News, Analysis and Opinion for the Informed Boulder Resident
Saturday March 25th 2023

Support the Blue Line

Subscribe to the Blue Line

That's what she said

city council transportation energy municipalization xcel housing urban planning april fools bicycles climate action density election 2011 affordable housing boulder county open space election renewables agriculture CU local food climate change election 2013 development youth jefferson parkway pedestrian election 2015 preservation Rocky Flats election 2017 recreation BVSD mountain bikes immigration boards and commissions plan boulder farming fracking GMOs transit urban design decarbonization planning board fires colorado politics wildlife land use smart regs downtown architecture new era colorado transit village parking homeless journalism plutonium natural gas ghgs commuting radioactive waste rental coal height limits taxes april fools 2015 walkability historic preservation energy efficiency historic district Neighborhoods diversity zoning population growth growth students North Boulder flood arts gardens education University Hill water supply bus election 2010 solar election 2018 nutrition RTD sprawl water quality election 2012 groundwater bike lane electric utility safety library april fools 2016 renewable energy affairs of the heart organic flood plain wetlands planning reserve zero waste mayor blue line electric vehicle ballot right-sizing street design transportation master plan obama hazardous waste county commissioners politics hogan-pancost longmont colorado legislature climate smart loan diagonal plaza campaign finance flood mitigation bears Mapleton solar panels PV recycling comprehensive plan golden conservation easement epa boulder junction pesticide congestion food drought road diet oil bus rapid transit commercial development inequality election 2016 flooding planning daily camera public health community cycles BVCP ecocycle Newlands automobile PUC climate change deniers children david miller ken wilson sam weaver community league of women voters wind power public spaces boulder creek crime mlk civil rights west tsa marijuana technology arizona Orchard Grove EV green points al bartlett Whittier city attorney

Safety First!


I love living in a dense, urban environment. I’ve lived in the urban core of both Amsterdam and San Francisco for extended periods, where I enjoyed the ability to walk to work, shopping, restaurants, and entertainment. I cherish the human contact and immersion in outdoor life that’s a part of walking. I see birds and storefront displays, and get some great people-watching in along the way, all as part of simple transportation.

Fred Ecks on a bike tour

For longer distances, riding a bicycle is my preferred mode of travel. I’m excited to see Boulder pursuing the sort of development that makes all this possible.

When I first moved here in 1992, I felt safe roaming all of Boulder city and county, both on foot and by bicycle. But in recent years, I’ve had far too many near-misses with cars. I’ve been nearly hit while walking in quite a few crosswalks, and been grazed by cars when cycling in our sub-par bike lanes. In the past three years alone, five friends have been hit while cycling.  One suffered a broken collarbone, another a broken hip, and a third shattered a windshield with her face.

Not surprisingly, I’ve come to drive much more, and walk or ride my bicycle much less these days.

Boulder is now in the midst of a building boom, rapidly expanding housing and employment in the city. It’s become a highly-charged debate, with the participants quickly categorized into “pro-density” and “anti-density” (or worse yet, NIMBY). The two sides are talking past each other, as pointed out by Lisa Morzel.

The trouble is not density. The trouble is density without the transportation infrastructure to safely support the increased demands of new residents and employees.  Consistently, the concerns regarding density surround traffic, safety, and quality of life. Gridlock serves no one, and only increases risks to pedestrians and cyclists, while making everyone’s life difficult.

Many cities, including San Francisco, have embarked upon a Vision Zero campaign to address pedestrian collisions and fatalities. In San Francisco, an average of three pedestrians are hit by cars every day.  If Boulder continues to develop and increase density while continuing to attempt to move automobiles quickly, we’re on this same course.  At San Francisco’s rate of traffic accidents involving pedestrians, Boulder would have a person on foot hit or killed almost every other day.  Boulder may soon need its own Vision Zero campaign, to address safety issues resulting from the increased motor vehicle traffic.

Boulder’s Transportation Master Plan continues to include an objective to maintain our roadways such that no more than 20% of them are rated at Level of Service “F” for motor vehicles. As a result, if traffic counts are high on a section of roadway, Boulder’s traffic engineers are advised not to do anything to impede that flow of car traffic. The engineers can’t increase bicycle safety or widen the sidewalks on Folsom or south 30th Street because that would require taking roadway space away from the car traffic.

With the currently-planned development for the Google campus, Reve, S*Park, and Boulder Junction, we’ll quickly be leaps and bounds beyond any traffic counts that might allow a traffic engineer to re-envision these roadways.  Although all these developments are claimed to be “car-lite,” with limited parking, parking is parking.  There will be more cars. Our traffic counts will increase.

Rather than build denser developments first and address safety problems later, Boulder needs to be proactive and provide safety for human-powered transportation first, so we don’t need a Vision Zero initiative later.

I love living in a dense urban environment. But we need safety first!

Rate this article: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (6 votes, average: 4.33 out of 5)