Monterey Road Issue
Background:
In its present form, Monterey Road, one of the city’s main thoroughfares, is in dire need of repair as motorists make their way down a bumpy path, avoiding potholes –many of them patched – and rough terrain, from Pasadena Avenue east to Fair Oaks Avenue. Due to federal requirements if any significant work is performed on the street, the city may need to address a some ADA issues, mainly where sidewalks are narrow due to utility boxes and light poles. Councilmembers are looking at a variety of options, from simply resurfacing the street to reducing the number of lanes as part of what is known as a “road diet.”
In its present form, Monterey Road, one of the city’s main thoroughfares, is in dire need of repair as motorists make their way down a bumpy path, avoiding potholes –many of them patched – and rough terrain, from Pasadena Avenue east to Fair Oaks Avenue. Due to federal requirements if any significant work is performed on the street, the city may need to address a some ADA issues, mainly where sidewalks are narrow due to utility boxes and light poles. Councilmembers are looking at a variety of options, from simply resurfacing the street to reducing the number of lanes as part of what is known as a “road diet.”
Study:
The South Pasadena City Council approved a study to be carried out by Minagar & Associates to look into the feasibility of a road diet along Monterey Road. The firm describes a road diet as “essentially a reduction in the number of existing travel lanes, and a reassignment/redesign of the remaining roadway space for other safety features such as bicycle lanes, pedestrian crossing enhancements, traffic calming features and/or protected parking lanes/bays.T
The resulting report from Minagar & Associates was presented to the Public Works Commission on Feb. 11, 2015.
The South Pasadena City Council approved a study to be carried out by Minagar & Associates to look into the feasibility of a road diet along Monterey Road. The firm describes a road diet as “essentially a reduction in the number of existing travel lanes, and a reassignment/redesign of the remaining roadway space for other safety features such as bicycle lanes, pedestrian crossing enhancements, traffic calming features and/or protected parking lanes/bays.T
The resulting report from Minagar & Associates was presented to the Public Works Commission on Feb. 11, 2015.
WISPPA's Position:
WISPPA supports the findings of the Public Works Commission as follows.
On February 11, 2015, the South Pasadena Public Works Commission met and reviewed the study regarding a road diet on Monterey Road. The Commission found* unanimously that there should be no road diet on Monterey Road because of (1) the risks that over-saturated traffic will back up onto the Gold Line tracks (2) the inevitable diversion of traffic onto side street (3) the significant driving delays that would result and (4) a road diet would be inconsistent with the goals of getting traffic to flow more smoothly on major arterials and reducing traffic on residential streets.
*The findings of the Commission set forth here are based on notes taken at the meeting of what the Commission concluded regarding the road diet, but are not necessarily the exact words of the Commission.
WISPPA supports the findings of the Public Works Commission as follows.
On February 11, 2015, the South Pasadena Public Works Commission met and reviewed the study regarding a road diet on Monterey Road. The Commission found* unanimously that there should be no road diet on Monterey Road because of (1) the risks that over-saturated traffic will back up onto the Gold Line tracks (2) the inevitable diversion of traffic onto side street (3) the significant driving delays that would result and (4) a road diet would be inconsistent with the goals of getting traffic to flow more smoothly on major arterials and reducing traffic on residential streets.
*The findings of the Commission set forth here are based on notes taken at the meeting of what the Commission concluded regarding the road diet, but are not necessarily the exact words of the Commission.
Ron Rosen's Report on the Monterey Road Diet Study discussed at the Public Works Commission meeting on Feb. 11th, 2015:
The commission was well versed in the issues and asked excellent questions of the consultant. Ultimately, those questions resulted in the consultant acknowledging that Monterey is already over-saturated with traffic and that reducing the number of lanes would make a bad situation worse. John Fisher explored the effect of the resulting traffic backups on the Gold Line crossings and got the consultant to acknowledge that the backups with a road diet would create unacceptable risks of traffic backing up onto the tracks at all three crossings. It wasn't advocacy that prevailed; it was facts.
In the end the Commission made several unanimous recommendations: that the city should make ADA improvements to the sidewalks on Monterey; that El Centro should be used as a bike route and "sharrows" should be added if necessary; that there should be no road diet due to (1) the risks that over-saturated traffic will back up to the Gold Line tracks at the three crossings on Monterey, (2) the inevitable diversion of traffic to side streets, (3) the significant driving delays that would result, and (4) the road diet would be inconsistent with the goal of getting traffic to flow more smoothly on major arterials and reducing traffic on residential streets.
Newspaper Articles
Street Needs Makeover South Pas City Council Considers ‘Road Diet’ for Monterey Road
Study Indicates ‘Road Diet’ Feasible on Monterey Road
Ron Rosen's letter to the South Pasadena Review
The commission was well versed in the issues and asked excellent questions of the consultant. Ultimately, those questions resulted in the consultant acknowledging that Monterey is already over-saturated with traffic and that reducing the number of lanes would make a bad situation worse. John Fisher explored the effect of the resulting traffic backups on the Gold Line crossings and got the consultant to acknowledge that the backups with a road diet would create unacceptable risks of traffic backing up onto the tracks at all three crossings. It wasn't advocacy that prevailed; it was facts.
In the end the Commission made several unanimous recommendations: that the city should make ADA improvements to the sidewalks on Monterey; that El Centro should be used as a bike route and "sharrows" should be added if necessary; that there should be no road diet due to (1) the risks that over-saturated traffic will back up to the Gold Line tracks at the three crossings on Monterey, (2) the inevitable diversion of traffic to side streets, (3) the significant driving delays that would result, and (4) the road diet would be inconsistent with the goal of getting traffic to flow more smoothly on major arterials and reducing traffic on residential streets.
Newspaper Articles
Street Needs Makeover South Pas City Council Considers ‘Road Diet’ for Monterey Road
Study Indicates ‘Road Diet’ Feasible on Monterey Road
Ron Rosen's letter to the South Pasadena Review
"The recent study by Minagar and Associates regarding a proposed 'road diet' for Monterey Road states that removing one lane in each direction on Monterey west of Fair Oaks is "feasible," but it doesn't say that it's necessarily a good idea. The study predicts delays in travel time of as much as 150% in eastbound travel time and 140% in westbound travel time in the morning peak hours. This means that travel time would be more than doubled during morning rush hour. These kinds of delays are not acceptable in my view and in the views of many, if not most, other citizens. One thing is certain: increased traffic congestion on Monterey cannot help but increase congestion on Fair Oaks, Fremont, Meridian and other streets. Easier bike and pedestrian travel for a handful of people does not justify impeding the travel of up to 3,400 cars a day, when we already have bottlenecks on Fair Oaks and Fremont. The study concludes that the city should determine whether "the resulting increases in peak-hour travel time and delays, and decreases in arterial travel speeds are found to be an acceptable tradeoff . . . in light of converse benefits . . ." Whether anything at all should be done to Monterey Road is a question that's very much up in the air. "
