The City of Boulder is seeking feedback on proposed changes to a stretch of Folsom Street from Pine Street to Colorado Avenue, including wider sidewalks and new protected bike lanes in both directions.
The section currently includes painted bike lanes and, in some areas, four lanes of vehicle traffic. The proposal would reduce the number of traffic lanes to as few as two in certain segments, while maintaining existing lane counts near some intersections. The bike lanes would be separated from traffic lanes with a physical barrier. Intersections at Pine, Spruce, Pearl and Walnut streets would be redesigned as protected intersections, which slow turning vehicles and shorten crossing distances for cyclists and pedestrians.
The city published a virtual open house on June 10 outlining the proposed redesign. Residents can submit feedback online.
The project is part of Boulder’s Core Arterial Network (CAN) initiative, a broader effort to make the city’s busiest streets safer. One goal of the latest Folsom Street redesign is to reduce crashes — especially those involving cyclists and pedestrians — while still accommodating travel times for drivers and transit users.
Folsom Street is considered part of Boulder’s “high-risk network” due to its crash history. Between 2019 and 2023, 218 crashes were reported, including seven that resulted in serious injuries. All of those involved vulnerable road users such as cyclists or pedestrians, according to the city.
The Folsom Street project remains in the design phase and is not yet funded for construction. A formal recommendation is expected to go before the Transportation Advisory Board and Boulder City Council later this summer.
Last month, the city proposed a redesign for 30th Street that includes protected bike lanes and fewer vehicle lanes north of Pearl Street, aiming to improve safety for people walking, biking, and using other non-car travel.
I do not understand how Boulder City traffic engineers are working in a vacuum. We have more than 50,000 cars enter the city every week day and yet we continue to reduce lanes by creating safe bicycle and pedestrian lanes from what was formerly traffic lanes. How does this reduce congestion on the city streets. When it takes 25 minutes to go from South Boulder to Mapleton on Broadway 3.8 miles on any given weekday between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 pm we have a serious problem that is not going to solved by reducing traffic lanes. All of the money Boulder has spent on redesigning roads has not increased bicycle traffic and has not reduced vehicular traffic. Moreover, the RTD buses add to the traffic, particularly as RTD runs all of the buses on the same schedule. Imagine driving on Broadway from south to north and getting stuck behind not one bus but 4 or 5 busses all running on the same schedule and all stoping at every other block. We need to rethink how our public transportation. 1) smaller busses, 2) moving the central RTD station from downtown to the Table Mesa Station and running one or two buses downtown, 3) converting all buses to electric. Given the ridership on RTD during non rush hour is less than 5 passengers – Boulder should be giving free rides to all residents. Lastly, if we can build a multi use path to Longmont, we can certainly have added light rail or a mono rail system in the same corridor. I’m all for spending $1 billion dollars for to make cycling safer between Boulder and Longmont. Instead of wasting money on studies and legal fees we need to start designing better vehicular traffic routes that reduce interactions between pedestrians and cyclists.
You could consider taking one of those buses. Don’t complain about traffic if you are the traffic.
Jake, unfortunately that is a very idealist and unrealistic stance. It is well known that there is a huge gap in bus routes and availability, making it very impractical to ‘just take a bus’ as the solution.
I live in north Boulder and work in Broomfield. Getting to the bus stop alone is a 15 minute walk. Then 3 transfers and not even a close stop to my building in Broomfield, so another long walk. All told well over 1 hour ++ and very impractical just to get to work. In winter, no way.
BTW, I bike commute 28 miles/day to/from the office 3 days/week in good weather, so I try to do my part, but even as an avid cyclist I don’t support removing motor vehicle lanes. There are MILES of protected bike & ped ONLY paths in the city that get you most anywhere you want just as quickly as surface streets, people are just lazy and want to go on the motor vehicle grid, or they just don’t know how to navigate them. Spend some money promoting those – we invested millions, and maintenance is crazy good: plowed in winter before most city roads!
You say it’s “unrealistic” and yet redirecting resources from private motor vehicles to public and active transport is the _only_ proven way to reduce traffic congestion, air pollution, noise, emissions, injurious crashes, and the litany of other problems car-centric transportation policies lead to. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in cities all over the planet which have successfully course-corrected and in every single one of these cities there was an army of Gregs (a vocal minority, it turned out) standing in the way of progress.
Agree 100%. We invite more and more people to live here in Boulder, and yet we keep reducing car traffic lanes in favor of bike lanes. This just does not compute!
It absolutely does compute, and I can happily recommend some books if you’d like to increase your computing power. Many of us you’re “inviting” to move here (not feeling a very warm invite currently as a migrant) don’t have cars and risk our lives every day to get around in a way that doesn’t harm others. In an inclusive society, not needing a car to get around should be a choice. You personally might not make that choice, but you’d be surprised how many do when you empower them to, as has been demonstrated in cities the world over.
City Council elections are this November…good time to pay attention to those that keep supporting this ridiculous idealistic view and vote them out.
None of your complaints seem to have anything to do with the Folsom project. The Core Arterial Network Initiative is focused on safety, not reducing car congestion. 218 crashes on this street over four years sure sounds like there is room for improvement. While Broadway can be relatively slow (because it goes through several high pedestrian traffic areas with many traffic lights), 25 minutes seems dramatic outside of standard commute hours. Even if it was, what is the serious problem – that you need to leave 5 minutes earlier?
Amen. (And I’m atheist).
Thanks Erik!
I agree, especially since Council is planning new housing for about 42,000 more people! I especially agree we need smaller buses -actually 15-passenger tall-roofed vans are perfect for most local Boulder routes and cost TEN times less than the local buses they use, use about FOUR times less fuel, and, weighing 5 times less, do 5 x 5 x 5 x 5 = 625 times less road damage due to the “Fourth Power Law”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
Meanwhile, many of us, most of the time, can use an electric bike to get around MUCH faster than a car or bus in most parts of time. I make it from Table Mesa to Mapleton in about 12 minutes.
Great idea. “Jitney’s.” The big buses are almost empty. Smaller and more frequent and east- west routes would help.
lol car brain
Erik,
You are spot on. The CAN approach is fundamentally flawed. It is a solution that does not realistically address the needs of all users of high volume corridors. It is being marketed to us as being 1. Safer, and 2. This will increase bus/public transit usage. Despite significant public resistance, the council went ahead with this. The environmental impact has not been adequately considered. This will cause more green house gasses. Yes, a few more people might ride the bus, but this will be offset by additional idling of other traffic (in particular busses and heavy trucks). Moreover, it would be far safer to separate cyclists entirely from high volume corridors. This option has been presented to the transportation folks and council by many in the community. They have all been brushed aside. This will be a financial boondoggle for the taxpayers and will not make a significant dent in safety, the quality of transportation and address the needs of the community. It is an edifice to wishful thinking. If we build it, they will come. Traffic doesn’t evaporate just because you take away lanes and throughput. Moreover, the city wants to significantly increase density. This will make it only worse. Public policy should be based on data and facts, not wishful thinking. We should be better than that.
Jake, you didn’t consider the remarks about bus congestion and the need for smaller scale vans.
Here you go: https://www.flickr.com/photos/carltonreid/6440857817/
Finally they are working on this road! It’s been a death trap for decades. Glad this city council has the political willpower to do this and support the engineers. I know the motorists are going to complain, but this project is a good for everybody else. Living in Goss-Grove, we desperately need this project to happen before more neighbors are hurt or killed by motorists in cars.
Let’s support the transportation department and get this funded and built ASAP!
B. Stephen- Well I’m a cycler, drive my car 4 times a year, and I don’t support this. I support lowering Boulder’s population and required enforcement of the jobs/housing balance, which will lower demand on the arterials.
I agree! While I wish we could magically make more room for cars, it’s a better decision to support our town’s bicyclists, pedestrians & micromobility with greater weight. Rather than complaining about traffic if you are the traffic, help reduce by alternative use!
We don’t need to rethink public transportation, we need to rethink cars. Several cities have prioritized alternative trnasportation over cars, and Boulder is next. Instead of being angry at the amount of car traffic in Boulder, try riding a bike, scooter, skateboard, or other alternative modes of transportation instead. I personally hate it when I have to drive my car here, which is why I bike commute and rarely drive my car. That’s the way of life here, it’s better for your health, and the safety of everyone else around you. Thumbs up to Boulder for making these improvements <3.
That is a great idea, and, having lived here 30 years I used to ride my bike more for errands. However, the bike theft when warm weather comes in got to such levels that I did not want to chance that (even with a kryptonite U-lock. These have been videoed getting cut off in the middle of the day). It is a complicated problem Boulder has put on itself: more crime from those looking to buy drugs (and we supply giant Sharps containers for needle disposal); lax camping laws; 3-4 story market rate apartments getting crammed in. We cannot house everyone that wants to live here. There are families I know who live in Broomfield because they get a house, garage, yard for the price of an apartment rental. Another complication is families and senior citizens. Seniors aren’t all going to hop on bikes and scooters. Families with kids are carpooling/driving across town for baseball, gymnastics, soccer, etc. I am a mom with 2 kids, now grown. It was not so simple. There are families that have gotten their kids e-bikes…Kids don’t know the traffic laws/don’t follow the rules and zip between bike lanes and sidewalks they see fit on some pretty fast bikes. Alternative transportation, sure…but too many close calls. Let’s add scooters in there, riding on the wrong side of the street then being left randomly and very much in the middle of a sidewalk. Wait til the CU students come in…There isn’t one simple solution.
I live close to Folsom and see the traffic, especially those driving in and out during rush hour. The city touts that the number of lanes will be the same, which is not wrong. However, it is deceiving. From Canyon Blvd northbound, there will only be one lane. From Canyon and Folsom running southbound, there will only be one lane. I already see a line of cars coming in on Folsom in the mornings where there is only one lane north of Pearl St. This will only get longer and cars will be sitting in one lane of traffic longer.
Also, do we really need to spend money on trees (although they will look nice if they grow)? I see those islands as an opportunity to J-walk and not be seen by drivers. At least now, when folks decide to run across the street, you can see them.