The major stumbling block — and the Supervisor himself has already admitted this — is the center median on Olympic west of the 405.

But then, Zev is really more concerned with the flow of traffic to and from the Westside, not within the Westside itself.

Just thought I’d help clarify that.

In my view, the medians function more as beautification efforts — pretty look at, making it more friendly to pedestrian foot traffic — versus open space where people can actually play as they do in parks. So having a new park elsewhere wouldn’t serve the purpose of making the streets themselves pedestrian-attractive –

The amount of money that might be involved in converting Pico and Olympic to one-way streets would be large–certianly enough to redo the landscaping.

The question is, when they mitigate impacts, would they be able to preserve (or improve) the resources currenlty there?

There’s no doubt that they’ll have the resources to cover a mitigation (I could make up some numbers, but I’ll just assume that transportation improvement projects are extremely well funded compared to parks projects).

At this stage, you should let them know you are concerned about greenspace. You could argue:

-preserve or expand the medians, no matter what
-mitigate the loss of open space off-site, with new parks elsewhere (are the medians really functioning as open space?)