Residents' Meeting with Culver City Lead Engineer, Andrew Maximous

Dear Neighbors,

Thank you to everyone who attended the 01/30/26 City-sponsored meeting. Approximately 40 residents showed up, and the overwhelming majority expressed serious concerns about the direction the City appears to be taking.

A clear theme emerged: many neighbors feel the City is moving forward with a predetermined plan that would significantly alter the character of our neighborhood in order to address a traffic issue around the schools that lasts roughly 15 minutes per day, only on days when school is in session.

Several important points came out of the discussion:

• Traffic data released by the City confirms what residents experience daily. Outside of two well-defined peak periods on the 180 school days, neighborhood streets are generally quiet. The total average number of vehicle trips is low and consistent with a low-traffic residential environment. (Link to data)

• Speed data shows an overwhelmingly safe pattern. Approximately 95% of vehicles travel at or below the posted speed limits throughout the neighborhood.

• Intersection data shows limited conflict. Recorded points of conflict were minimal and primarily related to turning movements, not through-traffic speeding or dangerous conditions.

• In short, the City’s own data describes a safe residential neighborhood. Despite this, City staff would not commit to using the consultant data they are paying for as the primary basis for decisions. Instead, they repeatedly emphasized reliance on their own “independent engineering judgment,” rather than objective data, to determine what they believe is best for the community.

• While City representatives suggested it is “unlikely” that proposed changes would lead to extensive tree removal in the Vets Park neighborhood, they would not commit to preserving on-street parking. 

This means the ability to park on your own street is clearly at risk and is being actively considered for removal by City staff, often aligned with bicycle advocacy priorities.

• Regarding the schools, City staff confirmed they have consulted with the school district superintendent to receive the district’s perspective. However, they emphasized that the City’s plan cannot compel the schools to take any actions to improve safety or mobility.

• This includes the schools’ refusal to reopen the Huron or Harter Street gates (which have been used in the past), or to reinstate a safe drop-off zone in the Farragut Elementary parking lot—measures that many residents believe would meaningfully reduce congestion without impacting the broader neighborhood. With 30% of the school district's families coming here on permit, they are most certainly driving and should be accomodated in a thoughtful approach that impacts residents the least.

For those who wish to review the information directly, the traffic data discussed at the meeting is available on the City’s website and is worth examining firsthand. (Link to data)

Residents left the meeting with serious concerns about transparency, the role of data in decision-making, and whether neighborhood impacts—particularly loss of parking and changes to street character—are being fully acknowledged or fairly weighed.

We will continue to share updates and encourage everyone to stay engaged. Your voice matters, and continued participation will be critical as this process moves forward.