Story of the Week: Community Concerns Grow About Colorado Boulevard's Future

Our coverage of community concerns about traffic and the state of medians on Colorado Boulevard continues to be our top story for the third week running. Our most recent report about the issue was a meeting between Eagle Rock residents and city officials in Eagle Rock City Hall on Nov. 30, marking the first in a series of planned Median Advisory Committee gatherings.

A local blog, LAStreetsBlog, linked to—and expanded upon—our Nov. 24 story, titled "The Future of Colorado Boulevard," prompting Topix.com, a news blog in Glendale, to pick up the LAStreetsBlog story as well. An earlier Nov. 22 column by Occidental College Professor Mark Vallinatos, titled "8 Ways to Create Better Streets in Eagle Rock," inspired a slew of comments from our readers, as did our Nov. 28 round up of comments to our "Future of Colorado Boulevard" story. Finally, the recently launched Eagle Rock blog Bipediality, quoted excerpts from what it described as "Three great articles on streetscape issues ... in Eagle Rock Patch."

We're reproducing all those comments here, starting with the Bipedality excerpts and excerpts from the Dec. 2 LAStreetsBlog article that linked to our site.

Posted on November 24, 2010 by Jane Tsong

Three great articles on streetscape issues appear in Eagle Rock Patch. Here are some excerpts and links to the articles….

The Colorado Boulevard portion of the Bike Plan is scheduled to be tentatively implemented in 2015, says Turner [of the Department of City Planning], adding that "as with everything else, implementation depends on funding, staff resources, and community involvement."

Well, we certainly won't be lacking in the "community involvement" arena. Read more by Robert Garrova in

We need to start thinking of our streets as among our most important public spaces. The  and  campus are both approximately 20 acres in size. Guess which other publically owned spaces in Eagle Rock are approximately 20 acres? Answer: The stretch of Colorado Boulevard between Eagle Rock Boulevard and Figueroa Street and Eagle Rock Boulevard between Colorado and York Boulevard.

Read more on Eagle Rock streets as public spaces in

"I am open and would love to entertain a discussion about how we can not only reduce the number of lanes but also put in a bike lane," Huizar said in his interview with Eagle Rock Patch. "I know there are some local organizations that are part of this discussion—I want to hear from them and see what their ideas are." 

Robert Garrova's coverage of Colorado Boulevard begins with and includes many ideas for Colorado. Don't miss the comments section afterward… These are all ideas this blog will be quantifying– with pictures and diagrams, just like in our last post.

"We're updating our streets to reflect the way people live now. And we're designing a city for people, not a city for vehicles."

• Eagle Rock Residents Pushing for a Slimmer Colorado Boulevard:

By Damien Newton (LAStreetsBlog)

Calls for a Road Diet on Colorado Boulevard are growing, and beginning to become too loud to ignore. For those not familiar with the layout of the road, it currently spans six car travel lanes, provides on-street car parking, and features a seventeen foot median that occasionally features live grass. Eagle Rock residents have been puzzled about a road configuration that is designed for many more cars than actually use it. The result is that the traffic that does use the street, tends to drive above the speed limit.

However, recently the idea of putting Colorado on a diet has begun to gain more traction, thanks in large part to Scott Wilson, who formally drove on Colorado daily for almost six decades but now travels on an electronic tricycle. Wilson proposes a diet that would reduce auto capacity from six lanes to four, create a rainwater cistern to support greenery, slow traffic and even add some bike lanes. Wilson's proposal began to gain notoriety after articles in the and Bipediality.

Traffic counts for Colorado, provided by the LADOT but laid out by Josef Bray Ali and viewable here, show that outside of the areas immediately surrounding freeway entrances that Colorado is actually a tremendously underutilized road.  For example, at the intersection with Eagle Rock Boulevard, less than 10,000 cars travel through the intersection over the course of a day, or roughly one and a third car every minute.  However, near the intersection with the Golden State Freeway, that number is five times as high.  Of course, during peak hours those numbers are much higher.

If you believe that there are other factors in determining whether a street is successful than just how many cars can be flushed through, then Bray-Ali shows how Colorado is a complete disaster for Eagle Rock in addition to how much space it wastes:

There is absolutely no measurement made as to the effects this has on the social fabric, local commerce, noise  pollution, etc.—suffice it to say that these streets are generally detrimental to traditional human contact and social ties, they degrade local commerce (auto parts, repair, nail salon, discount store, auto parts, repair, nail salon, fast food discount store, etc.), and they are really, really, loud.

• Comments following Eagle Rock Patch columnist Mark Vallianatos's article, "8 Ways to Create Better Streets in Eagle Rock."

• 
  I live nearby Eagle Rock and for the past 10 years have chosen to trade at businesses on Colorado and Eagle Rock Boulevards even though it takes some effort and time to get there. Because of the terrain of the Eagle Rock area, the various hills and valleys, the streets and boulevards tend to meander--a lovely feature for the residents, but less than conducive for getting anywhere quickly.
  
  Making the boulevards narrower may make the neighborhoods more livable by choking traffic flow, a likely "good thing" for people living in in the immediate vicinity, but for those of us attempting to keep our dollars local by trading at Eagle Rock businesses, narrower streets are enough of a deterrent to spend the same amount of commute time to shop in Glendale or Pasadena.
  
  Just a thought...

• 
  
  Thanks for the comment. We wouldn't want to choke our streets with traffic, although a future with zero emission electric cars moving at moderate speed alongside bikes and pedestrians and mopeds etc sounds like a nice, vibrant scene.
  
  Traffic currently isn't that bad; the problem is the streets are unpleasant for people outside of the cars. Narrowing streets will still allow cars to move but will make us happier when we're on the sidewalks and in the stores: a good trade-off to me. As Ajay and Walk Eagle Rock mentioned, the freeways are for getting cars between places fast; streets have multiple purposes.

• :
  @ Martin: Glendale and Pasadena have both got the reduced lanes we in Eagle Rock crave! What makes pedestrian shopping friendly in Olde Towne or Brand is what we who believe in the two lane idea hope will come to Eagle Rock—a thriving commercial corridor that brings friends into Eagle Rock.
  
  And thanks for making the trip over! Our local merchant do appreciate it!

• 
  A valid and, I take it, widely shared point, Martin. Thanks for your comment—I certainly hope it kicks off the debate this issue deserves. I'm sure we'll be hearing soon enough from our columnist Mike "Eco Soul" Vallianatos, whose passion and career revolves around urban environment studies.

• :
  Making the streets more livable is precisely for people in the immediate vicinity, it's for the neighborhood rather than Pasadena or Glendale folk. Making Colorado two lanes in Eagle Rock would also make it the same number of lanes as Colorado in Glendale and Pasadena. With modern freeways around today, our main roads like Colorado also become increasingly local than they may have been in the Route 66 days, for example.
  
  How about a cost-benefit analysis for narrowing Colorado? The result will likely be: increased physical and subjective safety for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians; making outdoor seating at restaurants along Colorado more attractive; added room to potentially accommodate cyclists, pedestrians, and greenery; converting Colorado to a destination rather than a route to pass through Eagle Rock; more fuel efficient car travel. It might even encourage people to do more walking and biking, especially if the reallocated space goes towards these users. All this against the sake of speed, saving a few minutes? We definitely need the safety a narrower Colorado would provide, along with the handful of other benefits that would follow.
  
  Also, the concept of triple convergence suggests that the third lane isn't doing much to help current traffic anyway. The space is superfluous and narrowing the car lanes will likely just result in weeding out unnecessary Colorado users, perhaps move them to the 134 freeway where their need for speed belongs.

• 
  Everyone interested in this topic should check out Walk Eagle Rock's blog http://walkeaglerock.wordpress.com/

• 
  Very interesting, Walk Eagle Rock. It seems as though advocates for fast traffic on Colorado, viewed as a bypass between Glendale and Pasadena, forget an important point you make: If you want to get from Glendale to Pasadena or vice versa take the 134.
  
  Could you please explain what "triple convergence" is? Thanks.

• 
  
  I love the improvements you've suggested. I would also add using Chandler Blvd. in Burbank as an example—they took a wide street and created a median which offers both a park like atmosphere to stroll through and a safe bike lane well protected from cars. I think we could do something akin to this on Eagle Rock Blvd.
  
  I would also love to see shuttles on Eagle Rock to connect residents to the Gold Line station to make it easier to connect with Pasadena.

• 
  Shuttles to the gold line or expanded DASH bus loops to the station would be great. It would be nice to have lots of green transportation options clustered in Eagle Rock. We have zip cars at Occidental College that members can use, it should be easier to get to gold line, it would be nice to have more bus options.

• :
  
  People use these streets. If you reduce the amount of lanes, people won't just stop using them; they'll simply become even more flooded with the same amount of people cramming into fewer lanes, using more gas waiting at stop lights (this isn't environmentally friendly, as you'd be causing more pollution). As said, people will then fight traffic by using Hill as an alternate route. Then you have to put in the speed bumps (which isn't really environmentally friendly). Perhaps adding a bike lane isn't a bad idea; but senselessly shutting down lanes to invite bicycle traffic that isn't present is just a dysfunctional approach toward increasing pedestrian traffic. Pedestrian traffic will increase as business districts improve anyway; these things don't work in reverse.

• 
  If this were the logic used when deciding whether to implement bicycle infrastructure in cities that are trying in increase ridership, cycling rates will forever remain low.
  
  [Regarding] "simply become...the same amount...cramming into fewer lanes, using more gas...". The third lane is superfluous, and it only encourages speeding/ reckless driving. Between Townsend and 2freeway is the only portion that has three lanes, to say that our smalltown with sporadic activity between these two points needs three lanes makes no sense. Meanwhile Pasadena survives with two, as does Glendale's portion, and Eagle Rock between Fig and Townsend? We can have two lanes without causing obscene standstills.
  
  Perhaps cycling on Colorado is low because there are ZERO accommodations besides the occasional bike rack.
  
  How can we increase cycling? By making safe facilities. While standard bike lanes are not the best, they do wonders to improve physical and subjective safety– especially compared with having to cram between 40mph cars in third lane and parked cars.
  
  Adding a bike lane is meant to increase cycling. The bike lane will also mean slower cars and further distance between noisy cars and pedestrians, making for a more pleasant walking/outdoor seating experience, thus perhaps increasing pedestrian traffic. And bicycles are easier to park and don't have to worry about meters so one can linger longer as a pedestrian than arriving by car.
  
  Accommodating nothing but cars isn't environmentally friendly!

• 
  Surely Walk Eagle Rock makes a very sound point: If you leave the lanes to the cars, bikes will never have a chance. L.A. had rail transport before the rail network was torn down to make way for automobiles. (Now we're trying to bring back trains.) Surely Eagle Rock isn't the only neighborhood in the nation where it makes sense to reduce car traffic—successfully. Aren't there models and lessons galore where that has been done—successfully?

• 
  
  I completely agree with Walk Eagle Rock. The proposal is to reduce traffic speed and improve life for pedestrians and cyclists by removing the third lane on Colorado. It seems rather far fetched to imagine that this will cause gridlock on Colorado and a massive diversion of traffic onto Hill.

• 
  
  One of the main reasons to decrease the number of lanes on Colorado is to increase safety for everyone. Even during the day a number of people treat the street as a 50 (+) mph zone, and it is not so long ago that young people were killed speeding down Colorado. I hope that incident has not been forgotten.
  
  What the effect on traffic will be is hard to say. There simply have not been enough incidences of this sort of traffic control to say.
  
  What is true is that increasing the number of freeways does not reduce, but actually increases the amount of traffic on those roads (anecdotal evidence before our eyes: the 210 freeway was built, did anyone notice a decrease in traffic on the 10?). What may happen is that the number of trips through Eagle Rock will decrease once we are no longer seen as a viable alternative to the 134.
  
  In any case, re-striping our streets is a relatively inexpensive way to find out, if the experiment fails, we can re-paint.
  
  I would add to Jack's comment above. It is not simply to improve life for pedestrians and cyclists, but to improve life for everyone who uses the street, including drivers. It's sometimes nerve-wracking to travel Colorado even in a two and a half ton truck.

• 
  Thanks, Mike, for your pointed comments, observations, analysis. It seems as though Eagle Rock won't know what it can do with Colorado Boulevard until the community gives it a try. The effort certainly seems worthwhile. The worst-case scenario can't possibly beat what Colorado has right now.

• 
  Patch.com. First of all, thanks for having such a timely discussion on Col Blvd, and many other subjects. You have an excellent e-newpaper going here, and I, for one, am really appreciative of your efforts. The above topic on the boulevards, is very timely, as the ERCPR has been trying to gain a Caltrans grant to "re-plan" the boulevard w. better transportation and its associated pedestrian-friendly enhancements. Since that didn't happen, we have now put in the the Council Office hands to help, and we hope to gain more ground. All civic groups in the area are interested in changes and pedestrian enhancement, so I think the timing is perfect. With Occidental College, re-working their Specific Plan, and York Blvd. going thru revitalization changes....and probably ER Blvd. as well, we can co0ordinate areas together in a better fashion.....despite the economy. More comments, as meetings progress. Thanks again, for your newletters. I get mine daily! LJA

• 
  Many thanks, Linda—we're enthused to hear that you find Eagle Rock Patch a useful community platform, besides being an online newspaper that aims to highlight and debate vital community issues. Please share with us some of the background about the proposed Caltrans re-planning grant that, as you say, "didn't happen." When was this—and why did it fall through?
  
  I do think that Occidental College, with its Specific Plan, including an upcoming green building and L.A.'s largest solar array, can take a lead in promoting sound environmental causes not just on campus but community-wide. And, as you say, York Boulevard is being revitalized. This may well be the perfect storm for Colorado Boulevard—despite "shortage" of funds: The money somehow materializes in the face of persistent community support for good ideas of the kind that Eagle Rock is known for. Onward, then, Eagle Rock! And onward Eagle Rock Patch!

• 
  Thanks all, for the great comments. I would love to see DOT initiate a comprehensive study be done to determine the amount of traffic throughout the day. All that is required is those two black strips that total up traffic. Many people continually state that Colorado is always extremely busy, but as someone who lives less than 100 feet from the Blvd., I can attest that there are certainly many times of the day when two lanes would more than accommodate the traffic flow.
  
  Perhaps something like how Wilshire or La Brea handle traffic, in which the third lane becomes used for traffic only during peak rush hours could be a fairly easy start, requiring only restriping and signage.

• 
  Excellent idea about the DOT study, Rebecca—and you're right about traffic being fairly sparse on Colorado many times of the day. What do you propose should be done with the third lane during non-rush hours? Allowing bikes would be one option.

• 
  Ajay,
  I remember from right after the August 2009 accident when the community last rallied to reduce traffic flow on Colorado. We asked for better timed lights to slow down traffic and were told NO by the DOT. One of the reasons they gave was that there are Metro Rapid Bus lines that need the speed to achieve their times.
  
  I propose a possible compromise with DOT that provides a way to determine if two lanes are sufficient for Colorado--without going to the expense of re-hardscaping--would be simple paint restriping and bus only diamonds painted on the street to give the rightmost lane, lane 1, over to BUS ONLY traffic. We could get some idea of traffic flow, without big expense, and possibly increase the usefulness of public transportation options for the area.
  
  What I am proposing is sort of a return to the trolley system, in that Colorado (which is this wide because we used to have a trolley that ran down the center) can become a destination BECAUSE it has really good public transportation access.
  
  If this proves to make a positive difference, then grant monies could be sought to create more covered bus stands and other things that make using public transport in ER a more convenient option. This could also help with our parking problems, as folks would choose buses. Perhaps OXY would consider a shuttle from on the hill down to Colorado as a way to get their kids onto campus and alleviate some of their own parking issues.

• 
  Rebecca,
  That's an excellent idea. I was thinking of buses when I asked you what you thought might be the best use for the third lane on Colorado. Besides the Oxy shuttle, which sounds long overdue, the community could lobby the City for buses that run on the major streets within Eagle Rock, Highland Park and maybe Echo Park. I am reminded of Westwood Village, where traffic gridlock is the norm, but where eco-friendly UCLA shuttles do a great job of moving students, staff and even the general public around. As a Bruin, Mr. Huizar knows this. If he gets re-elected in March, he could use his clout in the City Council to push something like this through. It just might be revolutionary.

• 
  We're working on making Santa Monica Boulevard in Beverly Hills bike-friendly. Keep up the good work!