After considerable discussion at a study session prior to the vote, the Beverly Hills City Council voted Tuesday to approve a contract worth more than $5 million to repair a section of Coldwater Canyon Drive between Beverly Boulevard and Monte Cielo Drive as part of a larger, multi-year effort to rehabilitate the street.

However, much of the discussion revolved around a larger overall plan to revitalize the corridor, most prominently surrounding potential crosswalks on Coldwater Canyon. While nothing was set in stone following the study session, the contract for the street repairs was approved at the city council meeting later that night.

Beverly Hills started its effort to revitalize the almost-mile-long corridor in 2020 after residents brought forward concerns about speeding and traffic safety issues in the corridor. This has resulted in a multi-step Coldwater Roadway Rehabilitation Project to reconfigure and repair the street. Additionally, parking striping on the street will be added and center lane striping was installed in March 2023 to discourage passing.

Most recently, a project to replace the water main which cost just under $8 million was completed in April. The next step for the city is to rehabilitate the street itself, including improving drainage and replacing damaged curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Spot drainage will also be installed to help capture groundwater that has previously caused issues on the sidewalk.

Three additional crosswalks were also proposed as part of the project after receiving resident requests in 2022: one at Loma Linda Drive, one at Lindacrest Drive, and the other at Monte Cielo Drive. However other residents questioned the need for crosswalks at a meeting held in summer 2023, and city staff modified the plan to account for some of those concerns.

According to City Engineer Darren Grilley, distances were a major factor in the number of crosswalks. Five locations were originally considered, but Grilley said that the approximately 1,000 feet between each of the three currently planned crosswalks was more appropriate for the area because of its lower traffic. 

“There’s no hard standard for crosswalk spacing,” Grilley said “but we looked at a variety of standards around the country to look at what people are comfortable with in different environments.”

These crosswalks would be equipped with high visibility signs and markings, pedestrian-activated rectangular rapid flashing beach (RRFB) which is recognized by the FDA as a tool that improves pedestrian safety. There will be additional traditional streetlights installed to improve visibility at night, and the Lindacrest crosswalk was also proposed to have a raised median to separate the two lanes of traffic.

But some of the residents in the area did not care for these crosswalks, with several public comments coming in from residents who believed they were unnecessary on the street or would not be safe without a traffic signal. However, the concerns in the area — particularly regarding speeding and the ability to safely cross — are alleviated by crosswalks and the lights they will be equipped with according to Grilley.

Aspects like stopping sight distance — the distance a driver can see ahead of them on the road to safely stop before hitting an object — and the speed limit were also considered by the city in the implementation of these crosswalks. 

Councilmember Mary Wells asked about plans to put preemptive signs for drivers heading towards the improvements that would let drivers know that crosswalks were coming, which Grilley confirmed. She also asked about the potential for traffic signals at these crosswalks, noting it was preferred by many people as an option during the earliest parts of the planning process.

Just as it was at the beginning of the process, traffic signals are not feasible because none of the intersections meet the guidelines for having one. Grilley explained that the city uses a federal guideline — the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices — to determine where these signals are able to be placed.

Still curious about the potential for traffic signals in the project, Councilmember Craig Corman pondered exactly what about the guidance prevented the city from installing these signals. One of the only safety-related guidelines considered for traffic signals is the recent crash history, namely whether there were at least five vehicle accidents in a 12 month period that were “correctable by a traffic signal,” Grilley said.

He also asked about the potential consequences of going against the guidelines, which could put the city at legal risk should a person blame a traffic signal for causing an accident. The idea of a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon — a three-light signal that displays red lights similar to a traditional traffic light when a pedestrian is ready to walk — was also proposed by Corman during his comments at the study session.

Just like the previous two councilmembers, John Mirisch was still not clear on what was stopping the city, and City Attorney Larry Weiner explained that from a legal perspective, having a signal installed against guidance without a study to prove the need for it would leave the city open to litigation.

Mirisch assumed that these studies would focus on the traffic speed and whether or not it slowed cars down, but Grilley explained that the traffic signal was, at its core, designed to assign the right of way to different directions and pedestrians as opposed to anything related to speed. 

He argued that a red light implies a legal impetus to stop, which provides more protection to pedestrians, while the flashing yellow lights proposed only require a driver to yield. Even without a light, drivers legally must yield to pedestrians in a walkway, and Grilley explained that the RRFBs proposed for the crosswalks are meant to make pedestrian traffic more visible to drivers.

This did not satisfy Mirisch, who emphatically suggested stop signs or traffic signals for safety purposes and expressed his frustration with the obstacles.

“It just seems absurd that if we wanted to install stop signs or lights where we know they are speeding and we can’t do it without a study, Mirisch said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Mayor Lester Friedman shared his belief that the Monte Cielo Drive crosswalk would be superfluous, but that he would support a traffic signal at one of the other two potential crosswalks should they be installed. He gave the motion to staff to continue work on the project but did not want to decide on the crosswalks until studies for potential stop signs or traffic signals at the crosswalks were completed.

Discussions on the potential crosswalks and other aspects of the Coldwater Roadway Rehabilitation Project will return to the council once the study is completed.

For the street repairs, workers on the project will be working between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, similar to the schedule used for the water main improvement project. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in October 2024 and is expected to last about one year.

Photo by Aowsakorn on iStockphoto.com