However, if one really wants a quick comparison one can look to a map that shows every road fatality between 2001 and 2009 in the entire United States. This map includes road fatalities along Colorado as the street runs through Glendale, Eagle Rock and Pasadena. Not the most solid of data to draw conclusions but it indicates what many suspect– Eagle Rock’s portion of Colorado Boulevard has been deadlier than it is in our neighboring cities where the street is only two lanes in each direction according to nearly a decade of records. Eagle Rock’s bit of Colorado Boulevard saw more deaths than Pasadena’s portion despite spanning a short distance and at about the same distance as Glendale’s portion of the street yet with more deaths. While one cannot speculate too much, it would not seem far fetched if  the increased number of deaths in Eagle Rock are partially the result of conditions which allow for greater speeds (and higher speeds are more likely to result in death in the event of a crash).

But I hesitate to draw a comparison between Eagle Rock and its neighbors if for no other reason than the fact that we shouldn’t have to justify Take Back The Boulevard due to circumstances in Glendale or Pasadena. If we, as a community, want to change our portion of the street because we are dissatisfied with the dangers and unpleasant nature Colorado presents, that should be enough reason to call for a safer, friendly street. However, to clarify, I am not fond of comparing conditions to Glendale and Pasadena because is not only the number of lanes that changes – the number of crosswalks, traffic volumes, intersections, driveways, etc all change. This means Colorado is not consistent throughout with street width issues aside.

A fair comparison would be to observe other streets that have been reduced in the number of lanes, undergone a ‘road diet’ as these lane reductions are frequently called. That is, a street that was once four lanes for example, and then was reduced to two through lanes and a center turning lane like on York Boulevard between Eagle Rock Boulevard and Avenue 54. This way, we can compare streets that have already experienced what is proposed for Colorado Boulevard. And road diets do have a positive track record (read about it from the U.S Department of Transportation here or from the LA Department of Transportation Bicycle Blog here) of increasing safety for people regardless of their transportation mode so it is unlikely that a reduction in lanes on Colorado Boulevard in Eagle Rock would be any different.

Anyway, despite what conditions are in Glendale or Pasadena, here’s a look at a decade  of crashes along Eagle Rock’s bit of Colorado from the year 2000 to 2010.

The Year 2000

Each blue marker represents a collision.

42 crashes

56 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes:Failure to Yield Right-of-Way( 11 times); Unsafe Speed (10 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (6 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Eagledale Avenue (5 crashes); Ellenwood Drive (5 crashes); Lockhaven Ave (3 crashes)

The Year 2001

Each blue marker represents a collision.

52 crashes

52 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes: Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (15 times); Unsafe Speed (12 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (8 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Sierra Villa Dr ( 7 crashes); Dahlia Dr (4 crashes); Vincent Ave/ Mt. Royal/ Glen Iris Ave/ College View Ave (3 crashes)

The Year 2002*

Each green marker represents a collision.

*For this year I looked at raw data which made locating Primary Causes and Injuries difficult, I will update the post later with that information.

57 crashes

Top Crash Intersections:Ellenwood Drive (6 crashes); Eagledale Avenue (6 crashes); Townsend Avenue (5 crashes)

The Year 2003

Each yellow marker represents a collision.

50 crashes

48 injuries

Primary Cause of Crashes: Unsafe Speed (11 times); Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (10 times); “Other Improper Driver” (7 times)

Top Crash intersection: Townsend Avenue (7 crashes); Sierra Villa Drive (6 crashes); Lockhaven Avenue (5 crashes)

The Year 2004

Each pink marker represents a collision.

56 crashes

53 injuries

Primary Cause of Crashes: Unsafe Speed (14 times); Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (10 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal and “Not Driver” (6 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Ellenwood Drive (9 crashes); Eagle Rock Boulevard (5 crashes); Broadway and Eagledale Avenue (4 crashes each)

The Year 2005

Each red marker represents a collision.

49 crashes

47 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes: Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (14 times); Unsafe Speed (12 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (6 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Sierra Villa Drive (5 crashes); Eagledale Avenue, Argus Drive and Townsend Avenue (4 crashes each); Caspar Avenue, Eagle Rock Boulevard, and Lockhaven Avenue (3 crashes each)

The Year 2006

Each green marker represents a collision.

52 crashes

56 injuries

2 deaths

Primary Causes of Crashes: Unsafe Speed (16 times);  Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (14 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal and Improper Turn (each 4 times)

Top Crash Intersections: North Figueroa Street (6 crashes); Lockhaven Avenue, Eagle Rock Boulevard (5 crashes each); Sierra Villa Drive (4 crashes)

The Year 2007

Each red marker represents a collision.

53 crashes

60 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes: Unsafe Speed (15 times); Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (14 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (6 times)

Top Crash Intersections: North Figueroa Street (4 crashes); Eagledale Avenue, Lockhaven Avenue, Sierra Villa Drive, College View Avenue, Ellenwood Drive, Highland View Avenue, and Eagle Vista Drive (all with 3 crashes each); Live Oak View, El Rio Avenue, Eagle Rock Boulevard, Vincent Avenue, Townsend Avenue, Mount Helena Avenue, and Los Robles Street (all with 2 crashes each)

The Year 2008

Each purple marker represents a collision.

55 crashes

55 injuries

5 deaths

Primary Causes of Crashes: Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (16 times); Unsafe Speed (14 times); Lane Change and Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (each 4 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Eagle Rock Boulevard and Sierra Villa Drive (4 crashes each); Eagledale Avenue, Broadway, Highland View Avenue, Townsend Avenue, and North Figueroa Street (3 crashes each); Linda Rosa Avenue, Loleta Avenue, Floristan Avenue, Dahlia Drive, Vincent Avenue, Argus Drive, Caspar Avenue, Ellenwood Drive, and Lockhaven Avenue (all 2 crashes each).

The Year 2009

Each red marker represents a collision.

57 crashes

63 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes: Unsafe Speed (15 times); Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (14 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal and Improper Turn (each 5 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Eagle Rock Boulevard (9 crashes); Townsend Avenue (6 crashes); Sierra Villa Drive and Eagledale Avenue (4 crashes each)

The Year 2010

Each red marker represents a collision.

41 crashes

 46 injuries

Primary Causes of Crashes: Failure to Yield Right-of-Way and Unsafe Speed (each 11 times); Running Stop Sign or Red Signal (5 times); Lane Change and Following Too Close (each 4 times)

Top Crash Intersections: Eagle Rock Boulevard, College View Avenue and Sierra Villa Drive (4 crashes each); Hermosa Avenue (3 crashes); Eagledale Avenue, Lockhaven Avenue, Ellenwood Drive, El Rio Avenue, Highland View Avenue, Mount Royal Avenue, Townsend Avenue, Loleta Avenue, North Figueroa Street (all 2 crashes each)

As one can see, it is not one isolated year that was dangerous along Colorado Boulevard. And while there were intersections that had more crashes than others, hardly any part of Colorado Boulevard was ever collision free.

What do you make of these findings? Are they surprising? Are they acceptable?

*This post has been ‘in the making’ for a couple weeks now. After seeing Biking In LA and Eastsider publish similar style posts I decided to push myself and finally get this finished

** This post does not include collisions that went unreported or where Colorado Boulevard was the secondary street of collisions (for example: if a crash occurred on Ellenwood Drive and Colorado Boulevard but the primary street was Ellenwood, that crash is not included in this data)

Much of this opposition relies on anecdotal observations and speculation about how traffic operates with few facts and little evidence. As a supporter of the efforts to calm traffic on Colorado Boulevard I want to make the case to support the initiative with real facts, evidence, and bringing to light the perspective of vulnerable street users (pedestrians, and cyclists).

One of the first places I’ve gone to for information is the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) where one can request crash information. The idea to calm traffic along Colorado Boulevard did not come out of nowhere, there are compelling reasons to do so and part of it is that Colorado is simply unsafe.

I recently received records from SWITRS and in the year 2000 alone there were 42 crashes along Eagle Rock’s bit of Colorado Boulevard, with 84 people (drivers, passengers, bicyclists, pedestrians) involved and resulting in 56 injuries. 11 of these crashes occurred directly adjacent to freeway entrance/exit ramps (10 crashes by the 2 freeway and 1 crash by the 134 freeway). Five crashes occurred at the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and Ellenwood Drive, this was the most number of crashes along any single intersection. Seven crashes occurred on Colorado Boulevard between Eagle Rock Boulevard and Townsend Avenue, the part of Colorado which is frequently identified as ‘downtown Eagle Rock’.

Here’s a map showing all the crash sites along Colorado Boulevard for the year 2000….

Each blue marker represents a crash, some are not visible in the picture as the markers overlap. Crashes mostly occurred west of Eagle Rock Boulevard but no portion of Colorado was exempt from crashes as one can see they dot the entire 3 miles the street runs through the community.

As for the cause of these crashes, failure to yield right-of-way contributed to 11 of the crashes and unsafe speeding was the primary cause in 10 cases. Together these factors caused half of the recorded crashes in the year 2000.

These issues can be minimized through engineering and Take Back The Boulevard seeks to, among other things, re-engineer the street so that it is safer. As one can notice, the poor engineering along Colorado means that unfortunately the year 2000 was not the only dangerous year for Colorado. As neighboring blog Bipediality has shared, between 2005 and 2009 crashes occurred at the equivalent of once a week for those five years. People may like to speed and behave as though Colorado Boulevard is a mini freeway, but this behavior is exactly what is making our major main street so dangerous.

I look forward to sharing more facts about Colorado Boulevard, particularly more data from SWITRS, but hopefully these preliminary findings are partially convincing enough to support this unique opportunity to make Colorado Boulevard a safe and inviting street that properly reflects our otherwise friendly, connected community.

Presented by Guide to Online Schools

This post is part of a student blogger contest, please click the blue ‘vote’ button to vote for me

Colorado Boulevard, the commercial center of Eagle Rock, will undergo a transformation if the initiative Take Back The Boulevard can maintain the momentum it is experiencing at the moment. A lot of ideas about how to improve the boulevard are being circulated– everything from angled parking to sidewalk extensions, to increased greenery, to bike lanes, and more! Just the other day Eastsider shared the idea of reversed angle in parking as solution.

While there are many popular ideas, I feel that it is important to reflect on the mission of this worthy effort to reclaim our main street from the dangerous freeway it currently resembles. Take Back The Boulevard seeks to transform Colorado Boulevard into a safe, sustainable, and vibrant street in order to stimulate economic growth, increase public safety and enhance community pride. Given that we cannot accommodate all the possible ideas being discussed due to limited space on the street I would like to share why I believe a solution that includes protected bike lanes, also known as cycle tracks, could fulfill as many of the desires of this initiative and is perhaps the most promising solution available.

Protected bike lanes essentially place a bike lane along the curb and place car parking to the left of the bike lane as a buffer separating motorized traffic  and bicycle traffic. To read more about protected bike lanes concept check out the Los Angeles Department of Transportation Bike Blog’s recent post explaining these facilities.

So, installing protected bike lanes along Colorado Boulevard would result in what is known as a ‘road diet’, the removal of one travel lane in each direction. The new found space would be used to accommodate the proposed cycle tracks. Road diets have been proven, nationwide, to increase safety for all users. They have also been known to better the flow of traffic. Read about them here.

However, before I continue, let me share a couple rough drawings I made of what these protected bike lanes just might look like on our boulevard.

This first image is supposed to a rendering of Maywood Avenue and Colorado Boulevard, looking East.

Current Appearance

Via Google Maps Street View

Sketch Including Separated Bike Lane

(From left to right) Sidewalk, separated bike lane, bus stop island, motorized traffic

Now what does separated bike lane do to fulfill the mission of Take Back The Boulevard? Well if one examines my rough sketch there are a few things being accomplished

1) Most obviously a safe space is created to allow travel for cyclists that doesn’t force cyclists to mix with pedestrians or automobiles. This facility will encourage more than just young fearless people to cycle. There is no pressure to ‘keep up’ with motorized traffic and provides an environmental, sustainable means of traveling along the boulevard

2) The bus stop is moved to an island that frees up space on the sidewalk and allows for speedier bus service as buses won’t have pull up to a curb. Bike racks can be placed on this island to again free up space on our precious sidewalks. This bus island also reduces conflict between bicyclists and buses– often bicyclists and buses ‘leap frog’ each other as a bicyclist passes a bus that is stopped then the bus passes the cyclist once in motion again. This removes such conflicts.

3) Crossings for pedestrians is made shorter by allowing them to wait at a refuge alongside the bus stop island.

4) While the moved bus stop frees up sidewalk space, the former bus stop space could also be used to plant trees to provide more greenery.

5) Greater buffer between pedestrians and automobiles, making outdoor dining (where it is available) or mere strolling more pleasant as the increased distances makes the sidewalks less noisy from cars whizzing by.

6) Cars will not be allowed to travel as recklessly as in the past since they will only have two lanes. This will likely result in more civilized speeds and careful, conscious driving. As Tom Vanderbilt notes in his book Traffic, when we make roads forgiving to motorists (like by allowing excess number of lanes), motorists tend to drive sloppier. It’s these kind of excessively wide streets that encourage illegal speeding, and unfortunately result in deaths too.

Here is an other view of the separated bike lane looking West on Maywood Avenue and Colorado Boulevard

Current Appearance

Sketch with protected bike lane

This remains a very rough sketch but I would like to highlight the benefits of this proposed configuration

1) Again a safe space for people of all ages to cycle is created

2)Pedestrian crossings become shorter by allowing the creation of a small refuge

3) The protective barrier between bicyclists and automobiles allows an opportunity to plant trees and other greenery in what is currently just plain asphalt

I realize it may be difficult to completely understand these drawings, however there are also existing examples of where similar spaces have been created. Take a look below where Colorado Boulevard could look for inspiration

Better bus boarding, reduced conflict between cyclists and buses. Photo via Paul Krueger's flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5133809157/

Protected bike lanes can accommodate many parking spaces for cyclists. Given that protected bike lanes are proven to increase the number of trips by bike this would likely be good for business along Colorado Boulevard's storefronts. Photo via Paul Krueger's flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/pwkrueger/5134416434/

Protected bike lane in Long Beach. Photo via Waltarrrrr's flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/waltarrrrr/5650654370

Unlike other proposed solutions to fix Colorado Boulevard, configurations similar to what I share in this post consider all users– pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motorists.

Pedestrians get more spacious sidewalks by moving bus stops to islands, shorter crossings through the refuges, greater buffer from automobiles through the separated bike lane

Bicyclists get safe travel space away from automobiles and pedestrians

Transit users get loading platforms that will make getting on and off the bus, easier and faster

Motorists get safer streets that make traveling at the speed limit easier to do, they won’t have to change lanes to pass bicyclists. Potentially shorter waiting times at lights as pedestrians will be able to cross faster thanks to the pedestrian refuges.

Everyone gets a safer configuration, everyone will benefit from increased opportunities to plant greenery by some of the pedestrian refuges. This solution allows flexibility in space. Since bus stops will move to islands sidewalk space formerly used to accommodate the bus stop can be now used to plant trees, install benches, or simply allow a wider space for pedestrians. Colorado Boulevard is currently flooded with cars, this solution will make cycling, walking, and taking the bus more attractive than they currently are and reduce the demand for car parking, one of the problems of the way Colorado Boulevard is configured today.

I’d like to compare this solution to the proposed ‘reverse angle in parking’ that the Eastsider shared the other day. The angled parking creates more parking spaces for cars and could potentially create curb extensions at intersections for pedestrians. This solution also claims it could reduce conflict between bicyclists and cars pulling in/out of parking spaces but if cars stop suddenly to start parking bicyclists will have to swerve around– a not so safe action to take.

While it is an attractive solution in some respects it is awfully car centric. This design will do little to encourage more people to cycle or make bicycling safer. It seems to do nothing to make bus travel easier either. It also, while it will create a buffer between pedestrians and moving automobiles, will rather confine the sidewalk space. I have experienced firsthand that cars tend to pull in to angled parking spaces so that part of the car hovers over the sidewalk, making pedestrian space feel cramped. It also seems that by creating more parking spaces this solution will only encourage driving and wouldn’t be very sustainable, nor make the street more vibrant, in complete contrast with the goals of Take Back The Boulevard. On the other hand, encouraging multiple modes of travel as a thoughtfully constructed cycle tracks can do, the street will be less car centric (and more sustainable) and filled with people rather than cars (and be more vibrant). Because we have limited space I support a solution that will accomplish as many of the goals of Take Back The Boulevard, and implementing separated bike lanes seems to be a promising solution.

Further readings about Colorado Boulevard:

Some Reasons I Support Separated Bike Lanes

A post where I share additional reasons why I support separated bike lanes: “ In making the case for a calmer, more bike friendly Eagle Rock sometimes those who oppose the idea contend car traffic will slow down too much. However, as local resident Jack Burnett-Stuart points out

‘ It is 1.6 miles from the post office to Swork [via Colorado Boulevard]. If the average speed was reduced through a variety of traffic slowing measures (including changing the speed limit, but does anyone pay any attention to that?) from say 40 mph to 20mph, that would add 2 minutes 24 seconds to the time the trip takes ‘ “

Some Facts and Thoughts About Colorado Boulevard

Specific facts detailing current traffic levels of Colorado Boulevard: “Colorado Boulevard is a major highway class II, projected to carry between 30,000 and 50,000 cars daily. Traffic counts available from the LADOT website from the past 15 years shows that Colorado Boulevard seldom carries above 35,000.”

Some Simple Facts

Some simple, yet unfortunate facts about the danger of a car centric Colorado Boulevard: “…there has been approximately one reported accident a week over the past five years. More than half of the accidents involve injuries.”

I entered this post into a ‘student blogger contest’. To vote for me click the blue ‘vote’ button bellow, thanks!

As Los Angeles is in the process of implementing its Bike Plan, the city holds quarterly meetings to discuss bicycle facilities, which streets to prioritize for bicycle facilities, education, outreach and more. These meetings are called the ‘Bike Plan Implementation Team’ or BPIT. These meetings are open to the public and the most recent meeting was on October 4th. At this recent meeting Colorado Boulevard was discussed (from LADOT Bike Blog)

Paul Habib with CD 14, announced that the Eagle Rock community is openly seeking a road diet for Colorado Blvd. Through their “Take Back the Boulevard Initiative,” residents hope to:

…make this central corridor through Eagle Rock a safe, sustainable, and vibrant street in order to stimulate economic growth, increase public safety, and enhance economic growth, increase public safety, and enhance community pride and wellness.

Unfortunately, removal of a travel lane for this corridor will very likely have a significant impact on auto traffic, triggering the need to conduct environmental review and roadway reclassification, prior to implementation. However, thanks to the BPIT process, these three miles of Colorado Blvd between Lincoln Ave. and the Glendale City limit have now been added to the Priority 1 environmental package. This means that Eagle Rock residents will be able to lobby their elected City leaders for a safer, more sustainable Colorado Blvd. sooner, rather than later. If successful, this project could set a precedent for the region as an example of vehicle travel lane removal to allow for increased safety and mobility for bicycles and pedestrians.

What does this mean exactly? Well bike lanes on Colorado Boulevard weren’t slated to be implemented until 2015 according to the LA Bike Plan. However, thanks to the Take Back The Boulevard momentum, a receptive council member representing us, and open meetings Colorado Boulevard has been moved to Priority 1 environmental package meaning that the street will be studied and likely see a bike lane sooner than originally planned.

And speaking of Take Back The Boulevard, the initiative is asking us what we like, what we don’t like, and what we would like to see come to Colorado Boulevard in a survey linked to on the initiative’s website. Click here to access the survey. The survey represents an opportunity to give input on this community project and I encourage you to spend a thoughtful 5 minutes to fill it out.

And if you would like to make Glendale, our neighboring city, a safer place to cycle the city is currently updating its Bike Plan and is accepting public comments. If you have the time, check out what the city has planned and make a few suggestions about how bicycling can be made more pleasant. Click here to access Glendale’s Bike Plan and make comments.

Also in more safe streets Eagle Rock related news, the excellent Eagle Rock based blog Zone 23 makes a sound case to ‘Take Back Yosemite Drive, Too’. In the ‘early’ days of Walk Eagle Rock I addressed Yosemite Drive in two separate post, if interested here are the posts I made– part 1 and part 2.

One more note about Glendale bicycling– the other day I cam across a rather interesting video that taught children how to ‘drive’ their bikes in the 1950′s. The video was filmed in Glendale, take a look below

Lastly, this is now old news but this LA Times article, ‘A Walk on the Risky Side‘ is a stark reminder of who pays the price of negligent driving and dangerous road design on our streets. It is my belief that a civilized society is one where a child should be able to walk to school safely without worry of getting hit by a car. Let’s reclaim the streets, make them safe  and liveable for everyone, especially children going to school– this is about more than ‘bikes vs cars’, it’s about providing safe mobility for all ages and all modes of travel.

Take a look at the site yourself, http://www.takebacktheblvd.org/

In reading the ambitious goals stated on the site I can’t help but to think of my recent visit to Sweden. While the cities I saw were not perfect, there were cases where cities created comfortable situations for all users– pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists.

A safe street for all in Hassleholm, Sweden

Many streets in the downtowns I visited in Sweden had ‘pedestrian priority’. As the blue sign depicts in the picture above the street should be safe enough for children to play soccer. While this kind of treatment is unlikely to surface on Colorado Boulevard it perhaps serves to remind that streets do not need to prioritize cars nor do they need to be used to flush people through neighborhoods. Streets, as the Take Back The Boulevard initiative understands, can serve multiple purposes and contribute to how people act in those spaces. If we slow down cars, provide space for cyclists, add crosswalks, plant trees, provide benches, and create public spaces Colorado may become more of a community living room and destination for all than a speedway for motorists. If Take Back The Boulevard is put to its full potential we can see people stroll, and linger on a safe, pleasant Colorado Boulevard. It can absolutely be attainable, we already have a lot of attractions along Colorado, neighbors that enthusiastically engage with one another, and growing momentum for these kind of ideas.

According to the Take Back The Boulevard site, the first community meeting  September 21st from 7-9pm at the 20th Century Women’s Club at 5105 Hermosa Ave. Mark your calender, get involved!

I love to see people walking in Eagle Rock. I love to see people cycling in Eagle Rock. Naturally, I enjoyed this sight….

One of my primary motivators for attending the meeting was that North Figueroa was going to be discussed. At the meeting the LA Department of Transportation (LADOT) presented two ways to reconfigure the street to accommodate bicycling.

From powerpoint presented at BPIT meeting

On the street the changes would look like this

These 2 options were presented for all parts of North Figueroa between Colorado Boulevard and San Fernando Road

Unfortunately both options are disappointing.

North Figueroa is vital link in the community of Northeast LA and the street Figueroa in its entirety is important in connecting LA holistically. The design of North Figueroa in this community will  reflect  LA’s ambition to connect the entire city and make bicycling a real, viable form of transportation. I would like to address the portion of North Figueroa I am most familiar (between Colorado and York) and explain why LADOT’s plans aren’t doing enough to benefit bicyclists.

Speeds of motorists along North Figueroa between Colorado Boulevard and York Boulevard are noticeably faster than other parts of the street as this is where commercial attractions become less frequent, reducing desire to go slow and observe surroundings. This also reduces desire to park, in fact parking along this stretch is very limited and thus mentally widens the street and may cause motorists to subconsciously speed. The reasons why these situations induce speeding are described in the book Traffic by Tom Vanderbilt.

Between Colorado and York Boulevard is also where cars either are still speeding from exiting the freeway or speed in anticipation of getting on the freeway. The speeding is undeniable as this portion of the street features a speed indicator beside the road to bring the dangerous speeds motorists are going to  their conscious. Based on observation and my own experience on this portion of North Figueroa it seems some of the lights are syncronized so to reduce speeding. However, some persistent speeders simply go faster to avoid getting stopped at the light about to change intended to slow those reckless motorists down. Just the other day I saw a car approach 50mph on this portion of N Figueroa… traffic lights alone are not working too effectively in reducing speeds.

Along this portion of the street between Colorado and York Boulevard there are 5 schools directly adjacent and other schools are not far from the street either on Yosemite Drive. This means the street is used by children or parents taking their children to school. There are also nearby parks like Garvanza Park, Lanark-Shelby Park and Eagle Rock Park.  Perhaps the many schools and parks close-by are indicators that substantial infrastructure is needed so that the street is safe enough to be used by children.

Also, along this stretch there is a lot of residential housing, particularly between Colorado Boulevard and Meridian. This means that every Tuesday trash cans are placed at the curb of N Figueroa for collection. If bike lanes are installed along the curb not only will cyclists have to contend with motorists who can easily speed because there is no parking along the corridor (thus not having to worry about other cars parking or leaving parking spot) but they will also have a bike lane rendered useless every Monday evening and much of Tuesday. As can be observed at just about ANY bike lane in LA, bike lanes become completely useless for a considerable about of time between Monday and Tuesday.

If bike lanes are installed at the expense of parking this portion of N Figueroa is set up for dangerous conditions like mentioned above that reduce feeling of subjective and physical safety. It seems clear a stripped bike lane along the curb will do nothing to increase safety and comfort for cyclists.

Also, this stretch of Figueroa where cyclists would be placed along the curb presents yet one more danger. The sides of the road are so cracked one needs the entire right-hand lane so to avoid most of the cracks on the road. If bike lanes are installed at the expense of parking and along the curb, the space will have to be repaved for even the most remote feeling of safety which will also raise the cost for LADOT’s options which already present many flaws and dangers.

An option that was suggested by LA bike advocat Joe Linton, (who helped bring 7 miles of park like space to LA during CicLAvia) was to bring parking to both sides of the street (currently the street alternates between accommodating parking on the two sides), remove one lane in each direction, and install bike lanes. This means that this portion of Figueroa would undergo what is called a ‘road diet‘ and resemble York Boulevard’s configuration between Eagle Rock Boulevard and Avenue 54.

If Mr. Linton’s suggestion of a traditional road diet is implemented cyclists will still have to contend with trash-bins on a weekly basis though the street will likely have fewer speeders and residents will get to maintain their parking, in some cases gain parking and perhaps the city can get away with no repaving since the space for cyclists will be further from the cracked curbs.

However, if bike lanes are installed at all they will not only be disrespected by trash-bins or produce other dangers mentioned above, the city must be aware the bike lane will be used by motorists to double-park on occasions too, causing yet one more danger which will not encourage any mass cycling in the neighborhood. While the road diet option suggested by Joe Linton would increase the amount of parking, the most arrogant of drivers will still double-park in the bike lane for convenience and most certainly will people park in the bike lane if all parking is removed as LADOT presents in their ‘option 1′.

Simply put, there are many problems with the proposals for N Figueroa. The road diet option that in some way benefits motorists, cyclists and pedestrians is not even an official option from LADOT.

With the many flaws of bike lanes this is why I encourage the installing of protected bike lanes (also known as ‘cycle tracks’) for N Figueroa– at least for portion between Colorado and York – so that trashbins, double parking, speeding, poor pavement surface can all be partially or completely eliminated conflicts for cyclists. The cycle tracks would place bicyclists away from motor traffic with a physical buffer between or where parking is permitted, by parked cars. Since the edges of the street of so cracked, when implementing cycle tracks the city  would need to repave the space for bicyclists. However, by installing cycle tracks the only places of potential conflict are driveways and intersections. These issues however can be further reduced or avoided altogether through proper design. The benefits of cycle tracks also easily extend to pedestrians as they will have greater distance from dangerous automobile traffic, car noise will be physically further, and through design crossings can be made shorter for pedestrians at intersections.

This protected bike lane next to the sidewalk creates a shorter crossing for pedestrians in Malmo, Sweden. There is an small 'island' with a bollard to the left of the bike lane in this picture.

To further bolster the case for cycle tracks, at least for this portion of the street, there is absolutely no ‘Bicycle Friendly Street’ or BFS alternative for cyclists. A ‘Bicycle Friendly Street’ is LA’s name for what is more commonly referred to as a Bike Boulevard. In essence a Bike Boulevard is a low traffic street that runs parallel to a major street. Low traffic streets are popular with cyclists as they increase the feeling of safety and still can help one reach destinations.

No street runs parallel to North Figueroa here between Colorado and York Boulevard

This means that cyclists of all skill level, whether they like it or not, will have to brave the street as there is no close by, quiet parallel street to use. If cyclists are too scared to ride on Colorado Boulevard they can cycle on Las Flores or Hill Drive. If bicyclists don’t want to ride on Eagle Rock Boulevard they can choose Ellenwood, a relatively quiet residential street, instead. North Figueroa however presents no inviting alternative!  North Figueroa needs to be able to accommodate ALL, especially because there is no viable alternative for beginner cyclists and because there are so many schools along this corridor. It is LADOT’s responsibility to make the street safe.

Cars are given superfluous amount of space and narrow bike lanes will not be enough especially with the many issues we see that arise with having bike lanes not physically protected. Also, intersections along N Figueroa, as seen between Colorado and York (and all the way to San Fernando) can be tricky to non-experienced cyclists. Bike boxes, dedicated bike signals, installing traffic circles/roundabouts can add a degree of comfort for cyclists and make them aware of how to behave at intersections– an element completely absent from LADOT’s plans for North Figueroa.

Some might say that if the city acknowledges that cyclists are a good to have and cycling is to be encouraged the city needs to accommodate cyclists like they are important. More than this though, bicycle infrastructure is an issue of equality. Give people who choose to cycle the safety they deserve. A person’s safety or importance should not be disregarded or put second to the safety and importance of a person who chooses to drive a car. While standard bike lanes are welcome in many places, they are not convincing enough to get large numbers of people on bicycles.

The plans the LADOT put forward are setting up a crucial part of NELA’s bike network for failure. It would be great to see LADOT implement experimental designs like colored bike lanes or protected bike lanes which have been shown elsewhere to benefit cyclists more than mere bike lanes. The least the city should do is to implement the road diet suggested by Joe Linton as it is more promising than LADOT’s own plans: it would bring the benefit of added parking for motorists, bike lanes on acceptable road surface for cyclists, greater buffer from moving cars for pedestrians and slow traffic to civilized speeds for the safety of all users.

What remains of the sidewalk. I find myself conflicted with sights like this. On one hand, I think “cool, the sidewalk is almost entirely covered in weeds and grass”. On the other, I think “must make getting through tough for strollers, wheelchairs, sidewalk cyclists. Also, it is perhaps a testament to how rarely people walk around the neighborhood.”

Michael Larsen, president of the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council:

“Part of the problem is that L.A. is such a car culture—kids can just as easily go to Silver Lake or Los Feliz to hang out. I’d like to lure them back by making walking and bike riding more pleasurable and safe. I’m encouraged by [TERA’s] Take Back The Boulevard campaign that just started, which will re-envision Colorado Boulevard to make it pedestrian- and bike-friendly. Slow it down, plant more trees, give space to bikes, create safe crosswalks.”

Mike Woodward, manager of the Eagle Rock Community Garden:

“What would make Eagle Rock Boulevard and Colorado Boulevard better would be more trees, easier bike access and more pedestrian amenities (you know, so you don’t die trying to cross the street). In other words, make our boulevards into Boulevards.”

Jennifer Morgan, co-owner of the neighborhood’s wine store:

“I’d love to see more bike lanes, particularly on Colorado Boulevard, which should be narrower, slower, safer, and more conducive to what makes any town’s center great—foot traffic.”

It’s great to see such support for safer streets that are pleasant to walk on. I’m visiting family in Sweden now and I am amazed at what the removal of one car lane can produce: shorter crossings for pedestrians, two-way bike path, buffer between pedestrians and cars– all in one! While we contemplate the future of Eagle Rock, here’s a look at the present of Malmö, Sweden

With the equivilent of one lane of cars, we could have this

Shorter crossing for pedestrians with bike path in foreground

There’s a lot that can be done by simply removing one lane of cars, or parking. We do not have to accept the car as the only viable means of transport in Eagle Rock. The safer walking and cycling facilities residents want don’t require heavy investment or massive construction, we just need to reallocate existing space on the road.

(If you would like to see greater bicycle infrastructure in Eagle Rock and safer streets, I will post when opportunities  arise to shape Eagle Rock’s piece of the LA Bike Plan. What Eagle Rock can get from The Plan will be influenced by the community’s input.)