Under Metro's recommended plan, Colorado Boulevard will have one traffic lane each way from Eagle Rock Boulevard to Linda Rosa Avenue. This Metro rendering from 2021 shows two eastbound lanes merged into one at Eagle Rock Boulevard.

Losing lanes on Colorado: How we got here, what comes next

2022 April Editions More News Politics

By T.A. Hendrickson

Metro’s plan to reduce much of Colorado Boulevard in Eagle Rock to one traffic lane each way was approved on Wednesday by the Planning and Programming committee of the Metro Board of Directors.

The lane reductions are a feature of the Metro bus rapid transit (BRT) route through Eagle Rock on the North Hollywood-to-Pasadena (NoHo-Pas) line, to be built by 2024.

The committee’s support for eliminating traffic lanes on the boulevard is another burst of momentum for the one-lane plan. It follows Councilmember Kevin de León’s endorsement of the plan on March 31 and a statement by Metro staff on March 25 saying it would recommend lane reductions on Colorado Boulevard to the Metro Board of Directors at the next Board meeting on April 28.  

The Metro Board has the final say over BRT route configurations. But support for the one-lane option from Metro staff, De León and the Planning and Programming Committee virtually guarantees Board approval. 

Under Metro’s proposal for lane reductions on Colorado Boulevard, shown here and summarized in the recent Final Environmental Impact Report on the NoHo-Pas BRT, there would be one traffic lane each way between Eagle Rock Boulevard and the 134 Freeway ramps near Linda Rosa Avenue. By removing traffic lanes, the plan creates room on the boulevard for dedicated BRT lanes, buffered bike lanes and the medians. Dedicated BRT lanes are Metro’s priority while buffered bike lanes and lane reductions are priorities for cyclists and road-diet advocates. The medians are prized by environmentalists and advocates for beautification of the boulevard.

The tradeoff, according to Metro’s analysis, is that lane reductions will cause bottlenecks at the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and Eagle Rock Boulevard and near the 134 Freeway ramps at the eastern edge of the boulevard, single-digit travel speeds during morning and evening rush hours and the loss of 122 on-street parking spaces (out of 319 total).  

There’s almost no traffic in this graphic by Metro of its plan for one traffic lane each way on much of Colorado Boulevard. But Metro’s analysis shows worsening traffic during rush hours and at the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and Eagle Rock Boulevard. (Image: Final Environmental Impact Report/North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT)

How did we get here?

In public meetings in 2019 on possible BRT routes through Eagle Rock, attendees repeatedly told Metro staff and officials not to eliminate traffic lanes on Colorado Boulevard. There was no apparent advocacy at that time for lane reductions, but Eagle Rock residents recalled the previous loss of a traffic lane to make room for bike lanes and were concerned that another traffic lane could be lost to make room for dedicated BRT lanes. Residents were also locked in debate during 2019 about whether to run the BRT on the boulevard or on the 134 Freeway. Residents who didn’t feel strongly one way or the other– or who preferred a freeway route but felt it was a losing proposition – routinely said in public forums that if Metro decided on a boulevard route, it should not eliminate traffic lanes.

The popular sentiment against lane reductions was noted in contemporaneous reporting by the Boulevard Sentinel and in Metro’s own materials and statements. Hilda Solis, a Metro board member and the L.A. county supervisor for Eagle Rock, held a meeting at Occidental College on August 7, 2019, where concerns over possible loss of car lanes were raised repeatedly. A possible solution, according to one Metro staffer at the meeting, was to keep two lanes of traffic each way on the boulevard, narrow the bike lanes and mitigate the resulting loss of parking.

At well-attended Metro workshops in Eagle Rock in November 2019, 21 of 25 working groups said the design for Colorado Boulevard should retain two car lanes each way. | Photo by Matthew Reagan/Boulevard Sentinel

Similarly, at Metro workshops in Eagle Rock that drew 195 participants on November 16, 2019, 21 of 25 working groups said the design for Colorado Boulevard should retain two traffic lanes in each direction, according to Metro. Twenty-one groups also said the boulevard’s on-street parking should be retained. Twenty groups said the bike lanes should be kept. Nineteen groups said they would narrow the medians to accommodate the BRT while a few said the medians could be eliminated and some recommended keeping them at their existing size.

On October 26, 2020, Metro released the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the NoHo-Pas BRT. The DEIR showed two possible ways to run the BRT on Colorado Boulevard, both of which retained two lanes in each direction. On March 26, 2021, after Metro had started zeroing in on a one-lane option, Scott Hartwell, the Metro project manager for the BRT told a Zoom meeting with Eagle Rock business owners that the agency’s initial two-lane proposals were based on feedback from Eagle Rockers in 2019, where residents told Metro not to eliminate traffic lanes on the boulevard. 

So what changed?

In the summer of 2020, Metro began previewing BRT route options for Eagle Rock that it intended to include in the NoHo-Pas DEIR. In addition to the two Colorado Boulevard options that retained two traffic lanes each way, there was an option to run the BRT on the 134 Freeway. 

Of the three options, the one favored by Metro – called the “proposed project” – preserved the boulevard’s two traffic lanes each way, most of its curbside parking and the medians, but called for running the BRT in the bike lane. Under the plan, cyclists in the shared BRT/bike lane would have “priority,” meaning the BRT would have to go around them.

According to Metro spokesperson Brian Haas, the first Eagle Rock stakeholders briefed by Metro on the forthcoming proposed project were members of The Eagle Rock Association (TERA), a private civic group, which received its briefing on July 26, 2020.

TERA opposed the design and on August 19, 2020, Greg Merideth, TERA’s president, emailed a letter  to Metro “to reiterate the elements that must be accounted for” to gain the group’s  support. One of those elements was “innovative design solutions.” As an example of what he meant by that, Meredith included illustrations in the letter showing various designs for eliminating traffic lanes on Colorado Boulevard, including one labeled “Concept C,” which removed one traffic lane in each direction to accommodate dedicated BRT lanes, buffered bike lanes and the medians.

Metro’s next DEIR preview briefing was to the transition team for then Councilmember-elect De León on August 26, 2020, followed by a public briefing by Metro project manager Hartwell on September 1, 2020, via Zoom to the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council (ERNC).

TERA member Michael MacDonald, who attended the ERNC meeting, spoke up to oppose the shared BRT/bike lanes in Metro’s proposed project. Hartwell replied that shared bus/bike lanes were used in other parts of the city. In general, cyclists say that shared bus/bike lanes are unsafe and effectively nullify the victories they have won in fights to create bike lanes on city streets. They also point out that city mobility policies call for maintaining or enhancing the cycling experience in bike lanes throughout the city. 

Another attendee at the ERNC briefing expressed support for Metro’s proposed project to retain two traffic lanes in each direction. Marcel Wittfeld, the owner of Peekaboo Playland on Colorado Boulevard, said he initially favored running the BRT on the freeway, but that he could live with Metro’s proposed project largely because it retained the boulevard’s car lanes and parking. In general, business owners have said that driving and parking are essential for customers and, by extension, business along the boulevard.

TERA’s suggestions to Metro for a one-lane option became more widely known in October 2020, when the ERNC voted to send a letter to then Councilmember-elect De León, asking him to require Metro to study a BRT design for Colorado Boulevard that would remove a traffic lane in each direction. In the letter, a drawing of the one-traffic-lane proposal is labeled “TERA’s Option C.”

In a letter from October 2020, the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council used “TERA’s Option C” to illustrate one car lane each way on Colorado Boulevard.

The ERNC letter, dated October 12, 2020, was spearheaded by Michael Sweeney, ERNC board member and chairman of its Land Use and Planning Committee. Sweeney said that, in his experience, riding a bike in shared bus/bike lanes was terrifying.

Only one ERNC member, Lisa Karahalios, voted against sending the letter. Karahalios explained that she had attended every community meeting on the BRT and that in each one, Eagle Rock stakeholders had said they wanted to preserve two lanes each way on Colorado Boulevard.

When the Draft Environmental Impact Report was released in late October 2020, it was just as Metro had previewed it, including two boulevard options that retained the traffic lanes and one route option on the 134 Freeway. The report was opened for public comment so the agency could potentially refine its proposals based on public input. The deadline for public comment was initially set for December, 10, 2020 but Metro later extended the deadline to December 28.

In mid February 2021, public discussion and media reports began referencing a “community-led” proposal called “Beautiful Boulevard,” which advocated a one-traffic-lane design for Colorado Boulevard. Essentially option “C” from the earlier TERA and ERNC letters to Metro and de León, respectively, Beautiful Boulevard called for eliminating a traffic lane in each direction to make room for dedicated BRT lanes, bike lanes and the medians. It also repositioned bike lanes and parking lanes so cyclists would ride between the curb and parked cars.

On February 15, 2021, Metro Board Member and L.A. County Supervisor Solis, posted praise for Beautiful Boulevard on her social media and urged Metro staff to bring the proposal to the Metro Board for consideration if it was deemed feasible and within budget. 

The seemingly sudden prominence of the one-lane idea triggered a public outcry. Up to then, the Beautiful Boulevard proposal was chiefly known only to those who had developed and promoted it to Metro, including some TERA members and some past and present members of the ERNC. The Beautiful Boulevard coalition had proceeded to collect signatures on a petition in support of its proposal. But some 500 signatures were collected before the petition added a mention about reducing lanes on the boulevard—an omission that Beautiful Boulevard supporter Natalie Freidberg, who helped gather signatures, did not comment on when asked about it for a story in the Boulevard Sentinel on March 30, 2021. The coalition has also posted logos on its website of some 25 businesses that support the proposal, although half of them are not on Colorado Boulevard or on stretches of the boulevard that would be reduced to one lane.

Be that as it may, Metro shifted its emphasis in early 2021 to removing a lane in each direction.

According to Metro spokesperson Brian Haas, lane reductions on Colorado Boulevard were the topic of meetings in March, 2021 between Metro and staff members representing Mayor Eric Garcetti, De León, Solis, State Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, Metro Board Member and then Glendale Mayor Ara Najarian and the L.A. Department of Transportation. 

Metro also previewed a onelane proposal in two invitation-only meetings in March, 2021, with members of the Eagle Rock community. The first meeting was with individuals from groups that have been active in the BRT debate in Eagle Rock, including TERA, the ERNC, the Eagle Rock Chamber of Commerce, Eagle Rock 411 and Eagle Rock Forward. 

The second meeting in March, 2021 was for local businesses. The Boulevard Sentinel attended; other owners in attendance included those from Peekaboo Playland, Arnott Kenpo Karate, Mathnasium and Super Copy.

During the meeting with business owners, Metro’s Hartwell acknowledged that the agency’s initial proposals for Colorado Boulevard had retained two lanes of traffic in each direction because that is what Eagle Rock residents had said they wanted. But Hartwell went on to say that during the DEIR public comment period on the NoHo-Pas BRT, the agency received so many letters of support for Beautiful Boulevard that it had decided to revise one of its earlier two-lane proposals into a one-traffic lane version.

The public comments are in Appendix C of the Final Environmental Impact Report, released on March 25. The Boulevard Sentinel counted some 250 letters regarding Eagle Rock, of which 54 supported Beautiful Boulevard, some with multiple signatures. All the support letters were submitted after the initial December 10 deadline, which Metro had extended to December 28. Forty-nine of the 54 letters came in during the last week of the extended deadline period, with 19 of them arriving on the last two days.

There were no letters in opposition to the Beautiful Boulevard proposal because apparently only its supporters knew about it.  

The public comment letter submitted by TERA President Greg Merideth on December 28, 2020 said “TERA supports study of the Eagle Rock community’s Beautiful Boulevard proposal and urges Metro to review it in full.” He also wrote that “the Eagle Rock community” had collaborated in the development of the Beautiful Boulevard proposal. 

In Hartwell’s telling, Metro was persuaded to pursue lane reductions by the public comment letters it had received in support of Beautiful Boulevard. But that explanation did not acknowledge that the general public was not aware of the Beautiful Boulevard proposal until after the comment period had closed.

On April 1, 2021, Metro presented its one-traffic-lane-each-way proposal for Colorado Boulevard at a public Zoom meeting. Metro’s aim was to gather public input before recommending a route to the Metro Board for inclusion in May in the Final Environmental Impact Report.

On May 13, 2021, De León announced that he was calling on Metro to delay its push for lane reductions on Colorado Boulevard. De León said the agency had failed to present a full picture of the plan to Eagle Rock residents and solicit their feedback. De León further called on Metro to present the community with two options for BRT dedicated lanes on Colorado Boulevard – one with one car lane each way and another with two lanes– and to hold public meetings to explain the proposals and invite debate. 

Metro publicly presented the two options in Zoom meetings on September 23, 2021. Both options had dedicated BRT lanes and protected bike lanes. A big difference between the two was that the single-lane option lost one third of the boulevard’s curbside parking (122 spaces) while the two-lane option lost two thirds (210 spaces).

This was a significant shift in the terms of the debate, because given the options on the table, parking spaces—not BRT lanes or bike lanes—had become the key issue.

In effect, Eagle Rock residents were given the choice of one lane each way that creates bottlenecks on the boulevard but keeps most of its parking spaces or two lanes each way that preserve traffic flow on the boulevard but lose most of its parking.  

In the Metro meetings on one-lane versus two, Eagle Rockers remained divided. Proponents of Beautiful Boulevard spoke up in favor of the one-lane option while opponents questioned the necessity of lane reductions and their impact on traffic and local businesses. Opponents also asked for a ‘cone study’ to block one car lane in each direction to test the traffic effects of the proposed lane reductions. Metro said that a cone study would not be useful because it would only show the impact of lane reductions and not other BRT project changes, including the impact on left turns and car/bike interactions. 

De León’s announcement

Councilmember Kevin de León, at the Eagle Rock City Hall on March 31, 2022, announcing his support for Metro’s plan to reduce much of Colorado Boulevard to one traffic lane in each direction | Photo by Bill Hendrickson/Boulevard Sentinel.

At his press conference on March 31 to announce his support for reducing lanes, De León spoke about the importance of the BRT in fostering clean air, responding to climate change, advancing social equity for low-income riders and providing an alternative to cars for higher-income people who don’t currently ride the bus. He said the plan for Colorado Boulevard would involve planting more trees and that businesses would be protected from disruption.

After the press conference, the Boulevard Sentinel asked De León why he supported the one-lane proposal when those same goals could have been achieved under Metro’s two-lane proposal.

His answer: “The parking.” He said one car lane each way is better because it loses fewer parking spaces than the two-lane option.

De León also said that he would make sure that Metro builds parking to replace the spaces lost under the one-lane option, adding that if the agency balked, the permits it needs to proceed with the BRT could be withheld.

In a follow up question sent to De León’s spokesperson, Pete Brown, the Boulevard Sentinel asked why De León couldn’t just as well require Metro to build enough parking to replace the spaces that would be lost under the two-lane option, which loses 88 more parking spaces than the one-lane version. In an email, De León replied that “the decision between the one-lane and two-lane lane alternatives along Colorado Boulevard should not be simplified only in terms of the quantity of street parking,” adding that the one-lane option offers residents and businesses outdoor dining, increased landscaping and shorter crossing distances for pedestrians that otherwise would be unavailable. 

 What’s next

At his press conference, De León said that the BRT plan for Colorado Boulevard would “upend the status quo” in ways that would improve and elevate Eagle Rock and make it a model for the other cities. But there is really no telling at present how the plan will play out. How will traffic adjust to losing a lane? Will the BRT attract significant ridership? Will significantly more cyclists use the bike lanes?

Also unanswered is the extent to which the BRT could encourage higher density development on and near Colorado Boulevard and whether such development would increase the use of buses and bikes enough to offset the increased car use that tends to come with population growth.

Metro says that the BRT will not change zoning rules in Eagle Rock in part because the area is already zoned for denser development as a “high quality transit corridor.” While true, that statement does not take into account that Eagle Rock at this time doesn’t look or act like a high-quality transit corridor. However, when there’s a BRT running in dedicated lanes on Colorado Boulevard, the transit features of the community will take center stage, potentially inviting more development. 

For now, two things seem clear: The political moment favors lane reductions on Colorado Boulevard. And those lane reductions would only be the beginning of changes that would impact Eagle Rock for decades to come.

The NoHo-Pas BRT project will be on the Metro Board agenda on Thursday, April 28 at 10 a.m. To tune into the meetings and provide comment, go to http://boardagendas.metro.net or by phone: 888.251.2949, Extension: 8231160# (English) or 4544724# (Español)

This story was updated on 4/22/2022 at 2:55 p.m. to include Councilmember Kevin de León’s comment.  

T.A. Hendrickson
T.A. Hendrickson, a native of Eagle Rock, is the editor of the Boulevard Sentinel, and a former member of the Editorial Board of the New York Times. Hendrickson is committed to local news reporting and to finding a way forward for local news outlets in today's challenging media markets.
https://boulevardsentinel.com

45 thoughts on “Losing lanes on Colorado: How we got here, what comes next

  1. shame them! Show up in their communities and cause traffic! They are taking away quality time that people need with their families after driving through traffic to get home, then have to drive through traffic just to get to their front door!!!!! This is nuts and the people who came up with this idea need to see a shrink! Mr. Leon if this was Boyle Heights you would not support it!

  2. In an email from the Metro NoHo to Pasadena Transit corridor project on March 4th of this year,
    they listed that almost 700 new parking spaces would be available on cross streets to Colorado. Which means that homes near the blvd will no longer be able to park in front of their homes.
    When I replied to the email and asked to see the studies that the report was based on, I was sent information that showed that travel time in the am from eagle rock blvd to the 134 entrance would go from 7 minutes to 14 minutes and in the pm it would go from 7 minutes to 16 minutes. Also that traffic on Hill Drive and Yosemite would increase by less than 1% on each alternative street. This going to be a total disaster in my opinion and horrible for the neighborhood

    1. Well put. The EIR numbers are completely unrealistic for cut-through traffic. There will be way more that 1 and 4 percent increases on Hill and Yosemite. The bottleneck and pollution increase will be real, all for one half-filled bus that passes through every ten minutes. As someone who uses Colorado daily and kids attending ERHS this will be a local traffic nightmare.

  3. This started with Villa-Derosa, Metro and Huizar; each making benefits from the Feds and China who was determined to change every city to “bicycle friendly” see China company “Flying Pigeon” to follow the money.

  4. This is ridiculous. Traffic is already horrible with two lanes. No answer to how they will replace losing all those spaces, careless and inconsiderate to the people in the eagle rock community.

  5. Yikes. It’s pretty obvious where the Boulevard Sentinel stands on this issue.

    It’s remarkable how obsessed people are with maintaining car centricity on Colorado Blvd. Just this once, please consider that adding a few minutes onto your daily commute is perhaps less important than making Colorado more safe and accessible for all.

    1. Peter. Answer this. Where does the material come from that’s needed for the batteries on electric cars? Think digging is part of it. Read somewhere that now they are hunting for more sources.

      1. I believe the idea is to be less car reliant in general. Gas or electric powered. The idea is to use public transportation instead. It’s pretty obvious that personal cars have been a cancer to our society 🙂

      2. As LG said, the whole point is to reduce car use – including electric cars – and increase transit use, including biking and walking.

    2. So Peter when u go for ur walk about on Colorado where are u going 2 park?
      In front of some one else’s home?
      Please consider THAT

      1. The idea of driving to go on a walk is ridiculous. You need to change your way of thinking.

      2. I would likely WALK to my walk… Not exactly sure what point you’re trying to make. Additionally, virtually every home, business, or public space in eagle rock is accessible by bike or bus. You are confirming exactly the point I was trying to make about our obsession with car-centricity.

  6. Why do we even need dedicated bus lanes??? It makes no sense to have a lane in that heavily travelled corridor that only has four vehicles use in the space of an hour.

  7. This is a total slap in the face to everyone that travels Colorado Blvd. on a daily basis. You’re never going to see Hilda solis or Kevin DeLeon drive down these streets or any of the surrounding side streets. Everyone should keep this and the pallet homes in the forefront of their minds when elections roll around.

  8. 1) DeLeon will never be mayor.
    2) Road “diets” in Playa del Rey and Silverlake were a disaster.
    3) In 10 years of watching the bike lanes virtually no one uses them.
    4) This will destroy the lovely, sylvan character of Colorado Blvd.
    5) The buses will be as empty as ever.
    6) DeLeon will never be mayor.

  9. We have to thank for this…. Severin Martinez, TERA Board Member & Planner at LA DOT. Michael McDonald TERA Board Member, and harrasser on social media of any opposing viewpoints. Felicia Garcia, Severin’s Girlfriend who harasses Eagle Rock residents on social media, Mike Sweeney ERNC VP Land Use for backroom deals and communication with Metro. John Gordon, Metro VP of Digital Marketing, harassing Eagle Rock restaurants and residents on social media. All behind the back of Eagle Rock citizens, while the majority of Eagle Rock didn’t know what was going on. Covert corruption at hand? Paid for by our tax dollars? Thanks Metro.

    1. Thx you Mike. Please continue.
      Name them all over n over
      Every chance u can. Plse don’t leave Lisa out of it either.

  10. So when the recall De Leon was in motion why wasn’t there more votes 2 remove him? De Leon is just as dirty as they get. From paying a homeless drug dealer to keep camp by 7-11 (drug dealer on video stating alice at E.R. council). De Leon is the one seeking kick backs on metro.
    If this goes through I really hope that the business owners on this route sue the city council, De leon n metro. Take a look at the buses that are running on Colorado now. I watched and looked at how many ppl on them. Top count was 8. Metro can use the smaller electric van buses.
    Now removing more parking means home owners will not have any parking in front of there homes. Traffic WILL go on hill Dr and Yosemite. Btw those ppl crying about their kids not able 2 run free on Colorado…hill Dr has families up there. Yosemite is packed with school kids. Why aren’t you concerned about them. U don’t care. The bike lane, mayb they should not cut into traffic lanes or just blow red lights. But they do bc they don’t care. So eagle rock will b a town of ppl that don’t care. De Leon is dirty n should b removed. Really the whole city council should b audited.

    1. Is it really so terrible if car drivers decide to drive on Hill? I already often make that choice simply because it it pretty and if I am in a hurry there is so little traffic for such a wide street it is easy to drive as fast on Hill as it is to drive on the 134 FREEWAY. I VERY rarely see children playing or people walking on Hill which is why I simply don’t find your safety concerns valid. They could raise the speed limit to 45 or even 55 mph on Hill and it wouldn’t be much different than what it is already like. Let’s concentrate on making Colorado Blvd. safer as it is where more pedestrians already are.

  11. This is irresponsible fear-mongering journalism. The Boulevard Sentinel continues to represent editorials as actual articles reporting fact while leaving out half of the story and not interviewing people on the other side of their slanted view in order to keep their reader base happy. I implore T.A. and Bill to please reach out to the people THAT YOU KNOW to provide information on these articles before you rush them to press.

    1. What do you think they get wrong, Pat? Factual pros and cons were listed in this article. Have you read Metro’s EIR? Be specific before slandering writers unless you mean to come off as Trump-y.

    2. This article is completely true and verifiable. It has been the “beautifulboulverd” 1-lane gridlock crowd including Pat Niessen, Natalie Friedberg Metro and TERA who have been lying to Eagle Rock residents, and LA for a year and a half.

  12. Once again, sensational representation of this process from the Boulevard Sentinel. We get that you don’t like this project, but revisionist history and pumping up fear is pretty gross and while this is not a true newspaper, one would hope for some semblance of balance in your effort to capture what’s going on here — or the many, many different feelings about this project from residents, shoppers, and workers that commute in, out and through ER on a daily basis.
    Here’s another POV: Metro to spend millions of dollars improving Eagle Rock’s main business district!
    I know change is difficult, but I humbly suggest you take a closer look at your priorities vs. the growth potential this will have for the neighborhood and it’s businesses. This is a win-win-win, across the board.
    We’ll get MORE TREES in the middle of Colorado, and YAY cars will have to SLOW DOWN — and actually better bike lanes. This is a neighborhood, not a freeway. If you want a freeway, look up the hill there is one right there called the 134!
    There was a strong group in this neighborhood that helped guide this plan to be more beautiful and to make it work best for many of the concerns raised. That is how living in a community works, you advocate for you POV and if more people agree with you — you just might succeed. So KUDOS to everyone that made their voice heard. This is an exciting day for Eagle Rock as it gets better connected to the broader METRO network and we will get to see the Blvd transformed into a prettier, more walkable, more accessible place for our friends and families to enjoy for years to come.
    Why are you in such a rush to drive through Eagle Rock anyway? Slow down, look out for your neighbors and maybe stop and spend some money at the local businesses?
    Fear mongering may get clicks, and lots of angry comments, but it’s not the way to foster better communication between neighbors nor community building.

    1. Tim. The paper is a joke. U follow De Leon like a puppy. I gave up telling n ur staff that they have wrong info. Yep there is that 134 fwy. At least u got that right. Thxs 4 the info. So I guess the city will not have any filming going on. 1 source out the door. And what about the music fair near fire dept. 2nd source out the door. If you think this aboration is going 2 slow traffic down ur outta touch. If you think that this is going 2 b happy happy ur wrong. N the info on we get more trees.
      You want 2 slow down traffic ask p.d. 2 do so. Can’t wait 2 c what all these walkers r going 2 do with homeless everywhere. Any parent with a brain will not let there kids run a muck on Colorado. This will take at least 5yrs of hell 2 business some that have been here over 60 yrs. Do you care. We get trees.!!! This so called paper was good yrs ago. If ur crying about speeding cars just what do u think will happen after the loss of lanes. We get trees!!! What we need is a paper that isn’t sucking up 2 De Leon on a daily basis. (Keep ur trees). When small busniess that support their families close up u gonna tell em about trees. Oh ya stop racing thru town n stop n shop. Parking is tough now wait until 5yrs. There will b no parking. You never trust a dirty council person and his newspaper. Hope I’m wrong but I c lawsuits on the horzion. Btw look at the buses running now. Really look. They way that u wrote ur reply looks like inside info.

    2. Tim (Lindholm?), this story is all true and completely verifiable. Cars trucks and normal Metro buses will be slowed to a crawl in the 1 lane of gridlock. Most parking will be removed east of Eagle Rock Blvd. Many restaurants will close. What about Trader Joe’s? Will that close and move to another neighborhood? The design is blocking their delivery driveway to the loading dock. No thank you to the “beautifuldisaster” Road Diet.

  13. Thanks to T.A. Hendrickson for writing the article. It’s much appreciated. I felt like this whole social media push on this BRT one lane proposal is misrepresented amongst people in Eagle Rock. And your article exposes that. I don’t know why TERA as a small interest group can speak in behalf of all of Eagle Rock. Let’s take this proposal to vote for the people of the 90041. No letters and no petitions.

  14. Why have we not heard more about a 3rd option: Mixed Flow through Eagle Rock!?!? Pasadena insisted on this; Burbank about to demand it. Why is Metro & Kevin De Leon caving to the Beautiful Boulevard fanatics? I also want a beautiful boulevard; but I want to preserve parking for businesses/customers and keep traffic moving through my neighborhood. All this could be accomplished w/MIXED FLOW (& not via a single, dedicated BRT lane). Metro is steam-rolling this with very little public feedback. The BB folks were in-the-know early on, but this does not give them exclusive rights to speak for all Eagle Rock residents! Please continue to reach out to De Leon, to Hilda Solis, to Metro Board, etc. It’s not over until it’s built–and even then, we could force the shared use of the lane, if traffic/residents/businesses demand it.

  15. Future thinking? Big Red Car had it all. Present plan is a crap shoot!…….. Excellent article by Ms. Hendrickson!

  16. It’s old, it’s tattered, it doesn’t shine, dump it. Get rid of it, cut it down and throw it out. It is not possible to improve what we have, we need to throw it out and buy the biggest shiniest bus China makes, and rebuild the roads to fit our new toy. I’ve had it patiently explained to me in a slow and loud voice, that what I don’t understand is that if our money isn’t spent on this BRT, that money won’t get spent at all. We can’t use it for something else – if we don’t spend it right now and on this, we don’t get to spend it. We are told that the reason people are not riding buses is that the buses are too small, not expensive enough, have too many stops to let people on and off. We are told that that we cannot fix what we have, we have to throw it away and buy something new. We are told a load of hooey.

  17. Thank you T. A. Hendrickson for sorting through the mess so we could better understand how we have been so poorly represented. I agree it is a disaster in waiting, yet I kept hearing it is the plan for and by the people. With such a drastic change planned for our small community, a vote by Eagle Rock residents would be the only fair way to proceed. Pasadena and Glendale weren’t willing to sacrifice their ‘downtown’ sections for bus lanes but we were? I don’t think we (as a community) would ever choose this. Put it to a vote!

  18. I should have started my previous comment with a thank you as well, Ms Hendrickson. You and the paper have always tried to sort through this mess, and worked at it with intelligence and resolve. But I’m not sure we have a full story of how we managed to end up here. Even right now, writing, I’m well aware that we never learned the identities of the BRT folks who wrote fake comments here, pretending to be me, and effectively covered their tracks by pretending the hack came from someone else who shared my views wanting an open honest discussion. It was hard to listen to that final Metro sales pitch on the Zoom meeting last week as they lied about contacting business owners and listening to our concerns and the needs of the folks who live and work here. DeLeon’s staff repeatedly pretended to set up meetings with us that would never happen. The one thing that Metro stoutly avoided was ever considering any viewpoint other than their own.

    1. Mark. Sorry to hear this. I tried to warn ppl about HUIZAR long ago. I even bothered ch2 news Goldstein to come to the so called meetings. Was told ya don’t see a story there. The city council needs to be REMOVED. They lie and collect great pay cks. They are against anymore who questions them. De Leon needs to go. Of course they never asked the business what they think or want. Never asked the home owner’s, renters. Bc they know what they all say and vote NO. And ur right if metro loses it also loses the funding. They should up grade the huge buses n use the electric mini buses. Put funding into repairing the strs that buses destroy. We don’t live by terra rules..who are they anyways?
      There’s another meeting coming up we all need 2 gang up on metro,city council, terra and shove it down their throats. Also find a lawyer that wants the attention to represent the town. Our town not De Leon’s. Pro-bono to dig into the dark lieing spaces known as De Leon n council. He really just sold ur town metro.
      Recall to remove him
      This time really sign it. Remove De Leon

  19. Yes for vote from neighborhood. NO for single lane. DeLeon’s reason for approving single lane because it made for more parking doesn’t even make sense. No one will be able to (or want to) drive on Colorado so no need for more parking. I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice very few bikes ever in the bike lanes, so get rid of them. I don’t think DeLeon has Eagle Rock’s best interest at heart. I for one will not vote for him again unless he proves otherwise.

  20. Why the hell does the bus need a dedicated lane? Why can a bus not use the existing lanes?? Stupid use of tax dollars. I’m an ER resident and no one ever knocked on my door asking what I think. Residents will deal with the daily impact all while 4 people max will ever be on those buses. ER is becoming Culver City and I don’t know even one resident who is in agreement with this crappy plan. We will sue everyone involved in forcing this upon us.

    1. I agree with just about everything you’ve said; this is not going to benefit most people in Eagle Rock, most of whom never or rarely have to take public transportation and would definitely rather not. On the other hand, every time I go to Culver City I wish Eagle Rock could be that clean, that upscale, and that close to the ocean and Santa Monica.

  21. I’m so sorry but this article and MANY of the comments are unfair to say the least. First off all Keven de Leon and I suspect most if not all of the Beautiful BRT Boulevard supporters are DEMOcrats. In the same way a CHRISTian is going to be christ like as “christ” is foundational to what they call themselves a DEMOcrat is going to demo, or demolish. “Demo”lish is equally foundational to what they call themselves. That isn’t always a bad things. Many times things need to be demolished and rebuilt. Let’s see how it turns out. The BRT could be end up being a good thing. The young people will tell you we can’t keep living life with cars taking over and maybe the rebuilt Colorado Blvd will be even more beautiful .

  22. And because de Leon approved this travesty, I will not vote for him for ANY office. And please let’s recall him ASAP.

Comments are closed.