget by 25 percent. TCEQ, which funded the study, cited a breach of contract by AACOG to justify the decision.

That accusation appears to reference an incident last July, when Peter Bella, AACOG’s natural resources director and a 15-year veteran of the group, posted a summary presentation of the results from the draft version of the infentory to AACOG’s website. According to the contract, AACOG could not release any of the results from the study without TCEQ’s approval.

Bella told the Center for Public Integrity he put the presentation together for a meeting with companies involved in the Eagle Ford shale, and that posting such presentations to its website was routine at AACOG. He also said the presentation was well-received by the industry representatives, and the discussions surrounding the emissions inventory — which the Center obtained through a Public Records Act request — show no signs of animosity.

In fact, six days after the July meeting, Bella invited TCEQ to attend another meeting with the same presentation, but no one from the agency showed up.

“I thought the state environmental agency would be happy I was making progress and bringing data forward,” Bella told the Center. “Part of the difficulty is that I have yet to receive a true indication of the true nature of the breach.”

Last week, AACOG chairman Kevin Wolff told a Texas radio station that an AACOG employee — presumably referencing Bella — made a “fairly minor mistake.” But he also added that he didn’t find TCEQ’s response particularly logical.

Al Armendariz — who works for the Beyond Coal Campaign with the Sierra Club’s Texas chapter, and is a former administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency — had far stronger words: “This is among the more petulant, childish and vindictive things I’ve seen TCEQ do,” he told the Center for Public Integrity. “It’s cheap, it’s schoolyard bullying… to go after a local government whose sole mission is to protect public health.”

According to the emissions inventory, the Eagle Ford shale’s air pollution comes from a variety of sources. The main ones include the engines that run drill rigs and pumps, leaks from pipes, and the inevitable vapor escapes that occur when the oil and gas is stored and shipped. The pollutants include carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, and volatile organic compounds — all of which have been linked to serious health effects for humans.

The “moderate scenario” projected by the inventory found that volatile organic compound emissions will increase in the Eagle Ford shale from 101 tons per day in 2011 to 544 tons per day in 2018. Nitrous oxides will increase from 66 to 146 tons per day over that same time period, and carbon monoxide emissions will increase from 50 to 160 tons per day. (There was also a “low” and “high” scenario.) These are also the results from the final version of the inventory, and are considerably more dramatic than the result from the draft. All told, they would increase air pollution in San Antonio’s Bexar County by 7 parts per billion.

Since 2012, San Antonio’s monitors have already recorded air pollution levels as high as 87 parts per billion — while the federal standard is 75 parts per billion.

Earlier this year, an eight-month investigation by InsideClimate News and the Center for Public Integrity found that Texas officials were failing to adequately monitor air pollution from the Eagle Ford shale, or to engage in any serious regulatory enforcement.

The post After Some Counties In Texas Released Air Pollution Data, A State Agency Cut Their Funding appeared first on ThinkProgress.


Preview of tomorrow’s Metro Board of Directors meeting; a look at some interesting items

The Metro Board of Directors meets on Thursday at 9:30 a.m. at Metro headquarters for their regular monthly meeting. The agenda is posted above and below is some of the more interesting items on the docket:

•Item 17,

">a motion by Board Member Paul Krekorian asking Metro staff to report on whether increased revenues may come from digital billboards on Metro properties and more ads on buses and at other facilities.

•Item 41, a motion by Board Member Zev Yaroslavsky asking Metro to continue studies for an express bus line between Westwood and the San Fernando Valley that would use the 405 HOV lanes.

•Item 69, a motion by Board Member Don Knabe asking Metro staff to reconsider Measure R funding forecasts as well as study future revenues from station gating and the ExpressLanes.

•Item 7, which asks the Metro Board to adopt the First/Last Mile Strategic Plan and stations to serve as pilot program areas. A companion motion by Board Member Zev Yaroslavsky asks Metro to include two stations along the Red Line (Universal City and NoHo) to the other pilot stations — Bundy and 17th on the Expo Line Phase 2 and Arcadia and Duarte on the Gold Line Foothill Extension. The Strategic Plan is attached to the Metro staff report; it’s a technical document intended to help Metro and city planners best consider different options for getting people to and from transit stations.

•Item 34, which asks the Metro Board to consider extending operations of the ExpressLanes on the 10 and 110 freeways beyond January 15. The staff report includes a preliminary federal analysis of the ExpressLanes during their one-year pilot programs. A companion motion, by Board Member Gloria Molina, asks Metro to consider a $1 per month account fee for those with ExpressLane accounts instead of a $3 account maintenance fee (which was waived last spring).

•Item 42, which asks the Metro Board to extend the contract for the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department to police the Metro system for an additional three months — which is through the end of September — for $22.2 million. The staff report says that Metro needs additional time to analyze three other letters of interest about the contract.

•Item 62, which proposes that Metro adopt a living wage program for contract landscape and irrigation maintenance workers under contract to the Board. The policy proposes to increase the hourly rate to $15.67 per hour.

•Item 72, which proposes that the Metro Board approves a $927.2-million design/build contract with Regional Connector Constructors (a Joint Venture between Skanska USA Civil West California District, Inc., and Traylor Bros. Inc.) to build the Regional Connector project. This would help launch the actual construction of the 1.9-mile underground rail line that will connect the Gold, Expo and Blue lines in downtown Los Angeles. 

 


Northbound 405 closures in the Sepulveda Pass planned for four consecutive nights April 24-28

Here’s the press release from Metro:

The I-405 Sepulveda Pass Improvements Project contractor is planning to close the northbound I-405 in the Sepulveda Pass for four consecutive nights April 24-28.  The closure boundaries and hours change each night. The closures will enable the contractor to install overhead freeway signs.

  • The northbound I-405 will be fully closed from Getty Center Drive to Greenleaf Street on the night of Thursday, April 24, midnight to 5 a.m., Friday, April 25

Closures:

  • Ramps begin closing as early as 7 p.m. Lanes begin closing at 10 p.m. 
  • Northbound Sunset Boulevard to on-ramp  
  • Northbound Moraga on- and off-ramps 
  • Northbound Getty Center Dr on-ramp
  • Northbound Skirball Center Dr on-ramp
  • Northbound I-405 to the north US 101 connector

Detour:

From I-405 northbound: Take the northbound Getty Center Drive off-ramp, head north on Sepulveda Boulevard to the northbound I-405 on-ramp at Greenleaf.

  • Northbound I-405 fully closed from Skirball Center Drive to Greenleaf Street on:
    • Night of Friday, April 25, 1 a.m. to 6 a.m., Saturday, April 26
    • Night of Saturday, April 26, 2 a.m. to 7 a.m., Sunday, April 27
    • Night of Sunday, April 27, midnight to 5 a.m., Monday, April 28

Closures:

  • Ramps begin closing as early as 7 p.m. Lanes begin closing at 10 p.m.
  • Northbound Skirball Center Dr on-ramp
  • Northbound I-405 to the north US 101 connector

Detour:

From I-405 northbound: Take the northbound Skirball Center Drive off-ramp, head south on Skirball Center Drive, head north on Sepulveda Boulevard to the northbound I-405 on-ramp at Greenleaf.

What to expect: