Caltrans drops road‑diet option for Foothill Boulevard project after public feedback; will add protected bike facilities without removing lanes or parking

Caltrans representatives told the La Verne City Council on March 17 that they will not pursue an earlier “road‑diet” alternative for the Foothill Boulevard Complete Streets project after an online surge of public comment shifted survey responses against removing travel lanes and parking.

"We heard you," Marlon Regisfore, deputy district director for Caltrans, said, explaining that the project is programmed in the State Highway Operations and Protection (SHOP) program and that its funding is secure in the current program. "There will not be any impacts as you're alluding to the federal administration in terms of how they treat active transportation projects." (Marlon Regisfore)

Benjamin Medina, community engagement coordinator and senior transportation planner for Caltrans District 7, presented the project scope and outreach summary and said rank‑choice survey analysis and later online comment showed increased opposition to the lane‑removal alternative. Medina said Caltrans will keep all existing travel lanes and on‑street parking and focus instead on designs that introduce protected bicycle facilities and pedestrian improvements without removing lanes or parking.

The agency described two primary treatments: class 4 protected bikeways (physically separated, with options ranging from plastic bollards to concrete curbs) in constrained segments and class 2 striped bike lanes elsewhere. To accommodate protected lanes while maintaining travel lanes, Caltrans proposes narrowing the center median in some locations from about 16 feet down to roughly 8–12 feet and realigning travel lanes to 11 feet.

"We want concrete curbs where feasible because it makes maintenance and safety better," Medina said, noting a preference among some commenters for physical separation rather than paint or temporary posts. (Benjamin Medina)

Residents who spoke during public comment gave mixed views. Miss Beauchamp urged caution about reducing the raised median under the 210 overpass, saying that wide concrete mass helps mitigate seismic load transfer and protect bridge columns. "I don't want people to feel a false sense of security with this separation," she said, citing curb strikes in nearby jurisdictions. (Beauchamp)

Other residents, including Lucas LeView and Chantal Steber, urged stronger, continuous protected facilities and asked that Caltrans favor concrete curbs rather than plastic bollards and address gaps where protected segments begin and end. "The discontinuity in protected facilities will mean bicyclists will not use them," LeView said. (Lucas LeView)

Engineering staff responded to safety and structural concerns: Martin, the Caltrans project engineer, said the design will include a vehicle‑resistant barrier around bridge columns (a Type 6 DMF) and that lowering the raised median will not affect the deep seismic supports for the overpass. He also described bike detection and signal accommodations — push buttons for bicyclists and green pavement markings through ramp crossings — and said lighting upgrades are not currently programmed, though pedestrian push‑button improvements are included.

Council members asked about schedule and cost. Caltrans staff said construction is currently planned to start around 2029–2030, with a one‑to‑two‑year construction duration once underway, and that the current planning estimate is roughly $32 million with contingencies and a formal project risk assessment.

Caltrans committed to returning with additional materials and to coordinate with the city on specifics such as median widths, landscaping, lighting at underpasses, and signal timing at intersections, and encouraged continued public engagement.

Next steps: Caltrans will follow up with staff and written materials, and the agency said it will return to the council with additional details and updates as the design advances.