Huizar: Bike Lanes on Colorado Will Go Forward. Fox 11 Is Shocked.

Los Angeles Local News, Weather, and Traffic

Good news out of Eagle Rock. Last night, a public meeting on a proposed bike lane for Colorado Boulevard drew out supporters and opposition, but in the end there were more cyclists in favor of the lanes than cranky people opposing them. Recognizing the riding tide, Councilman Jose Huizar announced that the lanes will be painted, to the boos of the bullying crowd.

The lanes will extend from the Glendale City Limit to Avenue 64 in Northeast Los Angeles. The new design will remove one lane of traffic for a buffered bike lane, matching the road design in Glendale. The road diet and new bike lanes will be joined by new, freshly painted and more visible, zebra (aka continental) crosswalks.

This was clearly bad news for the Fox 11 team, who had clearly already planned most of their story to be about a minority of bicycling advocates trying to ram their agenda past the protests of the decent god fearing residents of Eagle Rock. They actually used a reader survey on the Boulevard Sentinel, a paper that outright lies about supporters of the bicycle projects, as proof that Eagle Rock residents oppose bike lanes.

From the opening segment, where a reporter sadly laments that “It’s bikes versus cars, and in Eagle Rock it looks as though the bicycle will win” through the interview with known liar and Boulevard Sentinel publisher Tom Topping, the Fox 11 report is clearly incredulous that anyone would think adding bike lanes on a street that is underutilized by car traffic for the existing lanes (they don’t mention that part either, referring to Colorado Boulevard as “busy”) is a normal person.

Despite the majority of the speakers and attendees being for the bike lanes, the report interviews only Topping and highlights four speakers, three of which are against the lane. They also broadcast a round full of bullying “boos” at LADOT’s Nate Baird (hilariously mis-identified as Huizar) and cheers after a person called the lanes a “waste of time, waste of money, waste of effort.”

So despite the best efforts of Topping and his cohorts, and the shocked reporting of Fox 11, there is good news from the meeting. Northeast Los Angeles will indeed see three new miles of badly needed buffered bike lanes.

  • This is fantastic news!!
    It’s about time streets are made NOT just for cars, but for people – whether on bikes, on foot, or on transit. We’re now going through great transformation and positive changes. Bike lanes will significantly increase safety.

  • Anonymous

    Fox 11 is clearly suckling at the big FoxNews teat. They’re against everything from high-speed rail to surface rail to bike lanes. That’s ok though, just makes for one less news outlet to tune into.

  • passerby

    I think the best option for safer bike lanes is for them to be seperated but not just painted lines, but by a concrete island or a dividers.

  • Matt Ruscigno RD MPH

    If Fox News isn’t against it, then more can be done. It’s like a bar for progress! If it’s progressive and worthwhile then the naysayers will come out.

    Good work everyone who put many hours into making this happen. You’re on the cutting edge and 5 years from now (most) everyone will look back and laugh at the opposition.

  • img

    As much as we all dislike Fox News, you have to remember the difference between big papa Fox News and local affiliates that have nothing to do with the cable channel. Besides, Fox 11 is way liberal compared to Fox News itself.

  • motiv

    High-speed rail sounds great for California, but at the moment it’s just ambitious and nothing more. Even worse that since March it’s lost some support. High costs, no where near the “high speed” it claimed to be.

  • MaxHeadroom

    Increasing safety is debatable. At the same time, Colorado is a heavily traveled street. Reducing 3 lanes to 2 might cause a headache for people and certain business like it had done on York Blvd.

  • ubrayj02

    Max, increasing safety is about as debatable as gravity at this point. Collisions on similarly treated streets have dropped as soon as the road treatment has gone in – York Blvd. is a great example. Depending on whose crash numbers you look at, the street got between a 20% to 30% immediate drop in the number of collisions. That is a serious money saver for the city and local residents, not to mention a life-and-limb-saver.

  • Anon

    I disagree with bikes being allowed on streets paved for automobiles. Not only is there an inherent danger of cars colliding with bikers, there are instances when bikers themselves do not follow the rules of the road, while toting “share the road” at the same time. Just as bikers pose problems for motorists, pedestrians would cause problems for cyclists on sidewalks. In my experience driving in LA, bikers tend to stack on a single lane, inducing cars to slow down abruptly causing accidents, swerving as they ride, and dangerously making turns without so much as a hand signal. There is a need for biker lanes, but it should not be at the cost of automotive roads.

  • HP cyclist

    Bikes ARE allowed on surface streets, and that isn’t going to change. Cyclists are legitimate road users under California state law. The question is: should a tiny fraction of the road infrastructure (the equivalent of one vehicle lane on a handful of city streets) be set aside for these legitimate users, just as sidewalks are built for pedestrians? Seems perfectly logical and fair to me.

  • I actually usually find the local affiliate better than most, but this report was almost a parody of stupid bicycle reporting.

  • What’s the alternative to bike lanes? Keeping things the way they are and having bicyclists use the automobile travel lane? The city can’t ban bikes from surface streets; only the state legislature can do that, and it’s never going to happen.

    Bicyclists following the rules of the road is a separate issue that can be addressed through education and enforcement. Decisions about transportation infrastructure shouldn’t be based on rewarding or punishing the users of different modes, but on knowledge and evidence regarding overall safety, mobility, public health and neighborhood quality of life. Bike lanes, road diets and high-visibility crosswalks have all been shown to be beneficial in these areas, and they will likewise be beneficial on Colorado.

  • HighNoon

    By most capacity analyses of Colorado Boulevard, it is not “heavily traveled” enough to require 6 lanes. Four will be just fine, provided you can tolerate the POTENTIAL for seconds to be be added to your commute along this segment. I live in the area and drive Colorado quite a bit and would feel comfortable estimating that the POTENTIAL for delays would occur during a couple hours (typical peaks) of the day while the improved safety and more equitable allocation of road space will be there 24/7. They can’t implement this soon enough, in my opinion.

  • Anonymous

    oh… well, nevermind then.

  • Jeff Jacobberger

    On streets where there are a lot of potential conflicts between bicyclists and turning cars–such as where most intersections don’t have traffic signals and/or there are many midblock entrances to parking lots–and where there is curb parking, it is not clear that separated bike lanes are safer than buffered lanes.
    Cars and bicyclists either (a) need to be able to see each other or (b) be controlled from crossing the same space at the same time.

  • Joe Mama

    Totally. I agree 100%. As such we should address the real problem for the traffic nightmare that is Eagle Rock: Elderly drivers. We need to push for the restriction of all drivers over the age of 40. Annual sight and road competence testing, at standard state license issue fees. End the scourge of the road, old geezers who think the world should get out of their way.

  • Anonymous

    There have been five fatal accidents involving pedestrians in the last 12 years along Colorado Boulevard, all of them over the age of 50. Would you be willing to sacrifice a few seconds of your time if it meant less bodies?

  • Brian

    It is still planned for 2hours 40 minutes SF to LA so I don’t know where the “no where near” comment comes from. Well the Reason Foundation people claim it will take 5 hours, but we know how much to trust their proclamations.

  • Anonymous

    Nice troll! Now GET A BIKE!

  • Anonymous

    I was in Santa Monica recently for a job interview and I stuck around and walked the streets and got a bite to eat. I did not see one cyclist riding how the law says they should. Most were on sidewalks and even saw a wrong-way cyclist.

    Of course, a “cyclist” can mean anything from an athlete to Damien Newton to a guy who recently got a DUI.

  • Anonymous

    Fox 11 is not Fox News. I once saw the anchors openly debate immigration John and Ken live on the air and the anchors took the pro side.

  • Anonymous

    Reason Foundation hates trains but they totally love gays, minorities and women.

    By the way, still no word on how they are actually going to get the money to complete the damn thing.

  • ubrayj02

    All we have established here is (1) you are unemployed and (2) ???.

  • Anonymous

    The chances of bikes becoming popular in America are about as bleak as my career prospects!

  • Anonymous

    There goes the neighborhood. Just wait and see. There will be traffic. Eagle Rock is going to suck. Who the hell were all the bikers at the meeting? I hardly see THAT many bikers here in town.

  • HP cyclist

    When bike lanes were installed in Long Beach, wrong-way and sidewalk cycling decreased drastically (i.e. cyclists started using the lanes instead). So your observations actually provide good reasons to install bike lanes on Colorado.

  • Chris

    Have fun with your traffic nightmare Eagle Rock! Oh, by the way, are all you “bike lane advocates” willing to give up your cars? I doubt it.


Eagle Rock Residents Pushing for a Slimmer Colorado Boulevard

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 […]

Bike Lanes Planned for Fletcher Drive, Meeting Tonight

At tonight’s meeting of the Glassell Park Improvement Association, Los Angeles City Councilmember Mitch O’Farrell will be presenting the Department of Transportation’s (LADOT) planned Fletcher Drive Streetscape Project. Project plans are posted at the GPIA website. The project includes a road diet with bike lanes, plus new landscaped median islands. The bike lanes extend 0.8 miles from […]

Some Los Angeles Road Diet Projects Can Add More On-Street Parking

Most of the city of Los Angeles’ bike lane mileage has been implemented without removing any car lanes or any parking spaces. The city Transportation Department (LADOT) merely narrows existing overly-wide lanes, and adds bike lanes. In recent years, the city of Los Angeles has also done a number of bike lane projects called “road diets.” […]