Freeway alternative to be studied as part of NoHo to Pasadena bus rapid transit study; new community workshops added

As a result of public comments received this summer, Metro will study a 134 Freeway route option through Eagle Rock as part of the North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project’s draft environmental study. The other potential route to be studied through Eagle Rock is on Colorado Boulevard.

A freeway route was studied in the project’s earlier Alternatives Analysis study. But Metro staff didn’t recommend any further study of a freeway option because of lower projected ridership, limited access to Eagle Rock and an initial lack of community support.

In response to more recent comments, Metro feels that studying the 134 option in the draft study is important and will allow for a more thorough analysis of its benefits and effects in comparison to the route on Colorado Boulevard.

Metro received a large number of comments during the project’s public scoping period that was held this past summer. Comments covered a wide gamut of issues, including station locations, access to other transit lines, bike infrastructure and the need for more frequent and reliable bus service in the area between NoHo, Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena.

Other concerns expressed involved the potential impacts of dedicated bus lanes on traffic and parking and BRT infrastructure’s impact on landscaped medians, and access to businesses. There were also concerns about the project’s impact on zoning, density and development.

In November, Metro will hold five interactive workshops with the public to envision together what bus rapid transit may look like in different communities and what urban design elements the public would like to see incorporated as part of project. Meeting dates and locations are:

Wednesday, November 6, 2019
(Two Sessions to choose from)
Session #1: 3 – 5 p.m.
Session #2: 6 – 8 p.m.
Creveling Lounge, Building CC
Pasadena City College
1570 E. Colorado Blvd.
Pasadena, CA 91106

Tuesday, November 12, 2019
6-8 p.m.
Glendale Central Library
222 E. Harvard Street
Glendale, CA 91205

Wednesday, November 13, 2019
6 – 8 p.m.
Buena Vista Branch Library
300 North Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91505

Eagle Rock
Saturday, November 16, 2019
(Three sessions to choose from)
Session #1: 9 – 10:30 a.m.
Session #2: 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m.
Session #3: 2 – 3:30 p.m.
Yosemite Recreation Center
1840 Yosemite Drive
Eagle Rock, CA 90041

North Hollywood
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
5 – 7 p.m.
LA Soccer Club
11466 Chandler Blvd.
North Hollywood, CA 91601

Categories: Projects

17 replies

  1. I think it’s critical to note this is a workshop/charette style, so you have to be there when the meeting starts and not like a drop-in last past meetings where you might miss a presentation but could still give comment to a court reporter even 10 minutes before closing; it is focused on the community where the meeting is, not corridor wide; AND you have to RSVP per the link on the project web site.

  2. How frequently will this bus run? I haven’t seen official numbers (I tried looking them up) but I had heard somewhere that it’s every 15 minutes. It seems like overkill to remove a traffic lane in each direction in order to accommodate 4 buses per hour. I’m not under the impression that Colorado Blvd is particularly congested through most of Eagle Rock, except maybe a little congestion on the western end near the mall. It seems like signal priority would be enough.

  3. I commend you guys on expanding the bus system. You’re doing a great job of getting transit where we need it. But we’re making much too much of these buses. Pick whatever route is going to be the cheapest, paint some bus lanes, throw down some buses and let’s move on. Ultimately, this is what is going to happen anyway. Use that saved time and money to help get a grade separated train line going somewhere else.

    • You honestly think if it were that easy, would there even be any discussion regarding this bus line?

  4. I would prefer this route to run through the cities the right way as per the orange line though with more grade separation. I’m not much of a fan taking away from car lanes for bus lanes. If parallel parking can be used for bus lanes than I’m more for that.

    However if the freeway alternative is chosen then this needs to be a freeway widening of adding tolled express lanes that DONT take away from GP lanes and use funds generated by tolls to fund free BRT service along this route. Yet that obviously won’t happen and neither will a true BRT line only an “enhanced” bus service route running with cars.

    When will Metro wake up!? We need quality transit. So if freeway route is chosen not only is it more inconvenient to mass transit riders who would benefit more from a route going through eagle rock but it will also slow traffic on 210 with buses having to merge to HOV lane and back to the exit.

  5. how about improving the 780 service (weekend and early evening service is needed) and having a dedicated bus line along the Colorado Blvd in the Eagle Rock area? This BRT project duplicates the 780 service between Glendale and Pasadena. The only portion we need is connecting NoHo, downtown Burbank and downtown Glendale with a direct rapid service. For now metro needs to have a direct transfer point connecting route 501 and 780 in Glendale, and a new rapid route between Glendale – Burbank – NoHo should be added later.

    • Weekend service was experimented with the 780 about 10 years old. From experience I can tell you right now, even during the holidays, ridership was at its absolute worst. Though I think the main reason for it was because it only ran from Hollywood to Pasadena instead of its entire route.

      The 780 doesn’t need too much improvement except maybe actually running until 9pm. it just needs to be more reliable, and being able to using the Bus Only Lanes in Glendale and Eagle Rock from this BRT Line will definitely help with that.

  6. thank you for listening to constituents. too often is local input steamrolled by people who assume that they know better

  7. The freeway was already deemed non viable at the AA study phase. Why are we spending tax money to keep studying that option. This is really dissapointing

  8. A freeway route on the side of a mountain… I just will never understand why we fold so easily… I was already devastated by the lack of options in Toluca Lake, passing up Riverside Dr through NoHo seems ridiculous for the village of walkability there.

    • This is designed to be a limited stop, nearly express line. The main feature is to connect the transportation hubs, so that the A Line can connect to the B and F lines. This will make a more robust system. The areas near each end already are connected locally. Also, the connection to the Metrolink station opens that line up to the SGV as a practical alternative. And it makes Burbank Airport more transit accessible from the SGV. If those in Arcadia can make it to Burbank Airport more quickly than LAX (via transit), it becomes more attractive.

        • The purpose of this BRT project is to REPLACE the 501. I don’t think the 501 was meant to be a permanent route. Rather it is an experiment to see how the route would attract riders along this corridor.

          The reality is, at least up until I was still using it up until 6 months ago, ridership just wasn’t god outside of peak hours. Sure, perhaps keeping running peak hour only would definitely be smart, I really don’t think it would be wise to keep it running after this is line is ready for service.

          But again, Metro needs to experiment with Rapid Express service again with this line. It’s just way too long of a routing, hence why routes like the 720 and 780 needed them as well, not the 740.