1 Exhibit 3
City of Glendale Vision Zero Action Plan Walk Audit
April 2025
Introduction and Methodology
The City of Glendale is developing a Vision Zero Action Plan with the goal of eliminating pedestrian fatalities. Vision Zero challenges the traditional approach to traffic safety by recognizing that severe traffic collisions are neither random nor unavoidable; rather, with the right strategies and dedication of resources, they can be prevented.
Vision Zero takes a systemic approach to traffic safety by making streets more forgiving through proactive, cost-effective measures designed to prevent severe and fatal collisions. This comprehensive strategy integrates engineering, education, and enforcement to enhance street safety. Through the Vision Zero Action Plan, the City of Glendale will develop strategic recommendations to create safer streets for all road users, reducing both fatalities and serious injuries.
Vision Zero Action Plan Objectives
The Vision Zero Action Plan aims to:
• Identify priority areas for street safety improvements. • Recommend policy changes to improve street design, operational standards, and project delivery processes that enhance safety.
• Strengthen policies and programs identified in the Citywide Pedestrian Plan. • Promote and enforce safe driving behavior to enhance street safety. • Address areas where specific age groups are disproportionately impacted by collisions. • Eliminate severe and fatal traffic collisions on city streets.
Walk Audit Methodology
“A walk audit is an assessment of the pedestrian safety, accessibility, and comfort of a particular area.”
1 Walk audits serve as a key tool for assessing current street conditions, engaging with residents and other stakeholders, and gathering community input on safety improvements.
Residents, who know their neighborhoods best, were invited to participate in walk audits
1 “How to conduct a walk audit in your community,” AmericaWalks.org, October 2, 2020, https://americawalks.org/how-to-conduct-a-walk-audit-in-your-community-quick-video-guide-for-assessing-your- neighborhood-walkability/
2 alongside city staff and consultant team members. Each walk audit covered approximately one mile and lasted between one hour and ninety minutes, depending on the number of stops for discussions about observed conditions. The walks took place between March 19 and March 22, 2025, covering five routes selected based on the following criteria:
• Geographic diversity across different Glendale neighborhoods. • Proximity to key destinations such as schools, parks, medical facilities, and shopping centers.
• Alignment with the High Injury Network, prioritizing areas with higher collision rates. • Exclusion of areas recently assessed in the 2024 Metro NoHo to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit Walk Audit and the Citywide Pedestrian Plan Walk Audits.
Walk Audit Locations and Schedule
1. Walk Audit #1 – Riverside Rancho (West Glendale)
o Date/Time: Wednesday, March 19, 4:00 PM
o Meeting Location: Bette Davis Picnic Area, 1850 Riverside Dr.
2. Walk Audit #2 – Tropico (South Glendale)
o Date/Time: Thursday, March 20, 4:00 PM
o Meeting Location: Glendale Transportation Center, 400 West Cerritos Ave.
3. Walk Audit #3 – Woodbury/College Hills (Central Glendale) o Date/Time: Friday, March 21, 4:00 PM
o Meeting Location: Woodrow Wilson Middle School, 1221 Monterey Rd.
4. Walk Audit #4 – Sparr Heights (East Glendale)
o Date/Time: Saturday, March 22, 10:30 AM
o Meeting Location: Montrose Community Park, 3529 Clifton Pl.
5. Walk Audit #5 – Crescenta Highlands (North Glendale) o Date/Time: Saturday, March 22, 2:30 PM
o Meeting Location: Dunsmore Park, 4700 Dunsmore Ave.
Maps of the walk audit areas are provided in the Appendix. Weather for all the walk audits was pleasant, with full to partly sunny conditions and mild temperatures.
Community Engagement and Participation
The walk audits were promoted through multiple outreach efforts, including:
• Flyers and emails sent to the Vision Zero Project Development Team. • Emails to City Council members, commissioners, neighborhood associations, and other key stakeholders.
• Notices sent to the Vision Zero and Bicycle Transportation Plan email databases. • Social media posts on city channels.
• Flyers distributed at local libraries.
3 A total of approximately 50 community members of all ages – including parents with toddlers, students, and adults – participated in the five walk audits, not including city staff and consultant team members. Several community members participated in more than one walk audit. City of Glendale Planning Associate and Vision Zero Project Manager Ismael Carbajal-Perez facilitated the walks, welcoming participants, explaining the walk audit objectives and questionnaire, and introducing city staff and consultants.
A total of 39 completed walk audit questionnaires were collected. The Appendix includes:
• The walk audit flyer
• The walk audit questionnaire
• The 39 completed questionnaire responses
• The full list of attendees
Findings
Feedback from the walk audit questionnaire is considered qualitative input, similar to insights gathered from community meetings, open houses, and pop-up events. Unlike a statistically representative survey, the goal of qualitative feedback is to capture diverse perspectives and lived experiences. Given the small group sizes, the findings reflect the observations of key participants rather than the broader community.
Key themes emerged from participant responses across all walk audits. The top three reflect common concerns the Vision Zero project team has heard at other outreach events:
1. Speeding Concerns: Nearly all participants observed that traffic moved faster than the posted speed limit in walk audit areas.
2. Failure to Fully Stop: Many participants reported frequent "California rolls" at stop signs, where drivers slowed down but did not come to a complete stop.
3. Failure to Yield to Pedestrians: Participants commonly noted that drivers did not stop for pedestrians with the right of way. This was especially noticeable when the walk audit groups encountered shopping center or business driveways.
Other themes include:
• Blocked Crosswalks: A common concern was drivers pulling too far into intersections, obstructing crosswalks, and creating potential hazards for pedestrians and cyclists. • Faded Crosswalks: Several intersections throughout walk audit areas were noted as needing restriping for greater visibility, with the Tropico neighborhood receiving the most observations for well-marked crosswalks.
• Inaccessible Intersections/Sidewalks: Sidewalks and intersections throughout various neighborhoods were noted as lacking accessibility for individuals in wheelchairs or using
4 a stroller or mobility aid: Sonora Avenue and Victory Boulevard, Sonora Avenue and Fairfield Street, Victory Boulevard and Randall Street, or Garden Street or Randall Street. • Sidewalk Obstructions: Participants observed uneven pavement or sidewalks blocked by overgrown landscaping in most walk audit areas, creating accessibility challenges for pedestrians, particularly anyone with a stroller, wheelchair or mobility aid. • Lack of Accessible Traffic Signals: Participants noted a general absence of traffic signals with audio features for individuals with visual impairments. • Limited Transit Amenities: Throughout the walk audit areas, participants noted a lack of transit stops with lighting and/or shelter.
• Concerns About School Traffic: Some participants shared concerns about congestion around schools during drop off and pick up, especially due to lack of school buses and some schools drawing students from outside Glendale. This came up during the Tropico walk audit for Cerritos Elementary School and the Crescenta Highlands walk audit for Clark Magnet High School.
Findings by Neighborhood
This section presents findings from individual walk audits, detailing neighborhood-specific observations.
Walk Audit #1 – Riverside Rancho Neighborhood (West Glendale) Date: Wednesday, March 19, 2025
The walk audit began near the Bette Davis Picnic Area off Riverside Drive. Participants followed Victory Boulevard west to Allen Avenue, continued east on Lake Street, and returned via Sonora Avenue to Riverside Drive.
Key observations included:
• Missing Sidewalks: Participants noted the absence of sidewalks on Garden Street and Ruberta Avenue.
• Street Trees and Furniture: While all participants observed some street trees, opinions on the presence of street furniture were split—half reported seeing some, while the other half noted none.
• Crossing Time at Signals: Participants were evenly divided on whether traffic signals provided adequate time for pedestrians to cross. Signals at Victory Boulevard and Sonora Avenue, and Lake Street and Sonora Avenue, were specifically cited as not allowing sufficient crossing time.
• Crosswalks: The participants were even split with half noting crosswalks were well- marked and half noting they were not well-marked.
• Accessibility: Most felt intersections and sidewalks were accessible in some places.
Problem areas were identified along Victory Boulevard, at Victory Boulevard and Riverside Drive (lacking curb ramp).
5 • Features for the Visually-Impaired: Some Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) were noted, at Victory Boulevard and Justin Road, for example. The Sonora Avenue and Victory Boulevard intersection was noting as lacking APS. • Pedestrian Comfort Levels in Intersections: Participants were split between “very comfortable,” “somewhat comfortable,” and “not comfortable” when crossing intersections in the audit area.
• Perceived Safety: While most participants felt “somewhat safe” or “very safe” walking in the area, a couple noted they did not feel safe.
• Likelihood of Encouraging Walking: More participants were “somewhat unlikely” or “very unlikely” to encourage a child or older relative to walk in the area for transportation.
• Transit Stop Conditions: Participants noted a lack of lighting and shelter at transit stops, including those at Sonora Avenue and Lake Street, Victory Boulevard and Western Avenue, Western Avenue and Raymond Avenue, and Victory Boulevard and Thompson Avenue.
• Additional Concerns: Detailed comments were submitted and are included in the Appendix. Key themes include:
o Concerns noted about drivers not stopping for pedestrians with right of way. o Pedestrian button noted as not working at Sonora Avenue and Lake Street.
Further details and specific participant comments for all walk audits can be found in the Appendix.
Walk Audit #2 – Tropico Neighborhood (South Glendale)
Date: Thursday, March 20, 2025
The walk audit began at the Glendale Transportation Center (GTC) on Cerritos Avenue.
Participants proceeded along Gardena Avenue to South Central Avenue, then headed northeast to Los Feliz Road, and took Los Feliz Road east to Glendale Avenue. From there, the route turned west on Laurel Street, then south on Brand Boulevard to San Fernando Road, before returning to the GTC.
Key Observations:
• Sidewalk Width: Sidewalks were present throughout the area, with most noted as wide enough for at least two people to walk side by side.
• Street Trees and Furniture: Nearly all participants observed street trees, though street furniture was noted as mainly concentrated along San Fernando Road. • Crossing Time at Signals: Participants were evenly divided on whether traffic signals provided adequate time for pedestrians to cross. Signals at San Fernando Road and Central Avenue and Brand Boulevard were specifically cited as not allowing sufficient crossing time.
• Crosswalks: Nearly all participants noted that crosswalks were well-marked.
6 • Accessibility: Most intersections and sidewalks were considered wheelchair and stroller accessible, except for Los Feliz Road between Brand Boulevard and Glendale Avenue, where a lack of tree grates leading to uneven sidewalks were identified as a potential hazard.
• Features for the Visually-Impaired: Some truncated domes were noted on the sidewalk.
Some Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) were noted, at Central Avenue and San Fernando Road, for example. The Los Feliz Avenue and Orange Street intersection was noting as lacking APS.
• Pedestrian Comfort in Intersections: All participants rated crossing the walk audit area intersections as either “very comfortable” or “somewhat comfortable.” • Perceived Safety: All participants reported feeling “very safe” or “somewhat safe” walking in the area.
• Likelihood of Encouraging Walking: Most participants were “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to encourage a child or older relative to walk in the area for transportation. • Transit Stop Conditions: Participants noted a lack of lighting and shelter at transit stops, including those at Central Avenue and Cerritos Avenue, and Central Avenue near Dignity Health.
• Driveway Conflicts: Participants noted issues with vehicles quickly exiting business driveways, creating challenges for pedestrians.
• Additional Concerns: Detailed comments were submitted and are included in the Appendix. Key themes include:
o Suggestion to add a traffic signal at Cerritos Avenue and Glendale Avenue to improve safety, particularly for school-related traffic. Cerritos Elementary School traffic was cited as challenging during peak times.
Walk Audit #3 – Woodbury/College Hills (Central Glendale) Date: Friday, March 20, 2025
The walk audit began across the street from Woodrow Wilson Middle School on Monterey Avenue. Participants proceeded northwest along Monterey Road, then turned northeast on Coronado Drive. After a brief segment on East Glenoaks Boulevard, the group connected to Glendale Avenue heading northeast to North Verdugo Road. From there, they traveled south on North Verdugo Road back to Monterey Avenue, before returning to the starting point across from Woodrow Wilson Middle School.
A total of four walk audit forms were submitted for this location, resulting in less feedback compared to the other four walk audits.
Key Observations:
• Sidewalk Width: Sidewalks were present throughout the area, and most were noted as wide enough for two people to walk side by side.
7 • Street Trees and Furniture: All participants observed street trees. Half of the participants also noted the presence of street furniture, primarily trash cans. • Crossing Time at Signals: Three of the four respondents reported that some of the traffic signals did not provide adequate time to cross safely. The intersection at Glendale Avenue and Monterey Road was specifically cited as problematic, with another comment emphasizing the need for more crossing time for seniors and individuals with disabilities to cross.
• Crosswalks: All participants noted that most crosswalks in the walk audit area were well- marked.
• Accessibility: Most intersections and sidewalks were considered accessible for individuals using wheelchairs or strollers.
• Pedestrian Comfort in Crosswalks: Three participants rated crossing the walk audit area intersections as “somewhat comfortable,” while one rated it “not comfortable” due to concerns about drivers running red lights. The Glendale Avenue and Monterey Road intersection was highlighted by a second participant as an intersection of concern, especially given its frequent use by students.
• Features for the Visually-Impaired: No special signals or design elements for people who are blind or visually impaired were observed.
• Perceived Safety: Participants reported feeling “somewhat safe” walking in the area. • Likelihood of Encouraging Walking: Participants were “somewhat likely” to encourage a child or older relative to walk in the area for transportation, with a note from one specifying during the daytime.
• Driveway Conflicts: Participants noted issues with vehicles quickly exiting business and shopping center driveways, creating challenges for pedestrians. • Additional Concerns: Detailed comments were submitted and are included in the Appendix. Key themes include:
o Concerns about drivers failing to stop at stop signs, running red lights, stopping within the crosswalk on Glendale Avenue, and not yielding to pedestrians who have the right of way, particularly at intersections such as Glendale Avenue and Monterey Road, Glenoaks Avenue and Verdugo Road, and Monterey Road and 134 Freeway west of Glenoaks.
Walk Audit #4 – Sparr Heights (East Glendale)
Date: Saturday Morning, March 21, 2025
The walk audit began at Montrose Park on Clifton Avenue. Participants walked through the park to North Verdugo Road, then continued south on North Verdugo Road to Paloma Avenue. From there, the group traveled east on Paloma Avenue to La Cresenta Avenue, then northeast on La Cresenta Avenue to Roselawn Avenue. The walk continued north on Roselawn Avenue to Honolulu Avenue, then south on North Verdugo Road, returning to the park via Clifton Avenue.
Key Observations:
8 • Sidewalk Width: Sidewalks were present throughout the area. While some were noted as wide enough for two people to walk side by side, there were narrow sections where only one person fit comfortably, primarily along La Cresenta Avenue. • Street Trees and Furniture: All participants observed street trees, with some street furniture noted, primarily along Honolulu Avenue.
• Crossing Time at Signals: Most participants felt traffic signals provided adequate time for pedestrians to cross.
• Crosswalks: More than half of the participants noted that some crosswalks were not well-marked, several showing faded paint.
• Accessibility: Most intersections and sidewalks were considered wheelchair and stroller accessible. However, La Cresenta Avenue was highlighted as an exception due to its narrow width and sections with overgrown landscaping encroaching onto the sidewalks. • Pedestrian Comfort in Crosswalks: Most participants rated feeling “somewhat comfortable” when crossing intersections in the walk audit area. • Perceived Safety: Most participants reported feeling “somewhat safe” walking in the area, one felt “not safe,” and one felt “very safe” and “somewhat safe” depending on the specific area.
• Likelihood of Encouraging Walking: Most respondents were “somewhat likely” to encourage a child or older relative to walk in the area for transportation. Two participants reported being “very likely” to encourage walking, while one participant reported being “somewhat unlikely.”
• Transit Stop Conditions: Participants noted a lack of shelter or benches at transit stops, including the Rosemont Avenue and Honolulu Avenue stop. • Additional Concerns: Detailed comments were submitted and are included in the Appendix. Common themes included:
o Safety concerns at the crosswalk near Trader Joe’s on Honolulu Avenue, particularly during peak hours.
o Reports of drivers not stopping for pedestrians who have the right of way along Verdugo Road (at Verdugo Road and Broadview Drive) and at Sunset Avenue and Honolulu Avenue.
o Multiple requests for improved crosswalks or four-way stops at key intersections.
Walk Audit #5 –Cresenta Highlands Neighborhood (North Glendale) Date: Saturday Afternoon, March 20, 2025
The walk audit route began at Dunsmore Park and proceed north along Dunsmore Avenue to Santa Carlotta Street. Participants then walked east on Santa Carlotta to Maryland Avenue, headed south on Maryland Avenue, transitioned to New York Avenue, and continued south. The group then walked west along Foothill Boulevard before heading back to Dunsmore Park.
9 Key Observations:
• Sidewalk Width: Sidewalks were present throughout the walk audit area. While some were noted as wide enough for two people to walk side by side, some narrow sections where only one person could walk comfortably. The sidewalk on Dunsmore on the east side near St. James Church was noted for overgrown landscaping encroaching on the sidewalk. Multiple uneven sidewalk segments were noted while walking south on New York Avenue, near Clark Magnet High School.
• Street Trees and Furniture: All participants observed some street trees. However, there was a lack of street furniture noted, aside from benches for transit along Foothill Boulevard and private residential benches accessible from the sidewalk. • Crossing Time at Signals: Most participants felt traffic signals did not allow adequate time for pedestrians to cross, particularly at the intersection of New York Avenue and Foothill Boulevard.
• Crosswalks: More than half of the participants noted that crosswalks were well-marked, though some fading paint was noted on New York Avenue.
• Accessibility: Most intersections and sidewalks were considered wheelchair and stroller accessible, though concerns were raised about obstructions such as utility boxes and poles blocking the sidewalk, particularly at New York Avenue and Santa Carlotta Street. • Pedestrian Comfort in Crosswalks: All but one participant rated feeling “very comfortable” or “somewhat comfortable” when crossing intersections along the walk audit route.
• Perceived Safety: Most participants reported feeling “somewhat safe” walking in the area, with one participant stating they felt “very safe.” • Likelihood of Encouraging Walking: Participants expressed mixed opinions on how likely they would be to encourage a child or older relative to walk in the area for transportation purposes.
• Additional Concerns: Detailed comments were submitted and are included in the Appendix. Key themes include:
o Lack of visible speed limit signage along Santa Carlotta Street. o Concerns about traffic congestions around Clark Magnet High School, which participants noted is common near schools throughout Glendale. Some participants suggested that providing bus service could alleviate traffic, particularly since Clarks School draws students from outside the Glendale area.
Next Steps
The walk audits had a great turnout and a lot of great feedback was given. Information from the walk audits will be incorporated, where appropriate, into the countermeasures, project goals, and project actions. Materials from the walk audit will be preserved as part of the outreach toolkit so that the city can conduct future walk audits using already prepared materials and collateral.