(Ed. Note: I, Christopher Kidd, am back from the Comprehensive Exam for his degree in Urban Planning at USC. We’ll have a recap on yesterday’s BPIT meeting up in the next few days. In the meantime, here’s an update on our department’s attempt to bring bike lanes to Foothill Boulevard.)
The LADOT Bike Program has, among other projects, been working to bring nearly 4 miles of new bike lanes to the north-eastern San Fernando Valley on Foothill Boulevard. LADOT Bikeways engineers last month presented to the Foothill Trails Neighborhood Council on a 1.5 mile section of this street. In taking comments from the NC, the specter of equestrian-bicyclist conflict once again raised its head, though in different form than we saw during the hearings for the LA Bike Plan.
Below the fold we’ll cover the project particulars, the concerns raised by the Foothill Trails NC, some possible compromises drafted by LADOT, and what you can do to make your opinion heard.
Foothill Boulevard Bike Lanes
LADOT Bikeways Engineers are in design stages for a bike lane on Foothill Boulevard stretching from Osborne Street in the west to Wentworth Street in the east. In all, the bike lane would run for nearly 4 miles. After a few other bike lane projects are completed in this area of the Valley (Wentworth Street & Tuxford Street), bike lanes on Foothill Boulevard would connect to a contiguous network of bicycle infrastructure stretching over 17 miles across the eastern San Fernando Valley.
View Larger Map
Road Conditions
Foothill Boulevard is a very rural street. For much of the stretch being considered for bike lanes, there are two lanes of traffic in each direction, a two-way left turn lane, a 6-8 foot asphalt shoulder with no street parking, no sidewalks, and sometimes a stretch of dirt right-of-way between the street and the property lines of houses along Foothill. There are a few limited areas that have street parking instead of an asphalt shoulder.
Design
Out of the 4 miles of Foothill targeted for bike lanes, design is complete on a 1.5 mile stretch of Foothill Boulevard from Wheatland Avenue in the west to Wentworth Street in the east. The project would convert the asphalt shoulders on either side of Foothill into bike lanes and include the removal of a minimal amount of street parking. Most of the areas where street parking needs removal are adjacent to single family homes with ample private parking, negating much of the minimal parking removal’s impact on residents.
LADOT Bikeways engineers last month met with the Foothill Trails NC to present the project and secure their approval before finalizing design.
Foothill Trails NC Concerns
The Foothill Trails Neighborhood Council voiced a number of concerns with the project, most of them centered around possible conflicts with equestrians; Many equestrians in the Foothill Trails community use the dirt shoulders on Foothill Boulevard as a de-facto horse trail.
The major point of contention at the meeting centered around the removal of street parking on a stretch of Foothil Boulevard bisected on the south by Foothill Place. Equestrian members of the Foothill Trails NC claimed that the street parking on the north side of Foothill Boulevard provided a buffer between moving cars and their horses. By converting the area to a bike lane, they claimed the City would be setting up a conflict between horses on the dirt shoulder and bicyclists in the bike lane.
They requested that LADOT come up with alternatives to the current design plan that would create more separation between bicyclists and equestrians. Most of the NCs’ suggested alternatives (street reconfiguration, travel lane removal, etc) would require environmental review due to the likelihood of traffic impacts – a long and expensive process the City is eager to avoid when possible.
Plausible Alternative
One alternative recommended by the Neighborhood Council, however, would keep the street parking buffer and avoid environmental review. The NC suggested LADOT Bikeways engineers take a second look at Foothill Place. This street is on the south side of Foothill Boulevard and bisects the looping curve where the Foothill Trails NC would like to keep street parking.
Bike lane to the north, bike route to the south: the Neighborhood Council's recommendation
The alternative proposed by the NC would involve keeping the street parking and adding bike lanes on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. To make room for both bike lanes and street parking on the north side, there would be no bike lane on the south between the two points where Foothill Place runs into Foothill Boulevard. Instead, Foothill Place (a very low volume residential street) would be converted to a bike route to close the gap. Westbound bicyclists would have an uninterrupted bike lane and eastbound bicyclists would detour for a quarter-mile on Foothill Place to meet back up with bike lanes on Foothill Boulevard after passing the area with street parking.
This alternative, along with the original proposal, will be presented to the Foothill Trails NC for their approval. Without their blessing, and council office approval, this project will not be able to proceed.
What’s Your Opinion?
This project is emblematic of the nitty-gritty work (and the compromises required) in implementing the LA Bike Plan. While some streets have low-enough traffic volumes to allow lane removal without environmental review (7th Street, Hoover Street), other streets meet a traffic threshold triggering the EIR process.
Although there is sufficient room on Foothill Boulevard to accommodate bike lanes without travel lane removal, we also want to be respectful of the community’s desire to keep on-street parking as a buffer for equestrians. Sometimes there is little room to maneuver between triggering environmental review and gaining NC approval.
If you have opinions on the right configuration for bike lanes on Foothill Boulevard, get in touch with the CD 2 representative of the Bicycle Advisory Committee, Ayla Stern. Ayla has been in contact with both Council Member Krekorian’s office and with the Foothill Trails NC. As the official liaisons between the City, the neighborhoods, and the bicycle community, this type of project falls right in the wheelhouse of the Bicycle Advisory Committee. Contact Ayla to show support, give your opinion, and help bring more bike lanes to Los Angeles. Any comments made below will also be forwarded to Ayla.
[...] Foothill Boulevard Bike Lane Before the Foothill Trails NC « LADOT … [...]
For years the city of Burbank has had bike lanes on Riverside Dr. with horses travelling parallel to them. There doesn’t seem to be any conflict as the bike lanes are still there and the horses still travel along that street.
Making a bike route that runs parallel to Foothill Blvd on Foothill Pl would be acceptable and might even be prefered for cycling if the street has fewer vehicles that move slower compared to Foothill Blvd. If this rerouting makes it difficult to access the north side of Foothill Blvd then that could be a problem for cycling though.
Foothill Pl look like a more direct route going east/west for bikes compared to pedaling on Foothill Blvd. That alone could be an advantage worth pursuing.
Changing topics:
I have been trying to find a solution for a comfortable way to have bikes cross the Lankershim Blvd/Vineland Ave/Camarillo St intersection that is in the top ten bike lane projects according to BPIT. The tools for this in the bikeways section of MUTCD would place the bike lane to the left of right turn lanes. There are three right turn lanes at this junction in each direction on Lankershim Blvd. Which means the design could end up asking the cyclists to move over two lanes to go through the intersection and then move back one lane across fast moving traffic. That would be very scary, uncomfortable and dangerous for anyone riding a bike.
There is another possibility of using a roundabout which is in the MUTCD manuel. This would also increase pedestrian mobility as there is no crosswalk at this intersection going north on Lankershim Blvd.
Here’s video example of a roundabout being used in the Dutch city of Hertogenbosh.
Another video of what may be the same roundabout in this city.
It’s a fairly expense solution to this problem. The suggested alternatives for bikes using the tools provided by the MUTCD manuel are dreadfully inadequate though.
Thanks for the great videos, Dennis. We’ll be covering possible projects on Lankershim, Cahuenga, and Barham in the near future.
[...] Equestrians Endanger 4-Mile Bike Lane Project in NE San Fernando Valley (LADOT Bike Blog) [...]
See bike advocates. They push you out of parks and now they want you off their streets. You should have never caved to the horse people. Now they will try to dictate where you can ride in the city. I hope that crow tastes good.
The city’s own CEQA guidelines call for a Categorical Exemption for lane removal. What is this magic unpublished DOT “threshold”?
Josef,
We hope to give more attention to CEQA issues later this week. In the meantime, here is the City’s Manual on Traffic Study Policies and Procedures. Section H covers what is considered a “significant transportation impact”.
Thanks for staying on top of this.
Another video on Dutch junction or intersection design for bicycles. This gives further explanation on how this works. To access the first video, click on the red box on the screen.
http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2011/05/state-of-art-bike-way-design-further.html
Hopefully our Bikeways engineers are looking at these videos and getting some ideas on how to do some intersections differently.
The US has 30 times the bicycle accident rate and 5 times the death rate for bicycling per km compared to the Dutch. Yet it is uncommon in the Netherlands to wear a helmet or any bright bicycle reflective clothing there and they have 27 times the bicycle modal share that the US has. To get that record, they must know something about bikeways safety that other countries do not. It needs to be looked at when trying to design intersections.
I love that Dennis Hindman loves the Mark/David blog and videos– the Dutch infrastructure, stats, and explanations are eye opening.
I hope bicycling will be normal in LA by 2030 so we stop hearing about a bike lane as a controversial thing.
The equestrians who oppose bikes in griffith dont appear to be the same ones who are opposed to bikes on foothill…. I wouldnt lump them all together. Even if it is the same group I personally would still let them be in their fight to keep mountain bikes out of griffith. The LA Bike plan to me is all about commuting. The bikes in the park issue is a battle for another day – which I will personally sit out when it comes. I like griffith as is… but thats just me.
Look, this proposal for the bicycle lane diversion really isn’t a problem. Orinda, California already has several sections of Camino Pablo that have a similar arrangement. I do, however, have an issue with the outsize power equestrians seem to hold in Los Angeles. The Griffith issue is tiring and silly – especially considering that the SoCal High School Mountain Biking League is such a beneficial experience for young people. Central LA needs as many opportunities for recreation as possible, and equestrians seem to be limiting opportunities for mountain bikers in LA for little to no gain. Multi-use trails are successful around the world, there’s no reason why they can’t work in Griffith or in other areas around LA where bicycles are currently banned (i.e. central Backbone trail).
That’s a great attitude; throw the mountain bike riders under the bus. That’s exactly the stance of the car eccentrics do the bikes riders in LA. Bicyclist need to remember “All for one and one for all”!
Advocating killing it is reprehensible to all who had input and involvement in the process to make Los Angeles a better place for ALL bicyclists.
Simply banning something does not encourage education and responsible behavior for bicyclists, equestrians or motorists.
I have to say, Thousand Oaks can have cyclists and Equestrians coexist, Burbank has done an ok job in a spot or two. How is it that Mountain bikers have absolutely no-place to go.
There have to be more Mountain bikers (voters) then equestrians, I would guess they are more affluent and are far more tech savy (can get the word out easier) How have they not gotten their way.
Personally, I’ve never stepped in mountain bike poop by mistake so I would rather eliminate the equestrians and bring in the mountain bikers.
[...] week, the LADOT Bike Blog announced that plans for 1.5 miles of Bike Lanes along Foothill Boulevard , from Osborne Street in [...]
[...] the bike lanes. We’ve covered some project history in a post from May of last year that you can check out for yourself here. More on the project below the [...]
[...] bike lanes. We’ve covered some project history in a post from May of last year that you can check out for yourself here. More on the project below the [...]