City transportation officials have unveiled a proposal to add protected bike lanes to Iris Avenue, one of the city’s busiest streets, where cyclists are currently separated from car traffic by painted white lines.
The proposed redesign is part of a larger effort to make city streets safer for cyclists, pedestrians and people who get around by means other than an automobile. The inclusion of protected bike lanes would likely involve the installation of a concrete curb to separate cyclists from drivers.
Transportation planners are still gathering community feedback on four proposed alternatives for Iris Avenue through townhalls and an online survey. A construction timeline has yet to be determined, a city official said.
Iris Avenue was constructed decades ago when North Boulder was largely undeveloped. In the 1970s, it was widened to four lanes in response to concerns about automobile traffic congestion, according to historical reports. It now bisects a residential neighborhood, and some residents view it as dangerous.
“It’s a terrible street. But it gets me to the grocery store and my kids’ schools,” Natalie Orphan, a resident who said she has lived along Iris for more than a decade. She said she drives, walks and rides her cargo bike along Iris. “I’m really excited that there is city interest in actually doing something, finally.”
Transportation advocates said the proposed design alternatives for Iris highlight a shift in thinking about who ought to be served by transportation infrastructure.
“Right now, it functions pretty darn well for the driving public. It functions very, very poorly for the elderly, the kids, the cyclists, the walkers,” Tila Duhaime, chair of the city’s Transportation Advisory Board, told Boulder Reporting Lab.
“I’m so pleased to see these different alternatives getting real consideration,” Duhaime added. “The fact that they all include a protected bike lane is an implicit acknowledgment that that kind of physical separation is necessary.”
The street is part of the city’s “high-risk network.” About 20,000 drivers pass through Iris on a typical weekday, according to city data. Most drivers exceed the 35 miles per hour speed limit, according to the city. Since 2017, the city has documented at least 89 crashes that have resulted in at least a possible injury, according to city crash data. About a quarter of those crashes involved a pedestrian or cyclist. The city’s Vision Zero Action Plan seeks to eliminate severe traffic crashes entirely by 2030.
To make the street safer, city transportation officials are proposing to add 5-foot bike lanes separated from traffic by a to-be-determined “vertical element,” such as a concrete curb. It would extend from 28th Street to Broadway. In two of the proposed design alternatives, the four traffic lanes would be reduced to three, with the middle lane to be used as a turning lane. Some proposals include widening the sidewalk or adding a buffer with a planting area for shrubs and trees, according to renderings.
City officials have said that the proposals took into account emergency response access and flood and fire evacuations.
The changes are expected to reduce the speed of drivers. Transportation advocates argue this is needed, but some residents have said drivers might just use neighborhood side streets to avoid traffic congestion.
“I am most concerned that this project will cause greater congestion on Iris and cause traffic to divert onto the side streets off of Iris,” a resident wrote in a response to a 2023 survey by the city. “Most of these streets are quiet, low traffic streets (many being official bike routes) and increased traffic would present safety risks to the pedestrians and bikers who frequent them.”
In response to this concern, the city is planning to add “traffic calming” features, such as speed bumps, to side streets such as Glenwood Drive, Grape Avenue and Kalmia Avenue.
The Boulder City Council in January 2022 made it a priority to retrofit the city’s core arterial network, which includes streets like Iris Avenue. In the coming years, the city plans to extend protected bike lanes along Baseline Avenue and Folsom Avenue.
“Iris is part of a wider program of fixing arterials to make them safer,” Councilmember Ryan Schuchard, a resident of the neighborhood near Iris Avenue and a former member of the Transportation Advisory Board, told Boulder Reporting Lab. “We are undergoing a process as a city of making badly needed and overdue improvements to our system.”
This gimmickry does not make bicyclists safe, despite all the self-congratulatory malarkey. For a town with a university, Boulder sure wallows in a lot of magical thinking.
Is that what the data show?
It appears that the council is trying to make it more and more difficult to drive in Boulder. This is another plan along with increasing the density of housing without parking availability that will further congest the streets of Boulder. The people who live in Boulder will be restricted by necessity to work only in Boulder and walk or bike to work. It is not practical but part of some utopia dream.
Why would we be restricted to work only in Boulder?
Excited about these proposed changes. I am sure some drivers will respond to these changes with cries of traffic and delays, but be realistic. This is a 1.25 mile section of road if you drive the entire project area – even if the changes reduce the number of traffic lanes from four to three, how much time would that actually add to your commute? As a driver and cyclist (who does not currently bike Iris because it does not feel safe), I think the tradeoff is totally worth it.
Zach, the problem is not how many driving lanes, the bigger problem is that Boulder Traffic planning doesn’t understand how to best move traffic through the city. For example, try driving on Broadway and being able to move through two traffic lights. If anything, the Traffic department relishes on creating congestion in the city. If Boulder really wanted to create a more bike and pedestrian friendly city, we would have small bodegas, coffee shops, restaurants and grocery stores throughout all neighborhoods – not just in large shopping centers. Have you ever driven on Broadway when the RTD buses fill entire city block – and worse, each bus has less than 10 passengers – often less than 5. I understand public transportation is important and vital to a healthy community; however, Boulder and RTD need to come up with a better plan. Here is an important question, why would Boulder and CU agree to build two hotels and a conference center on Broadway when the congestion between 8-10am and 3-6pm makes traveling a bumper to bumper ordeal? Or here’s another great question, why would Boulder Traffic authorize long term projects on 28th Street, 30th Street, and Foothills to run concurrently? Finally, have you noticed the amount of potholes and the amount of gravel and debris both on the driving lanes and bike lanes? Instead of focusing so much energy on banning natural gas from new residential builds, how about fixing the current infrastructure, how about working with Xcel energy to move overhead lines underground, to work with RTD to utilize smaller electric busses and offer point to point services, to permit the opening of small neighborhood grocery stores, coffee shops, bakeries, etc.
Erik – I agree with the points at the end of your response “Instead of focusing…”, but it feels like you’re using this single project to complain about many other issues in Boulder. Zooming out as you have, the Iris Ave project represents small improvements, but improvements nonetheless.
Reducing a busy main arterial from four lanes to effectively two lanes is always a smart move, especially when the other news of the day is the effort to increase the population and density of Boulder. No mention of the mayhem and chaos they created by doing the same thing on Folsom about a decade ago. I’m going to beat them to the punch and name this program SmartStreets, like so many of Boulder’s other “smart” endeavors that end up with disastrous results, but at least the media is there to cheer them on with nary a jaundiced eye.
I do remember the outcry about the proposed changes to Folsom. Much of the same things were said about that, from drivers, that are now being said about Iris. And yet the disaster did not happen. As a cyclist I now use it and it is much better.
We also hear far too little on these sorts of message boards from people who live along these corridors and those who walk and cycle along them. It is almost always the drivers perspective that is given.
And this is going to make you feel safe?
What data?
I think you’re replying to my question. You said these changes won’t make bicyclists safe. Based on what? Accident data from, say, the changes on Folsom? What are you basing your statement on?
It is the responsibility of people making extraordinary claims to support those claims, noy for skeptics to prove the claims lack substance. The City has admitted its Vision Zero flim flam has produced no positive results. If these magical ideas seem to show a positive outcome, even if it may not be statistically significant, that’s hailed as a success. If the results do not show a positive result, that’s used as a justification for more of the same. Since the City ignores citizen input on its pet projects, it’s just an exercise in Post=PR anyway.
The claim that these changes would improve safety for cyclists doesn’t seem extraordinary, but only looking at the data can prove it one way or another. I assume the city has looked at results of previous traffic modifications. If they’ve admitted the program has produced no positive results (as you claim), that definitely casts some doubt on predictions for new projects.
Charlie, I don’t know who you were communicating with, but the more population you add to BO, the more congestion, no matter, and actually BECAUSE of added transit opportunities and in spite of state of the art urban design with 15 min. neighborhoods. People cost infrastructure. The developers never have to pay the impact of their built environment.
I’m not sure what points you’re trying to make here. I’m just looking for objective ways to think about the proposed changes.
When you are dealing with a relatively small number of events in a large number of auto trips, it’s very hard to infer a small change is statistically significant or to assume causality.
Here’s an interesting tool I just found:
https://boulder.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/095b1408ece3466fa2e15a4b3a8f36c1
It doesn’t show many accidents involving bicycles on that stretch of Iris (about one per year). Are they solving a problem that doesn’t exist?
I also looked at the data because, yes, when I first listened to the city’s presentation on the project, I did not get what exact issues/problems they want to work on. Here is the tally from the city open database:
Total crash: 55 (2018); 58 (2019); 34 (2020); 33 (2021); 43 (2022); 36 (2023)
Incapacitated injury: 4 (2018); 1 (2021); 1 (2023)
Bicycle involved: 8 (2018); 1 (2019); 2 (2020); 0 (2021); 3 (2022); 2 (2023)
Pedestrian involved: 1 (2018); 1 (2020); 1 (2022); 2 (2023).
So presumably these are not many cases for a thorough analysis about locations and causes to generate targeted and focused solutions.
They’re solving a problem that doesn’t exist with a solution that doesn’t work. The “protected” bike lanes would not protect anyone from a motor scooter, another bicycle, or even a stiff breeze.
There are plenty of bike routes north and south of Iris. Why mixing moving objects of vastly different speeds in one narrow space? Collisions happen because of high relative velocity. In my humble opinion, it’s better to remove the bike lanes on Iris as on sections of Broadway. You could use the extra space for plants if nothing else – mitigating some noise and pollution (another topic). This does not negate improving safety on Iris. Then, work on better connectivity of off-Iris bike options.
Thank you for those facts. The facts haven’t stopped the boosters of these white plastic pole projects (a done deal, incidentally, the city does care what the public thinks) from piling on to anyone who questions them in NextDoor. After dozens and dozens of posts, I tiptoed quietly out. Watching paint dry is more intellectually nourishing. Still I’m left to wonder why the people pushing for these things are so passionate. Do they believe their own jive? Do they have some kind of financial stake?
I live in NW Boulder. I drive Iris often. More bikers fly down Broadway and don’t turn left at Iris. They stay on Broadway and the sidewalks. There are very few bikers on Iris.
There are lots of bike riders on Folsom at “rush hour” these days. Are there lots of bikers who want to use Iris but don’t feel it’s safe. I’m skeptical. The car lines at schools in NW Boulder in the afternoon are a hazard.
There’s no good way to cut through to the heart of Boulder from Iris on a bike. You have to go to Folsom. My thought is Iris needs to lead to good N/S route to Ideal Market, East and West Pearl. Presently we go down 4th Street (a pothole, rough road nightmare) from there we can zig zag to downtown Boulder. A better plan for getting bikers to downtown would be appreciated.
I also live in N Boulder along Broadway and agree that it would be helpful to have more direct routes into downtown. It’s very difficult to cross Broadway as a pedestrian or cyclist. I usually take the 13th St bikeway past ideal market. However, for cyclists and peds going west from North Boulder I think this will be a huge upgrade. It will also make crossing Iris much safer
As someone who lives close to Iris, and drives and bikes along it daily, I am very excited for these changes. Attempting to cross Iris at the crosswalk is always a scary part of my day as people rarely stop for you. Adding a protected bike is much needed. Most cyclists avoid iris because it is dangerous.
I think the city should address problems where the problems are. From 2017 to 2023, there were 16 bike-involved accidents on Iris (out of total 265 crashes, mostly cars, 6 involving pedestrians): 6 at the 28th St intersection, 7 at the Folsom St intersection, and 1 each at the 19th, 16th, and Broadway intersections. Iris is unpleasant as a bike route, noisy with toxic vehicle exhausts, and pot holes and debris on the bike lane. Even with improvement, I would still prefer bike on side streets and bike paths to get to places. As some people mentioned, the city has already invested in the very nice off-road cycling network around town. Why not use this opportunity to improve it?
I seem able to survive 4th Street.
But those “protected” bike lanes protect from nothing.
Fix the existing pavement and pot holes in the city before messing up Iris.
He’s not wrong. Many potholes are in the bicycle routes. Why are potholes so hard to fix?
The amount of automobile traffic congestion that this will cause is a dangerous safety hazard in case of evacuation routes needed in emergencies such as wildfire evacuation. Just look at what happened in Maui when there was not enough roads for people to escape the fast moving wildfires where so many were trapped and died by the deadly blaze. Wildfires are a constant threat as evidence by the Marshall fire in Louisville and Superior. As a resident of Boulder County in the foothills, this traffic plan is very short sighted in regards to allowing adequate automobile traffic evacuation space. The Boulder City Council should reconsider this horrible plan that will only cause more congestion and traffic jams and is disregarding the safety of thousands of residents.
With what we’ve been seeing in the downturn of quality of life in Boulder the last several years, I do not trust the motives of the plan. How about fixing all the potholes to keep our cars safe? and to decrease our driving and biking stress regarding trying to avoid all the potholes?! They are trying to reduce our driving and are making things harder and more complicated. Iris is needed as wide as it is for good traffic flow and residential transport. I don’t hear bicyclists demanding improvements nor is the need really there. It is not a high accident zone. Boulder is becoming more ugly, boxy, congested and crime-ridden. Citizens, speak up!
I’ve been Boulder cyclist for about 60 years now, and I have never deigned to ride on the silly Folsom road furniture, although I cross it on my way to thee dedicated bike path that is only about 500 feet east.
Some day it will be someone’s bright idea to increase the capacity of the road by locating the bike lanes on less traveled streets and adding lanes. They will be earning big bucks.
Bikes find Folsom concrete separators more dangerous within the constraints they pose: other bikes rocketing by with less room to maneuver.
Yes, and catch a wheel on one of those separators and you will go down.
Any project that lowers vehicle miles traveled is a positive. If Iris becomes harder to navigate by car–great! That will disincentivize driving and incentivize more motorists to walk, bike, or combine trips at less-busy times of day. If we’re too afraid to take things away from drivers, we’ll never actually make progress on improving climate outcomes, air quality, or public health and safety. Those are more important by far than shaving a few minutes off drivers’ commutes.