Loading...
Item 16 - Adoption of the Active Transportation PlanItem 16 �t�x ofi Council- d. Report ti ttjs o Department Name: Cost Center: For Agenda of: Placement: Estimated Time: FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager Public Works 5010 February 2, 2021 Public Hearing 60 minutes SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission and Active Transportation Committee, adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) to: 1. Adopt an Initial Study/Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment B); and 2. Adopt the Active Transportation Plan (Attachment C); and 3. Authorize the Public Works Director or their designee to approve future administrative revisions to the Active Transportation Plan as necessary, so long as the revisions do not alter the policy framework, project recommendations, and substantive content of the February 2021 edition of the Plan (Attachment C), and any such revisions are documented in writing and provided to the City Clerk for record keeping. REPORT -IN -BRIEF Consistent with the Sustainable Transportation Major City Goal identified in the 2019-21 Financial Plan, the City's Transportation Planning and Engineering Program has prepared the City' s first Active Transportation Plan ("the Plan") to guide future transportation planning for both bicycling, walking and other forms of human -powered transportation. This report provides an overview of proposed policies, projects, programs, and implementation strategies contained in the Plan. This public hearing follows up on the Council Study Session held December 8, 2020, where the Council provided comments, questions, and general input on the Draft Plan and heard public comment from the community. The Final Plan incorporates refinements to address the input and direction provided by the City's Active Transportation Committee (ATC), Planning Commission, City Council, and the community. The Active Transportation Plan document is provided as a Council Reading File (Attachment C) and is also available for public review at www.slobikewalk.org. Packet Page 171 Item 16 DISCUSSION Background Over the past two years, City staff has been working on preparation of the City's first Active Transportation Plan. This Plan serves as both a successor to the City's 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan, as well as the City's first comprehensive plan on pedestrian policies, programs and infrastructure recommendations. The consolidation of the two modes (as well as consideration for other human powered devices) into one plan serves to not only support the goals of the 2014 General Plan Circulation Element to increase access and mode share for sustainable transportation modes, but also to increase the City's chances of competing for grants, especially the highly competitive California Active Transportation Program, which in the last cycle provided $440 million in funding and has contributed over $10 million toward bicycle and pedestrian projects in the City of San Luis Obispo to date. Highlights and major themes of revisions since the public review draft include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Additional explanation of Active Transportation Plan concepts including the plan goals, Level of Traffic Stress analysis, project prioritization, equity, electric bikes, protected bicycle lanes, bicycle parking, and other design concepts. 2. Additional explanation of proposed pedestrian improvements in the downtown. 3. Improved mapping of proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects. 4. Requests to elevate priority of the segment of the Bob Jones Trail between Octagon Barn and Los Osos Valley Road to a Tier 1 project (currently a Tier 2 project in the Plan). • Note: In response to multiple comments heard during the public review period, the Final Plan includes additional clarification stating that if the County is able to secure funding to complete the Bob Jones Trail segment south of the City from Avila Beach to the Octagon Barn, the Octagon Barn to Los Osos Valley Road segment in the City will be reclassified from a Tier 2 to a Tier 1 project. 5. In response to questions from Council at the study session regarding past community opposition and Council direction, the proposed crossing improvement of Brizzolara Creek at Montalban Street, which was a Tier 3 project, has been removed from the Final Plan. 6. Added an equity performance measure and additional equity policy actions. 7. Name of goal three changed from "Accessibility" to "Convenience" to better reflect what the goal sets out to accomplish. 8. Provided clarification on the survey statistics. Only results from the statistically valid survey were included in the Plan. The Active Transportation Plan at a Glance The Active Transportation Plan is centered around four major goals: 1. Build It. The City can develop the physical infrastructure necessary to achieve this Plan's goals with an emphasis on priority actions to build a high -quality bicycle and pedestrian network. 2. Safety. Active transportation can be safe - with an emphasis on addressing safety, education, and partnerships. Packet Page 172 Item 16 3. Convenience. Active transportation can be easy - with an emphasis on user convenience, accessibility, and connectivity. 4. Equity. Active transportation is for everyone - with an emphasis on accommodating diverse mobility needs, ensuring that active transportation projects and resources provide equitable benefits to disadvantaged and low-income community members, and that city planning and outreach processes are inclusive and accessible to all community members. The structure of the Active Transportation Plan document is organized as follows: Chapter 1: Introduction - Introduces the Plan within the context of wider City policy and explains what an Active Transportation Plan is. Chapter 2: Vision and Goals - Captures the vision and goals of the Plan and identifies performance measures to ensure that the City can track progress and make the Plan vision a reality. Chapter 3: Bicycling and Walking in the City Today - An inventory of present-day bicycle and pedestrian conditions. Chapter 4: Community Engagement - Provides a summary of the community outreach activities organized and facilitated by City staff, focusing on barriers to walking and bicycling. Chapter 5: Recommended Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects - Identifies recommended bicycle and pedestrian projects that will enhance the biking and walking experience for San Luis Obispo residents. Chapter 6: Bicycle & Pedestrian Programs - Provides a description of bicycle and pedestrian education, encouragement, enforcement, and evaluation programs. Chapter 7: Implementation - Details a practical roadmap for implementing the proposals within this plan including project details, cost estimates, and grant funding opportunities. Changes from the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan In addition to adding a pedestrian component, the Active Transportation Plan proposes a new approach to implementing projects compared to the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan. This is in response to public outreach results as well as input from the Active Transportation Committee. Previous bicycle and pedestrian planning efforts have prioritized the implementation of striped bike lanes and off-street shared -use paths. While all proposed shared -use paths and many other bicycle projects from the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan have been carried over to the Active Transportation Plan, the new Plan has a greater focus on prioritizing projects that provide physical separation and safe crossing opportunities along existing major city streets, which provides more intuitive routes with more direct connections to key destinations that community members already travel to daily. The Active Transportation Plan also incorporates new best practices and design tools that were not approved for use in California or widely deployed at the time the previous Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted, such as protected bike lanes and protected intersections. Furthermore, the Active Transportation Plan places more emphasis on investments that have the greatest potential to increase bicycling and walking for transportation purposes in the near -term, especially projects within the City right-of-way that can be built more quickly, affordably, and minimizes the need for outside agency approvals and right-of-way acquisition. Packet Page 173 Item 16 Barriers to Bicycling and Walking To achieve the City's Modal Split Objectives, public outreach and surveys were conducted to identify the barriers to bicycling and walking. For bicycling, surveys showed that the perception of risk with using higher -stress facilities is often the most significant barrier to bicycling for most people. In order to develop a bicycling environment that will encourage more people to ride, it is important to first understand the existing level of interest, ability and comfort of bicycling within the community. While there are many diverse types of individuals who bike, including people who have no other means of transportation, for the purposes of bicycle system planning, the population can generally be classified into four types of transportation bicyclists as shown below. q� ' q Strong + Fearless USIi" To nde a bicycle on any roadway regardless 4t trzft bX*_ C omfortabie takm U-*" and nding in a vahruW manner on ff aj Streets +M1fw des� bi Xle faml4s 22% Interested, but Concerned Enthusiastic + Confident >: wring the roadway voth dUid33r wo [raft✓- r1 som nstares, b d prefer to- ride in [her own desigrrated t]irte sane Or oft• street %c*ty. 21% No Way No How Int-equerrt bicyclists with some inclination towards Residents who simply are not interested in bicycling more regularly if they felt safer on the bicycling for masons of topography. irka"Bty. roadways. Not very coadWable sharing the road c r simply complete and utter lack of interest. with cars, or riding on major streets. even with a Unlikely to adopt bicycling in any way. hike lane_ Prefer separated pathways or low -traffic neighborhood streets. For walking, types of pedestrians usually vary according to age and/or physical ability. Public outreach results indicated drivers not paying attention, pedestrians not feeling safe, lack of night lighting, and time to reach destination as the top concerns about walking today in San Luis Obispo. Statistically valid survey results, as well as feedback from public workshops also indicated a concern about the need for more protected crossings along high -traffic roadways and more street lighting, especially near Cal Poly as a particular barrier to walking. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Network Provided with data from community surveys and outreach activities, and technical analysis of barriers and levels of traffic stress within the existing transportation network, staff worked with the Active Transportation Committee and the City's Active Transportation Plan technical consultant, Alta Planning+Design, to develop a proposed network of bicycle and pedestrian projects that enhance user safety and comfort levels. Building on the proposed network from the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan, routes were identified that could include more physical separation from vehicular traffic along roadways that are within existing city right-of-way. Several design strategies that were not widely deployed in California (or approved by Caltrans) at the time the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted, are prominent features of this Plan, including protected bike lanes ("cycle tracks") and bicycle protected intersections. Packet Page 174 Item 16 Caltrans has since authorized the use of these design strategies and many successful installations have been completed throughout California in recent years. While many locations will require further analysis and design review to ascertain whether a protected bike lane is feasible, the Active Transportation Plan proposes protected bike lanes on most arterial routes. The Active Transportation Plan also identifies information on existing sidewalks and areas where there are gaps in the sidewalk network to be completed. Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facility Type and Shared -Use Path Network Existing (miles) Proposed (miles) Shared Use Path 11 31 Bicycle Lane 37 13 Bicycle Route 26 0.4 Neighborhood Greenway 1.5 10 Protected Bicycle Lane 0.1 25 In addition to proposed bikeways, outreach results indicated that crossing large arterial Streets was a significant barrier for both walking and bicycling, and therefore, the Active Transportation Plan identifies almost fifty locations citywide for crossing improvements. While each location will require further analysis prior to implementation, the improvements are categorized into locations of major and minor crossings. Possible improvements at major crossing locations could include roundabouts, pedestrian hybrid beacons (a.k.a. "HAWK Crossings"), traffic signals or a new design tool known as a protected intersection. Possible improvements at minor crossing locations include curb ramps, crosswalk striping, flashing beacons, bike boxes, curb extensions and median refuges. Prioritization of Projects Given that the Plan proposes over 240 projects and acknowledging that there are limited financial resources to spread between all city infrastructure projects, it is imperative that the bicycle and pedestrian projects identified in this Plan are prioritized based on their greatest potential to increase safety, access and connectivity, and ultimately, the number of bicycle and pedestrian trips. Therefore, the bicycle and pedestrian network projects were evaluated against a set of criteria and scored. The following criteria were used to prioritize the proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects: a) Ridership/ Usage Potential b) Safety/ Collisions c) Equity: Improve access for Disadvantaged and Low- Income Community Members d) Community Input e) Existing Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) f) Proximity to Key Destinations: Schools (K-12 and Cal Poly), Parks and Open Space, Retail and Employment Centers, Downtown, Senior Housing & Supportive Facilities Packet Page 175 Item 16 The projects have been categorized into the following priority levels: • Tier 1: The highest -priority projects with the greatest potential to increase the number of people bicycling and walking. The City will actively pursue funding for these projects first. The Plan proposes that the City endeavor to complete the Tier 1 network by 2030, which is consistent with the City's Climate Action Plan objectives to support citywide carbon neutrality by 2035. • Tier 2: Moderate -priority projects that play an important role in the future bicycle and pedestrian network, but with less potential than Tier 1 projects to increase bicycling and walking. These projects will be pursued as funding opportunities arise, but not at the expense of delaying Tier 1 projects. • Tier 3: Lower -priority projects that help complete the bicycling and walking network but are not likely to generate measurable increases in bicycle and pedestrian trips. These projects will be funded primarily through grants and where required as a condition of approval for new development projects. Individual bikeway and pedestrian projects were reviewed, evaluated, and prioritized by City staff and the City's Active Transportation Committee based on the prioritization criteria listed above. In selecting the Tier 1 network, staff and the Active Transportation Committee focused on creating a crosstown network of interconnected routes and crossings that present the greatest potential to generate increased bicycle and pedestrian mode share and reduce existing collision trends. Using data extracted from the City's Travel Demand Forecasting Model, various route combinations were evaluated until a refined network of nine priority corridors was selected (see Figure 1 below). These Tier 1 priority corridors have potential to serve roughly 70% of citywide trips, at least for a majority of the trip length. The remaining Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects improve bicycle and pedestrian circulation, but to a lesser extent than the Tier 1 network. Packet Page 176 Item 16 Figure 1. Tier 1 Projects (routes and crossing improvements) Additional Pedestrian -Specific Improvements and Amenities In addition to the bikeways, shared- use paths and crossing improvement projects identified as part of the Tier 1-3 networks, the Active Transportation Plan also proposes to actively pursue opportunities to construct other pedestrian -specific improvements to enhance accessibility and connectivity, including sidewalk repairs and construction of new sidewalks, upgrades to curb ramps, and installation of additional street lighting. To complete the pedestrian network, approximately 27 miles of new sidewalk would need to be constructed to fill in all the existing sidewalk gaps throughout the city. In addition, the City has thousands of intersection corners that would need to be reconstructed to meet current ADA standards, and several hundred new streetlights would need to be installed for each on -street and off-street path to meet the City's current Engineering Standards. Many of these improvements will likely be installed as a requirement of future land use development/redevelopment projects, while others will be installed as City -initiated capital improvement projects. In lieu of mapping and inventorying the thousands of individual locations where the City would install/repair sidewalks, curb ramps and streetlights, the Plan outlines methodology for prioritizing City initiated installation of these pedestrian improvements based on factors such as collision history, pedestrian activity, and proximity to key destinations such as schools (including Cal Poly), parks, the downtown core, and senior living facilities. Per the Plan, these types of improvements would be prioritized first in areas with existing safety concerns, and then in areas of high pedestrian activity, such as near Cal Poly, the downtown core, and near parks and K-12 schools. Packet Page 177 Item 16 The Plan also identifies recommended features to f make the overall walking experience more inviting s' and enjoyable, including policies recommending inclusion of public art and streetscape enhancements as part of active transportation infrastructure projects. In conjunction with the City's COVID-19 -" economic response campaign known as Open SLO, the City installed nearly 40 parklets citywide. The v,. Active Transportation Plan builds on this success and provides guidance for a sustained parklet program. Other programs include recommendations to bring an Open Streets event (also known as - Ciclovia) to San Luis Obispo, continued support for a citywide bike share system, creating walkingibiking wayfinding signage, and recommendations to incorporate public art and placemaking streetscape enhancements as part of every future active transportation project, where appropriate. Implementation The Active Transportation Plan will be built over a number of years depending on funding and staffing resources, focusing first on the Tier 1 projects that have the highest potential to increase walking and biking. Throughout the implementation process, staff will continue to work with critical partners and the community to gather input. Implementation of the Plan will be incremental but is guided by established policy to continue to prioritize funding toward meeting the City's goals for increasing bicycling and walking and to ensure that projects benefit disadvantaged and low-income community members equitably. The Plan includes the following implementation strategies to accelerate priority active transportation improvements: Leveraging Funds with Larger - Projects Oftentimes, the costs associated with individual active transportation projects can be reduced significantly by incorporating them into larger infrastructure projects, particularly roadway resurfacing projects. These projects require coordination and planning and focus on leveraging on -going or planned projects to build active transportation projects with an economy of scale. Quick -Build Quick -build projects are semi -permanent improvements that can be designed and implemented quickly, often utilizing lower -cost interim materials, such as flex posts, curb stops or paint, in lieu of more costly permanent materials. Quick -build strategies also provide the flexibility to test and refine designs before committing to more substantial infrastructure investments. An example of a quick -build strategy is the recent installation of bike lanes on Higuera Street in the downtown. By first installing the bike lanes in paint at a cost of around $15,000, the City is able to test the viability of the design before committing to a more permanent installation. Packet Page 178 Item 16 Projects Built as a Condition of Development An additional opportunity to fund projects is to ensure the City works with developers to pay for or implement active transportation projects that are necessary to serve their new developments. The City has been successful in doing this through the construction of new projects by a developer or through infrastructure financing through the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee program, which collects a fair share fee from development throughout the City to help fund significant roadway, bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects. These opportunities create a "win -win" scenario for the community and the developer as it provides holistic circulation benefits to the entire community, including reduction in citywide vehicle miles traveled (VMT), while providing necessary transportation options for the individual residents, workers and visitors of the new development. Measuring Progress Towards Implementing the Plan Ongoing monitoring and evaluation will be vital in achieving the goals of the Active Transportation Plan. The following matrix summarizes the proposed ways the City plans to measure progress towards implementing the Active Transportation Plan, with a summary report to be presented every other year to the Active Transportation Committee and made available to community on the City's website. Active Transportation # Performance Measure Goal Baseline 1 The share of citywide commute trips made by bicycling Current Mode Share: to 20% and 12% by walking by 2030 . Bicycle - 8.3% • Walk - 7.2% • Drive Alone - 67.7% 2 Consistent with the City's Climate Action Plan and Current Mode Share: General Plan Mode Share Objectives, decrease the • Drive Alone - 67.7% share of total citywide trips made by single -occupant auto to 50% or less by 2030 3 Achieve Platinum Level status as Bicycle Friendly Gold Status Community by the League of American Bicyclists 4 Continue progress towards the City's Vision Zero goal Three -Year Total (2015-2017): of eliminating traffic fatalities and severe injuries, . 3 fatal collisions endeavoring towards a trend of zero fatal collisions by . 43 severe injury 2030. collisions 5 Complete installation of the Active Transportation 6.5% of the ultimate Tier 1 Plan's Tier 1 bicycle and pedestrian network by 2030. network currently in place 6 Consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Baseline to be set in 2021 policies, strive to allocate transportation funding across various transportation modes approximately proportional to the General Plan Modal Split Objectives 7 Double the mode share for all bicycle and pedestrian Baseline to be set in 2021 trips for public K-12 schools in the city Packet Page 179 Item 16 8 Strive to achieve the same demographic representation Baseline to be set in 2021 of those using active transportation modes as those using single occupancy motor vehicles. POLICY CONTEXT The recommendations of the Active Transportation Plan support the current Sustainable Transportation Major City Goal identified in the 2019-21 Financial Plan. In addition, the Active Transportation Plan implements many of the goals, objectives policies and programs of both the City's General Plan and Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery. The General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements identify a multitude of goals and policies promoting bicycling and walking and reducing community dependence on single -occupant automobile trips. Similarly, reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and related greenhouse gas emissions through improving access and use of sustainable transportation modes, such as walking and bicycling, is one of the most important goals identified in the City's Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery. In turn, one of the key Foundational Actions identified under the Connected Community Pillar of the Climate Action Plan recommends that the City "Complete adoption of the Active Transportation Plan and begin implementation immediately." A fundamental objective of the Active Transportation Plan is to provide the policies, programs and infrastructure needed to increase the number of trips completed by active transportation modes, supporting the City's General Plan and Climate Action Plan Modal Split Objectives to reach 20 percent of Citywide trips by bicycle and 18 percent by walking, carpool and other sustainable transportation options. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT In the fall of 2019, City staff branded an outreach strategy known as the "Roll and Stroll" campaign and held a series of both in -person and online community outreach activities for the Active Transportation Plan. The community outreach is summarized in Chapter Four of the Plan. In -Person Activities In person outreach included five pop-up workshops on weekends in neighborhoods throughout the City, event booths at the SLO Farmers Market and Cal Poly University Union, as well as an open house workshop at the City/County Library. Packet Page 180 Item 16 Other Activities Online activities included a project webpage at www.slobikewalk.org, an online interactive mapping tool, and an Active Transportation Survey. The Active Transportation Survey was conducted to better understand existing travel behavior, major barriers to active transportation, and what investments community members would like the City to prioritize in order to increase access to walking and bicycling. Postcards were distributed to a randomly generated list of 4,500 city residents to invite participation in the survey, which resulted in 709 completed surveys, providing a statistically valid sample. Other community members were also offered the opportunity to participate in the survey, although the results were not counted as part of the statistically valid survey sample. An Interactive Online Mapping Tool was created to provide participants with an opportunity to mark locations throughout the city of desired intersection crossing priorities, bikeway, and pedestrian facility improvements. The input received as part of these public outreach activities was used to guide development of the projects, policies, and programs included in the Draft Active Transportation Plan. Public Review Draft The Public Review Draft of the Active Transportation Plan was released on November 19, 2020 and available for an extended public review period through December 31, 2020. The draft was made available on the City website as well as on the project webpage www.slobikewalk.org. Notice of the draft was made available through a press release as well as a notice of availability published in the SLO New Times, and an email sent out to individuals who had signed up for updates on the project webpage. In total, including project webpage responses and emails, staff received 135 substantive comments and 302 non -substantive comments, totaling 437 total public draft comments. Substantive comments were archived by topic area, and longer comments were broken down into multiple comment rows based on individual topic. The response to substantive public draft comments is included in Attachment E. Along with their recommendation to adopt the Active Transportation Plan, the ATC submitted 42 comments. The response to their comments is included in Attachment F. CONCURRENCE Over the past two years, spanning at least 19 meetings, the ATC provided valuable input on the Active Transportation Plan. On December 3, 2020, the ATC recommended unanimously to adopt the Active Transportation Plan with comments to be considered for the final draft. The responses to comments are included as part of Attachment F. On December 9, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended unanimously to adopt the Active Transportation Plan and approve the Initial Study / Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (see Attachment D for resolution). Packet Page 181 Item 16 Several City departments provided input to the Active Transportation Plan including City Administration, Fire and Police Departments, Construction Inspection, Office of Sustainability, and the Community Development Department (planning and development engineering groups). Other community groups have helped shape the Active Transportation Plan including SLO RISE, the SLO Chamber of Commerce, Downtown SLO, SLO County Public Health Injury Prevention Committee, SLO County Healthy Eating -Acting Living Coalition, Bike SLO County, Save Our Downtown, SLO Under 40, Cal Poly ASI, and others. Public agency comment letters received included the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, and Caltrans. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study /Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to CEQA (EID 0496-2020) by Alta Planning+Design to evaluate the potential significant effects of implementing the Active Transportation Plan (Attachment B). An extended review period for the Initial Study / Negative Declaration opened on November 19, 2020 and closed on December 31, 2020. The Active Transportation Plan is a program/policy-level document, which means it does not provide project -specific construction details that would allow for project -level CEQA analysis. Specific development is not being proposed under this Active Transportation Plan and adoption of it would not authorize any land use changes or development. Information such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings will be required in order for future "project -level" CEQA analysis to occur. Under CEQA, a programmatic document is prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and/or for a project that will be implemented over a long period of time. Therefore, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration was prepared at a "program -level," which is appropriate for this type of proposal. The Initial Study does not identify any potentially significant impacts that would occur as a result of adoption of the Active Transportation Plan. FISCAL IMPACT Budgeted: No Funding Identified: No Fiscal Analysis: Budget Year: 2019-21 Funding Sources Total Budget Available Current Funding Request Remaining Balance Annual Ongoing Cost General Fund N/A* State Federal Fees Other: Total Packet Page 182 Item 16 *A total of $140,000 was previously allocated for preparation of the Active Transportation Plan in the FY 2017-19 and FY 2019-21 Financial Plans and has been sufficient to bring the Plan to this stage. Adoption of the Active Transportation Plan itself does not have any direct fiscal impact. However, when adopted, the fiscal impact associated with fully implementing the Active Transportation Plan is significant and will extend over many years, requiring substantial funding commitments over multiple financial plans as well as exploration of grants, development fees and other outside funding sources. Since the Active Transportation Plan is a programmatic document, it provides only a planning level assessment of project costs. Therefore, a high- and low-cost range has been provided, which is summarized in the table below. The broad range of potential costs is appropriate given the level of uncertainty in the design at this point in the planning process. Priority Level Cost Estimate (Low) Cost Estimate (High) Tier 1 Projects $ 16,800,000 $ 195,400,000 Tier 2 Projects $ 2,900,000 $ 26,500,000 Tier 3 Projects $ 30,900,000 $ 181,400,000 Consistent with the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery, the Active Transportation Plan calls for the City to actively work toward achieving the General Plan mode share targets by 2030 by prioritizing implementation of the Tier 1 bicycle and pedestrian network. Other projects would be completed as opportunities become available or as part of development mitigation. With that said, ultimately each individual project and program expenditure would be considered and prioritized by the City Council as part of the City's two-year financial planning process. For FY 2021-23, scheduled pavement plan upgrades present an opportunity to begin implementation of the Anholm Neighborhood Greenway, protected bike lanes and buffered bike lanes on Marsh St and Higuera St in the downtown as well as pedestrian improvements. ALTERNATIVES Council could request more information, suggest substantial changes, or otherwise request that the Active Transportation Plan be presented for adoption at a later date. Staff does not recommend this as several proposed projects in the Active Transportation Plan may risk exclusion from the forthcoming FY 2021-23 Financial Plan. Packet Page 183 Item 16 Attachments: a - Draft Resolution b - COUNCIL READING FILE - Initial Study / Negative Declaration c - COUNCIL READING FILE - Active Transportation Plan d - Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-1029-20 e - Response to Public Draft Comments f - Response to ATC Comments Packet Page 184 Item 16 RESOLUTION NO. (2021 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EID 0496-2020) WHEREAS, the Climate Action Plan includes a goal of reaching adopted mode share targets related to carbon neutrality by 2030 and the Circulation Element of the General Plan establishes a goal of reducing motor vehicle use and reaching 20% of all citywide trips by bicycle and 18% by walking, carpooling and other forms of transportation; and WHEREAS, the Circulation Element of the General Plan establishes a goal to consolidate the Bicycle Transportation Plan with a citywide Pedestrian Plan (an "Active Transportation Plan"); and WHEREAS, the potential environmental impact of the Active Transportation Plan has been evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to an initial environmental study (EID 0496-2020) and an Initial Study/Negative Declaration of environmental impact has been prepared and circulated for public review and comment period from November 19, 2020 to December 31, 2020; and WHEREAS, an outreach strategy known as the "Roll and Stroll" Campaign was conducted consisting of both online and in -person activities, including six pop-up workshops in the community, an open house workshop, an online interactive mapping tool, a project webpage, a citywide survey, as well as a statistically valid survey distributed to a randomly generated list of 4,500 city residents to invite participation in the survey; and WHEREAS, the Active Transportation Committee provided input on the Active Transportation Plan in over 19 meetings over the course of two years and at the hearing of December 3, 2020 conducted via a virtual, online, meeting platform reviewed the Active Transportation Plan and unanimously recommended approval of the Active Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at the hearing on December 9, 2020, conducted via a virtual, online, meeting platform, reviewed the Active Transportation Plan and unanimously recommended approval of the Plan and adoption of the Initial Study / Negative Declaration for the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council at the study session on December 8, 2020 via a virtual, online, meeting platform, reviewed the Active Transportation Plan and provided input in anticipation of the final draft of the Plan; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and Packet Page 185 Item 16 Resolution No. (2021 Series) Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo to adopt the Initial Study / Negative Declaration, approve the Active Transportation Plan, and authorize the Public Works Director to update the Active Transportation Plan with administrative, non -policy amendments as necessary and appropriate. This resolution is based on the following California Environmental Quality Act findings, with associated findings: SECTION 1. Environmental Review. The City Council finds and determines that the Initial Study / Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the project as defined by CEQA, finds that approval of the Active Transportation Plan would not result in any significant environmental impacts, and hereby approves the Negative Declaration and directs staff to prepare and file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk within five working days of the approval of the Active Transportation Plan. SECTION 2. Findings. This Council, after consideration of the Active Transportation Plan, as recommended by the Active Transportation Committee and Planning Commission, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed Active Transportation Plan will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of persons working, living, or travelling in the City by providing a network of convenient pedestrian and bicycle facilities and programs. 2. The proposed Active Transportation Plan is consistent with the General Plan (including Circulation Element Policies 1.7.1, 1.7.2, 1.75, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.2 among others) and will further General Plan goals to reduce single -occupancy motor vehicle use by implementing planned projects or programs that both support and promote sustainable alternatives to motorized transport such as walking, using transit and bicycles. 3. The proposed Active Transportation Plan will provide new and improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities which furthers existing General Plan policies and objectives to complete a network of safe and convenient bikeways and walkways that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and routes outside of the city. Packet Page 186 Resolution No. (2021 Series) Item 16 Page 3 SECTION 3. Approval. The Active Transportation Plan is hereby approved by the City Council and Resolution Number 10471 (2013 Series) approving the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan is hereby repealed and superseded. Upon motion of and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this ATTEST: Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney seconded by day of Mayor Heidi Harmon 2021. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on Teresa Purrington City Clerk Packet Page 187 Item 16 RESOLUTION NO. PC-1029-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED DECEMBER 9, 2020 (CITYWIDE, OTHER- 0495-2020 & EID-0496-2020) WHEREAS, the Active Transportation Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo at the meeting of December 3, 2020 recommended approval of the Active Transportation Plan. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a meeting via teleconference on December 9, 2020, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under OTHER 0495-2020 and EID 0496-2020, City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works, applicant; and, WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the project: 1. The proposed Active Transportation Plan will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of persons working, living, or travelling in the City by providing a network of convenient pedestrian and bicycle facilities and programs. 2. The proposed Active Transportation Plan will further General Plan goals to reduce single -occupancy motor vehicle use by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, using transit and bicycles. 3. The proposed Active Transportation Plan will provide new and improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities which furthers existing General Plan policies and objectives to complete a network of safe and convenient bikeways and walkways that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and routes outside of the city. Packet Page 188 Item 16 OTHR-0495-2020 & EID-0496-2020 City -Wide Page 2 SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The Planning Commission finds that the project's programmatic Initial Study / Negative Declaration adequately evaluates potential environmental impacts of the project. SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend Council approve the Active Transportation Plan and adopt of the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. On motion of Commissioner Hopkins, seconded by Commissioner Kahn, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hopkins, Kahn, Quincey, Shoresman and Vice -Chair Jorgensen NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Wulkan and Chair Dandekar The foregoing resolution was adopted this 9th day of December 2020. -Mo-re d Tyler Corey, Secretary Planning Commission Packet Page 189 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 # Topic Participant Comment Response Include photos of Black, Indigenous, People of While the public draft did include photos of San Luis 1 General Comment Bike SLO County Color (BIPOC) within the ATP Obispo's BIPOC community, additional photos have been added. Please note in the draft plan's Introduction section —and wherever else applicable —that the Chapter 5 includes language that the Plan is a high-level proposed concepts are planning -level -only. The blueprint and that its projects will require more detailed 2 General Comment Caltrans feasibility and design standards will need further analysis to determine constructability constraints analysis as this plan moves forward. Caltrans' neighborhood compatibility, and other challenges that comments regarding this document are not may make a project infeasible or undesirable. considered approval for any improvement concepts In general, any changes to the state's right of way 3 General Comment Caltrans would be subject to consistency of current Comment received adopted policies, manuals, and guides. Currently, Caltrans is developing a districtwide Active Transportation Plan on bicycle and pedestrian needs at specific locations, on, across and parallel to the state highway system. The 4 General Comment Caltrans plan, which will be available for public review in Comment received February, emphasizes social equity and providing safe walking and bicycling. It will be a useful tool for local jurisdictional multimodal planning efforts. We look forward to input from the city and coordination on future implementation. Reevaluation (post pandemic budget The Anholm Neighborhood Greenway includes many Slobikewalk.org considerations) of the expensive and disruptive cost effective strategies including movable planter boxes 5 General Comment Anonymous tearing up of Anholm neighborhood in favor of as a first stage toward a more costly and permanent Comment continuing trial of less costly and invasive concrete solution. solutions that are observable around town. Packet Page 190 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Our city needs to spend down the pension debt & stop spending huge amounts on small percentage who bike. We think that the city should not be The Plan does not commit city resources to projects but spending any unnecessary money on provides a blueprint for meeting General Plan and Slobikewalk.org ANYTHING right now since we are deeply in Climate Action Plan goals. Active Transportation 6 General Comment Anonymous debt. The city is fiscally irresponsible. If you improvements can reduce automobile use, which reduce Comment insist on spending money we do not have then costs for maintaining city streets and related more money needs to be spent on walkers. Most infrastructure, which are a significant portion of the people have 2 legs & walk. Not that many people City's annual budget. ride bikes. The walkers seem very unrepresented on the ATC. You are marginalizing walkers & auto users (drivers/passengers). I like what I have seen in the proposed active transportation plan. It seems to be a pragmatic Slobikewalk.org way of achieving the stated goals. I know that you The Plan is consistent with the County Bikeways Plan in 7 General Comment Anonymous can only deal with issues within the city borders, providing connections to outside of the city. Comment but I would urge you to also consider how to improve the biking options for interconnecting the cities and surrounding areas. The Plan does not commit city resources to projects but Slobikewalk.org Stop wasting money on these idea. The city provides a blueprint for meeting General Plan and 8 General Comment Anonymous doesn't even have enough money to pay for their Climate Action Plan goals. Active Transportation Comment large pensions, let along bike lanes that they can't improvements can reduce automobile use, which reduce maintain. costs for maintaining city streets and related infrastructure (a significant portion of the city budget). No one moves here and pays astronomical rents or mortgages and then rides a bike. They drive Bicycle use in the city has steadily increased over the and mostly drive very nice vehicles. If the city last 10+ years and is currently at just over 8% of all Slobikewalk.org were really serious about reducing cars, only citywide trips, which is significantly higher than the 9 General Comment Anonymous allow homes to be built with one car garages or a national average of less than 1 %. Providing high quality Comment carport or neither of these. It would reduce the bicycle infrastructure is a key strategy in increasing cost of housing and accomplish your goal more bicycling and works in tandem with increasing housing than building more bike lanes primarily for capacity in the city. recreational use. Packet Page 191 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 My concern is personal safety of walking and the increased amounts of homeless persons that have mental disabilities, on drugs, passed out, often Slobikewalk.org clustered on walkways with their bags, dogs, etc.. 10 General Comment Anonymous I understand that most are harmless but their This comment will be forwarded on to the Community Comment erratic and unstable behavior can install real fear. Development Department. I am talking about daylight hours. I have lived and worked here since 1993 and have never felt this level of discomfort walking in my town. How can we help resolve this as a community? The Plan does not commit city resources to projects but provides a blueprint for meeting General Plan and Slobikewalk.org I do not see how the city plans to pay for this Climate Action Plan goals. A majority of the Plan 11 General Comment Anonymous work. Who does the city plan to charge ? How projects will be built as a condition of development as Comment does this fit within the city budget ? well as require a financial commitment from the City through the 2-year budget planning process over multiple years. Slobikewalk.org Maintaining roads and utilities is a large portion of the 12 General Comment Anonymous Get your head out of the clouds and put this City budget. Active Transportation improvements can Comment money to better use, like fixing roads and pipes. reduce automobile use, which reduce costs for maintaining city streets and related infrastructure. The city of San Luis has no monies for these Slobikewalk.org projects, there are many projects in the works that Maintaining roads and utilities is a large portion of the 13 General Comment Anonymous need attention but this should not be one of them, City budget. Active Transportation improvements can Comment the city is starting to have infrastructure reduce automobile use, which reduce costs for problems,water mains are old and at times have maintaining city streets and related infrastructure. broken, city streets are falling apart Slobikewalk.org It's interesting that the photos of in this project do The public draft of the Plan did include photos of San 14 General Comment Anonymous not represent the diversity of people who live and Luis Obispo's diverse community, however new photos Comment work in the City have been added to the Plan. Packet Page 192 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 SLO is among our favorite towns to visit. Your 15 General Support Rick Fee commitment to improving the safety and Comment received efficiency for people on bikes and on foot makes your town all that much more attractive The APCD would like to commend the City of SLO for updating their Bicycle Transportation Plan and transform it into an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to include both bicycling and walking needs. Promoting active 16 General Support Air Pollution transportation by incorporating pedestrian and Comment received Control District bicycle infrastructure into the City is consistent with several of the APCD's land use goals and policies in the Clean Air Plan and helps meet the SB 32 and SB 375 emission reduction targets set by California legislation and the California Air Resources Board. I urge you to support the Active Transportation Plan as recommended by the Active Transportation Committee without major 17 General Support Taylor Mehelic revisions. I want to see these Tier 1 projects Comment received considered in the FY21-23 budget cycle without delay so that we can start to see real progress in support of active transportation in our city. 18 General Support Emily White I am in support of the Active Transportation Plan. Comment received I support the ATP as written, and look forward to 19 General Support John Clements USING these trails to get to and from work, travel Comment received to parks and recreation, and to go downtown and *buy things* to support our local economy. I urge you to support the Active Transportation 20 General Support Gregor Kraemer Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions. 21 General Support Laura Joines I am writing to support the active transportation Comment received plan in SLO city and county. Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 22 General Support Brad Langer I am writing to support the active transportation Comment received plan in SLO city and county. 23 General Support Nathan Deweber I am writing to support the active transportation Comment received plan in SLO city and county. I urge you to support the active transportation 24 General Support Kathryn Anne Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions 25 General Support Erik Justesen ATP writing to record my support of the Draft Comment received The ATC unanimously recommends the draft 26 General Support Jonathan Roberts Active Transportation Plan without any major Comment received modifications for your review and are excited for it's final adoption in February, 2021 ! Active transportation is a critical component of the city's climate, vision zero and mode shift goals, and I was encouraged to see unanimous 27 General Support Kim Lisagor Bisheff support for the ATP from the Active Comment received Transportation Committee. Please pass the plan without major revisions so that we can stay on track with those goals. I am writing to endorse the ATP, as guided by the Active Transportation Committee.This includes support for the Tier 1 projects (without major 28 General Support Robin Erickson revisions) for the FY21-23 budget cycle. The Comment received ATP has incorporated a lot of detailed and well thought out work, and appears to have followed a systematic process for determining priorities. I urge you to support the Active Transportation 29 General Support Raquel Smith Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions. Packet Page 194 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 I urge you to support the Active Transportation 30 General Support Willy Wilson Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions. 31 General Support Eric Azriel Supports the Tier 1 list of projects in the ATP Comment received I am writing to express my support for the Active 32 General Support Helen Mastache Transportation Plan as unanimously Comment received recommended by the Active Transportation Committee. I am writing to express my support for the Active 33 General Support Shannon Klisch Transportation Plan as unanimously Comment received recommended by the Active Transportation Committee Please support the Active Transportation Plan as 34 General Support Christina Jacobson recommended by the Active Transportation Comment received Committee without major revisions. Please support the Active Transportation Plan as 35 General Support Ellie Petersen recommended by the Active Transportation Comment received Committee without major revisions. 36 General Support Aaron Williams I'm writing to share my support for the ATP and Comment received related projects I urge you to support the Active Transportation 37 General Support Kyron Blau Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions I urge you to support the Active Transportation 38 General Support Dawn Janke Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions I urge you to support the Active Transportation 39 General Support Robin Marzi Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Packet Page 195 Transportation Committee without major revisions Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Please support the Active Transportation Plan as 40 General Support Melanie Mills recommended by the Active Transportation Comment received Committee without major revisions. I urge you to support the Active Transportation 41 General Support Milo Skapinsky Plan as recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions. I am writing to express my support for the Active 42 General Support Tony Skapinsky Transportation Plan as unanimously Comment received recommended by the Active Transportation Committee My family strongly supports the Tier 1 projects of 43 General Support Scott Petersen the Active Transportation Plan without any major Comment received revisions, as recommended by the Active Transportation Committee I urge you to support the Active Transportation 44 General Support Steve Klisch Plan as unanimously recommended by the Active Comment received Transportation Committee without major revisions 45 General Support Slobikewalk.org Anonymous I support creating walking/biking /bikin only public pp g g g y p The Plan proposes policies and projects to create more p p p p J Comment right of ways. dedicated space for both bicycling and walking. As an active bike rider, walker, jogger and skateboarder all over the town, I'm thrilled to see Slobikewalk.org a number of the pain points I've experienced in 46 General Support Anonymous the 8+ years I've lived and commuted in town Comment received Comment (namely the Higuera/Madonna/South and Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersections) addressed in the plan Packet Page 196 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Just wanted to express my appreciation for 47 General Support Douglas Bing creating more dedicated bike lanes throughout the Comment received city. I hope for a respectful balance between the needs of cyclists and motorists. 48 General Support Ethan Stan I am very pleased with what I am seeing in this Comment received Draft Active Transportation Plan. Bicycling and Fig. 10 Connectivity could use a legend or some 49 Walking in SLO Andy Pease way to make the intent a little more obvious. I The text and the map for Fig 10 has been revised to Today finally get it about the islands, but it took a few better explain connectivity islands. tries. The Progress list on p. 83 seems a little anemic. I Bicycling and know you can't list everything, but it would be 50 Walking in SLO Andy Pease nice to give kudos to the number of projects or Additional successes have been added to the list. Today bike lanes that were added since the 2013 plan. There has been so much great work done on bike lanes and intersections! The plan notes that of the 709 residents who completed the survey, 83% own a bicycle, thus bicycle ownership isn't a major barrier to biking The statistic of bicycle ownershp came from a in the City of San Luis Obispo. SLOCOG staff statistically valid survey of residents of San Luis Obispo Bicycling and noted that this percentage seemed higher than and did not include visitors. The Plan does recommend a 51 Walking in SLO SLOCOG expected. A separate but related consideration not bike share program that can benefit visitors and the City Today addressed in the plan is the numbers of visitors will continue working with partners including SLOCOG, who arrive in San Luis Obispo without a bicycle to determine barriers to bicycling and appropriate and do not know how/where to access one. programs to improve use. SLOCOG suggests that the plan consider visitors as another potential audience who may not have easy access to a bike during their stay. Comment that the disadvantaged community Agreed. The disadvantaged community maps are from Bicycling and maps provided in the Plan do not tell the whole the California AB 1550 and SLOCOG regional 52 Walking in SLO Gary Havas story on what the true equity issues are in San definitions of disadvantaged communities, which are Today Luis Obispo given that Cal Poly and agricultural used to determine scoring criteria for competitive state areas are a huge part of the zoned areas grants. Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Goal 3 Accessibility. It seems like `accessibility' is pretty limited and almost technical as a term. It Goal 3 has been revised from "Accessibility" to 53 Vision and Goals Andy Pease could be replaced with something like: easy, "Convenience" with additional explanation of the goal. preferred, desired, enjoyable, obvious, delightful, convenient, etc. A performance measure for equity has been added with 54 Vision and Goals Bike SLO County Incorporate a gender and race lens to the ATP a goal that the demographics for active transportation modes should endeavor to be the same as for single occupancy motor vehicle use. Adding an equity metric could significantly shift 55 Vision and Goals Sarah Flickinger they types of facilities in certain areas of the city, An equity performance measure has been added to the and that is absolutely something that should Plan. happen Connectivity is a core aspect of the Plan, which proposes 56 Vision and Goals Karen Aydelott Urge more connectivity for bicycling. over 240 projects to improve connectivity throughout the city. Though the plan mentions desired roadway speeds or bike infrastructure on various roadway Slobikewalk.org types and prevailing speeds, it does not mention A goal of the plan is to explore lowering speeds as low 57 Vision and Goals Anonymous or highlight that speed is directly linking to as 15 mph on appropriate roadways if allowed by the Comment survivability of someone walking or bilking. California Vehicle Code. There should be greater emphasis within the plan to lower all roadway speeds within the city limits. One thing that only got glancing discussion is the advent of all sorts of scooters, wheeled electric platforms, electric bicycles, motorized The Vision and Goals as well as the Design Guidelines 58 Vision and Goals BK Richards skateboards. I think it is important to: have revised language on the challenges and acknowledge how big this fulfills some goals, opportunities presented by electric bikes as well as other acknowledge how it all complicates planning, micromobility devices. describe how it is or is likely to add to the safety challenges. Packet Page 198 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Allowing certain shared micromobility devices is complicated by a city ordinance that prohibits scooters 59 Vision and Goals Gary Havas Remove portion about needing city council and other rolled devices on city streets. Amending or support to pursue shared micromobility eliminating the city ordinance by the city council would be necessary to move forward with a shared micromobility program with these kinds of devices. The People For Bikes city rating is a new methodology Suggestion to swap the performance measure of and is still going through significant transformation in 60 Vision and Goals Rick Ellison the Bicycle Community Designation of the each iteration. Given that in 2020 the City achieved the League of American Bicyclists for the People For No. 1 rating in the nation with this methodology, the Bikes City Rating Bike Friendly Community designation is perhaps more usable as a guide for future improvements. The Plan mentions that projects will be pursued The City Council at the Dec 8, 2020 Study Session 61 Vision and Goals Gary Havas where supported by individual neighborhoods. I expressed that neighborhood support was an important like this generally, and fear it also. aspect of Plan implementation. I would welcome a "quiet streets" initiative The Plan goals call for the City to explore reducing 62 Design Guidelines Davis Foley comprising: road diets, citywide maximum speed speed limits as low as 15 mph in neighborhoods per the limit of 25 mph and elimination of slip lanes. California Vehicle Code. The City does not have authority over freeways, which are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. The Design Guidelines, however, do include the following policy: I would like to make one more attempt to obtain "4.13 The City shall work with Caltrans to encourage stronger policy language with regard to biycle and and advocate that freeway overcrossing/ 63 Design Guidelines Myron Amerine pedestrian facilities in the ATC Plan as it pertains undercrossing and interchange projects incorporate to freeways. the needs of bicycling and walking as part of the project design, avoiding conflict points where cyclists and pedestrians must cross the path concurrent with high speed/volume motor vehicle movements." 64 Design Guidelines Lea Brooks Request to consider resources from Bike SLO The Design Guidance mentions the Cal Bike Quick - County and Cal Bike in the Plan. Build Guide and other advocacy resources. On page 141 and 155, When reconfiguring parking stalls, consider using diagonal reverse -in 65 Design Guidelines RRM Design Group types where feasible. These reversible diagonal Comment received parking stalls give drivers a better view of oncoming traffic (vehicular and bicycle). Packet Page 199 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 P. 65 and 66 of design guidelines recommend 66 Design Guidelines RRM Design Group adding design criteria to locate transit stops at far Comment forwarded to the Transit Division. side of the intersection instead of before the intersection P. 69-70 Recommend design guidelines include The Plan policies detail options for textured and colored 67 Design Guidelines RRM Design Group adding guidance on using specific colors or pavement for pedestrian use, which the City has already pavements for pedestrian areas. begun to employ consistant with Federal and State standards. Since electric bikes are a growing assisted active 68 Design Guidelines Air Pollution transportation mode, APCD recommends the ATP More discussion has been added on the challenges and Control District provide specific information about their use and benefits of electric bikes. limitations within the City. The City minimum standard for the width of a bike path Healthy Expressed concerns about extra danger posted to is greater than the State standard and provides more 69 Design Guidelines Communities Work pedestrians on shared use paths from users of e- room when sharing the path with other path users. As e- Group bikes. bikes gain in popularity, additional outreach on the importance of yielding to other path users and lowering speed will be important. The ATP Design Guidelines and existing City Healthy Expressed concerns about obstacles in the way of Engineering Standards establish design policies and 70 Design Guidelines Communities Work sidewalks and bike lanes such as signs, utility standards that identify the proper location for signs, Group poles, landscaping. utility poles, and other vertical obstructions within sidewalk and bike lanes consistent with Federal, State and industry -leading design best practices. The Plan recommends use of sharrows only in areas 71 Design Guidelines Gary Havas I believe that "sharrows" are no longer considered where other improvements are not feasible or appropriate for modern bicycling infrastructure. recommended and only under lower speed and volume conditions. Please include all of the features for Upright This table is from national guidance on the Bicycle as Adult in the Bicycle as Design Vehicle Table in Design Vehicle. It includes a variety of types of bicycles 72 Design Guidelines Gary Havas the Design Guidelines. Otherwise this table will but not all types as the bicycle industry is changing be misleading. 2013 is a LONG time ago. rapidly especially with trikes, cargo, and electric bikes. Recumbents are increasingly of the trike type, and The table provides a sample rather than a complete list, even those are popularly being electrified. which would be chall ftC*q�tcPl=0 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 The City will consider all devices to deter speeding in 73 Design Guidelines Gary Havas Comment to consider cameras, speed sensitive work zones that are permitted by State law. Cameras for strobes to enforce lower speeds in work zones speed enforcement have had legal challenges in California. Consider language for including street drainage The Plan supports the City's broader efforts on 74 Design Guidelines Gary Havas bioswales landscaping and other low impact development best practices. Peak Rack type racks are the City approved standard. U- Consider making Peak Racks with the hi-lo racks are allowed in areas where there is a small 75 Design Guidelines Gary Havas design the city's bike rack standard and making u- footprint and no other rack type is feasible. The Plan has racks inappropriate with the exception of docking been revised to state that when the Zoning Regulations cargo and larger self supported (kickstand) bikes. are updated that U-racks are discouraged to the extend possible. The recommended environmental considerations Per the City Natural Resources Manager, these 76 Design Guidelines Gary Havas near Laguna Lake in the Design Guidelines seems considerations have been carried over from the 2013 more appropriate for another document Bike Master Plan given the environmental context of Laguna Lake area. An action strategy in the 2019 RTP is to fund the planning, environmental assessment, design, and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities that close gaps in the network (both physical and perceived) and improve multimodal mobility, including Safe Routes to School projects, and many proposed Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects can help to 77 Implementation SLOCOG implement this action strategy. SLOCOG Comment received applauds the City's efforts to implement a progressive program of projects that gives high priority to projects with the potential to increase mode share and improve safety and look forward to our continued collaboration to advance projects where local and regional goals and priorities can be achieved Packet Page 201 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 A new page to the Plan has been added discussing the The Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection Bob Jones Trail and the Railroad Safety Trail. 78 Implementation Helene Finger project from Los Osos Valley Road to Octagon Additional description has been added for this segment Barn should be included in the Tier 1 project list. of the Bob Jones Trail stating that it will be recategorized to a Tier 1 project if the County is able to secure funding for the section to Avila Beach. I would like to specifically highlight the 79 Implementation Jesse Englert categorization of projects into a tiered structure Comment received by recommending that all projects remain in their tiers as currently categorized. I am writing to you to ask you to please complete 80 Implementation Michelle Hamilton the current bike paths we have in town before Comment received diverting funds to other bike projects. The Plan proposes important portions of shared use paths as Tier 1 projects including portions of the Bob I would like to recommend that we connect Jones Trail and Railroad Safety Trail. Other portions are 81 Implementation Linda Spiers existing cycling paths to make them more useful included in the Tier 2 and Tier 3 lists however any of before adding bike designations on busy streets. these portions can be triggered for construction through conditions of development such as the portion from Orcutt to Righetti Ranch. Slobikewalk.org There is a lot of good stuff in the plan. I am 82 Implementation Anonymous highly supportive of building out the Tier 1 Comment received Comment corridors by 2030 and find the methodology and approach for project prioritization spot on. The plan should emphasize use of demonstration and pilot programs for its outreach efforts rather Demonstration projects are short period projects that can Slobikewalk.org than concept plans. This will give people more be useful for showing what the benefits of an 83 Implementation Anonymous chance to try out new roadway designs rather than improvement are using easily removable materials. They Comment focus on fear of change. Outreach efforts should can be used both for outreach or demonstrating a heavily focus on gaining opinions of those concept. walking, biking, or wanting to bike and walk. Slobikewalk.org Please prioritize protected bike lanes across the 84 Implementation Anonymous city and approve the ATP as is. Comment received Packet Page 202 Comment Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 The Plan includes the Bob Jones Trail from Calle Slobikewalk.org Joaquin to Froom Ranch Way as a Tier 1 project. The 85 Implementation Anonymous After reviewing the plan I would recommend Plan also recommends that if the County secures funding Comment moving Bob Jones Trail to Tier 1 status. for the portion to Avila Beach that the segment from the Octagon Barn to Los Osos Valley Rd will be recategorized from a Tier 2 to a Tier 1 project. I'd encourage however that the Committee prioritize closing of gaps between existing already accomplished improvements as a practical The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types way to build the sustainable network and higher from low speed neighborhood greenways on local use/comfort and reach for people opting to use streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on Slobikewalk.org bicycles as an alternative to getting into cars arterial routes. Gaps in the bikeway network will be 86 Implementation Anonymous because uncomfortable gaps remain. I am like completed over time through a mixture of development Comment many in the County that while I don't live in the mitigation and city initiated projects depending on a City I work in the City and make trips fora is priority and likelihood of increasing bicycle variety of reasons during my workday. Closing gaps within existing routes would make it easier trips. trips. and more attractive to bike during my day rather than always using a motor vehicle for those trips The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types Slobikewalk.org Please focus your efforts on closing the gaps in from low speed neighborhood greenways on local 87 Implementation Anonymous the current Bob Jones Trail, rather than start a streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on Comment new list of projects, especially ones that take arterial routes. Portions of the Bob Jones Trail will be bikers through such busy roads in the city. completed over time through a mixture of development mitigation and city initiated projects. I would like to see the city prioritize closing the The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types gaps and connecting our existing bike paths from low speed neighborhood greenways on local Slobikewalk.org before creating new cycle tracks on busy streets. I streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on 88 Implementation Anonymous live in the Sinsheimer neighborhood and would arterial routes. Portions of the Railroad Safety Trail will Comment like to see Bullock Lane put through to Tank be completed over time through a mixture of Farm Road, to name just one development mitigation (such as the segment along Bullock Lane) and city initiated projects. Packet Page 203 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 As recommended by the Active Transportation Committee, the segment along Los Osos Valley Road from Calle Joaquin to Froom Ranch is included as a Tier 89 Implementation Gary Havas I am concerned the Bob Jones Trail is not Tier 1 1 project. The segment from Los Osos Valley Road to the Octagon Barn has been revised such that if the County receives funding for the portion to Avila Beach that this segment will be changed from a Tier 2 to a Tier 1 project. This segment of S. Higuera will require further Consider adding S. Higuera from Tank farm north engineering analysis and community outreach given 90 Implementation Gary Havas to Bridge Street as a Quick -Build potential project potential right of way constraints, low potential to reduce lane widths, potential conflicts with emergency service response times and transit schedules. I think the city should put pressure on the county The City will coordinate with the County of San Luis Interagency to improve their bike lanes near SLO. Tank Farm Obispo on projects that are in the County jurisdiction. In 91 Coordination Robert Collins road and Buckley road are a nightmare to ride a addition, the County Bikeways Plan was consulted for bike on! How do you share a road when cars and the proposed City projects that terminate at the trucks are doing 55 mph? city/county border. Packet Page 204 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Page 22, Goal 3.3c Include discussion to consider projects and coordination with the San Luis Obispo County Stormwater Resource Plan (Stormwater Resource Plan) to help the County achieve its regional stormwater treatment goals. The Stormwater Resource Plan identifies complete streets and green streets projects as The Plan includes a goal to incorporate stormwater opportunities to include management elements into active transportation projects 92 Interagency RRM Design Group stormwater treatment (such as Low Impact where feasible. Staff will review the County Stormwater Coordination Development). A multi -benefit project that Resource Plan and look for opportunities to echo the incorporates transportation and stormwater is a recommendations of the plan into future capital strong candidate for grant funding from improvement projects. various state agencies. Stormwater Resource Plan: https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public Works/Forms-Documents/Committees- Programs/Stormwater-Resource- Plan/Documents/Stormwater-Resource-Plan.pdf On page20, Consider adding San Luis Coastal Interagency Unified School District to the list of partners to 93 Coordination RRM Design Group acknowledge the importance of the City-wide SRTS network and the recommended program policy 6.3 on page 123. Revision added Packet Page 205 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 It is important to understand Caltrans' role in implementing active transportation improvements along the state highway system, particularly "Main Streets" like Santa Rosa Street. While seeking feasible opportunities for complete street enhancements (at times based on local plans) to incorporate in our State Highway Operation & Protection Program (SHOPP) projects, often we find ourselves constrained in a variety of ways Interagency and benefit from partnerships. These partnerships 94 Coordination Caltrans such as with the city, San Luis Obispo Council of Comment received Governments (SLOCOG), and other pertinent resource agencies helps to further refine the potential improvements, seek funding, and provide technical expertise. It's also worth mentioning that locally -sponsored projects, whether stand-alone or features added to existing SHOPP projects, are required to establish a maintenance and/or cooperative agreement with us for long-term maintenance needs of the new elements. On the survey results on p. 40 of the plan, it lists Safety education and outreach to all modes of `drivers are speeding...' as a top reason. It occurs transportation users, especially motorists, is an important to me that so much of what we are having to build proposed program of the Plan. The City and local wouldn't be needed at all if we had a culture of partners have had limited success with education efforts slower, considerate driving. I know the ATP is given that a large share of motorists in the City are not 95 Programs Andy Pease putting in the physical infrastructure, which is the residents of San Luis Obispo. Therefore, the Plan, most reliable tool, but I wonder if there could be following outreach results and input from the Active some acknowledgement and program focused on Transportation Committee, places a focus on behaviors of people driving cars. Signage, infrastructure improvements with a strategy of quicker advertising, forums, campaigns, getting into high and more cost effective implementation strategies as a schools and colleges, etc high priority. Packet Page 206 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 SLOCOG & Rideshare work together to implement the Safe Routes to School Capital Grant Program and convene the Safe Routes to School Taskforce, compromised of member agency planners & engineers, bicycle & health advocates, 96 Programs SLOCOG and school/district representatives, which helps Comment received guide the development of the grant program and guidelines and offer input on SRTS projects and program best - practices. SLOCOG and Rideshare look forward to partnering with the City on future SRTS planning, projects, outreach and efforts SLOCOG commends the City for its vision to develop a "Safe Routes for Seniors" program. Rideshare's Know How to Go mobility management program focuses on overcoming barriers to public 97 Programs SLOCOG transportation Comment received and increasing independence for seniors and people with disabilities through mobility options counseling and oneon- one travel training. Rideshare hopes to coordinate with the City on its efforts to reach similar goals Packet Page 207 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Safety is frequently noted as a primary barrier to biking and walking and much of the collision data indicates driver distraction at fault. The City should consider the possibility of an ongoing driver education and The Plan includes a goal to improve safety education for awareness campaign all users of the road. Given that these issues are regional 98 Programs SLOCOG that places increased emphasis on the as well as local, the City looks forward to partnering responsibility drivers bear to protect the safety of with SLOCOG and others on this effort. more vulnerable road users, such as people who bike and walk, who are at greater risk of experiencing severe injury and death as a result of reckless and distracted driving behaviors. SLOCOG is encouraged to see recommended implementation of a Mobility as a Service (MAAS) platform and continued assessment of a bike share and other micro -mobility programs. An action strategy of the RTP is to develop a regional MAAS platform to provide a 99 Programs SLOCOG unified, equitable gateway to transportation- Comment received related information and services. We encourage the city to consider working in partnership with our agency to develop the platform in order to share information and best practices as we explore future implementation of a regional MAAS platform. Packet Page 208 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Concerning helmet challenges for people with The Plan has been revised to include a goal to update the 100 Programs Bike SLO County afro -textured hair, can the city sponsor a project City's bicycle education efforts with an equity lens for for engineers at Cal Poly to solve this? things like providing tips for how people with Afro - textured hair can wear a bicycle helmet more easily. Recommend ATP expand its discussion of The Plan includes a goal for the City to explore Air Pollution "others zero -emission, motorized, micromobility expanded use of micromobility devices such as scooters 101 Programs Control District options like personal electric skateboards/scooters and the role and electric skateboards including whether to amend an they play in achieving ATP goals ordinance restricting such devices on city right of way. 102 Programs Healthy Communities Work Expressed concern for the need for a driver The Plan proposes improved education for all users of Group education campaign. the road including drivers. I also would pitch the idea of making the Slobikewalk.org downtown parklets permanent or somehow Along with design guidelines for the installation of 103 Programs Anonymous allowing downtown businesses to better utilize parklets, the Plan proposes making parklets a permanent Comment parking spots in front of their business for fun and program citywide. interesting opportunities Enforcement in the Plan was discussed with the Active Recommended removing Enforcement as one of Transportation Committee and was ultimately 104 Programs Rick Ellison the 6 Es in Chapter 6 recommended to remain in the Plan given that motorist interactions with bicyclists and pedestrians sometimes requires enforcement efforts. Packet Page 209 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 The City Council voted several years ago to not put a bridge across Brizzolara Creek, 105 Projects Jim Nett connecting the two sections of Montalban Street, This project has been removed from the Plan. as was shown on earlier versions of the transportation plan. It should have been removed from the plan, yet still appears in this version. Johnson Ave northbound a block or two before This intersection is identified in the Plan as a proposed the San Luis Dr split - In the vicinity of Breck crossing improvement. When the project is initiated, 106 Projects Raymond Kiefer adding sharrows would make riding safer for more detailed analysis will be conducted which will those staying on Johnson. inform what improvements may be constructed at that location. North & South bound Higuera at Marsh making a This intersection is identified in the Plan as a proposed left or right turn to access the Madonna Trail - As crossing improvement. When the project is initiated, 107 Projects Raymond Kiefer you know this is a cluster. Some striping of any more detailed analysis will be conducted which will type once going toward the 101 underpass inform what improvements may be constructed at that could save a life. location. Desire for a Ped x-ing at Osos & Leff - I live on This intersection is identified in the Plan as a proposed Church St across Er Sally Loo's. As a crossing improvement. When the project is initiated, 108 Projects Raymond Kiefer frequent walker to downtown, x-ing Osos is a more detailed analysis will be conducted which will challenge. inform what improvements may be constructed at that location. Road configurations are considered on a case by case Concern that road diets will negatively impact basis and are informed by collision history, volume, 109 Projects Leslie Terry those who cannot use active transportation and speeds, and other factors. In certain instances, road will create congestion reconfigurations, such as with South St, can improve congestion by eliminating lane weaving while also improving conditions for active transportation. Packet Page 210 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types from low speed neighborhood greenways on local Bike lanes are mostly ok for adults, but I don't yet streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes n feel comfortable allowing my kids to ride around arterial routs depending on a planning level analysis of 110 Projects Eric Zeeb town. In the short term I would also love to see feasibility and street context. In addition, when projects some sort of bike lane/path to get across the south are initiated, other roadway improvements will be part of town such as down tank farm, which considered in tandem which can help further improve currently does not exist. the comfort level for active transportation. Shared use paths on both sides of Tank Farm Road are proposed projects in the Plan. We suggest the city consider further analyzing the routes to and from CSU-Cal Poly where bicycle usage is high along with the State Route (SR) 1 intersections of Foothill Boulevard, Highland Drive and Murray Avenue. We support a strong partnership between the city, CSU-Cal Poly, SLOCOG and Caltrans to improve the Foothill The Plan proposes multiple projects to improve the Boulevard corridora major multimodal comfort level of bicycling and walking to Cal Poly both III Projects Caltrans connector providing access to and from the along State Route 1 and parallel routes such as the university, housing, workplaces and commercial Railroad Safety Trail and the Anholm Neighborhood outlets. We recommend working collaboratively Greenway. The City looks forward to coordinating with to develop and implement a grade -separated Caltrans and Cal Poly on projects of mutual benefit. facility in the vicinity of SR 1 (Santa Rosa Street)/Boysen Avenue. SLOCOG's 2019 Regional Transportation Plan identifies the need for bicycle and pedestrian improvements along this highway, but funding availability remains a challenge. Packet Page 211 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Protected bike lanes require wider shoulders to provide adequate space between vehicles and bicyclists. It's likely that installing these bike lanes on Santa Rosa Street, between Walnut Street and Highland Drive, would be challenging as much of the roadway is fully built out with two lanes in each direction, two-way left turn lanes in the median or left -turn pockets, shoulders less than 8-feet-wide, and multiple driveways and cross streets along the corridor. Closely spaced driveways may result in potential conflict points from vehicles entering and exiting. Comment received. Mention of relinquishment has been 112 Projects Caltrans Implementing wider shoulders at this location added to the Plan as a possible option. would likely require widening as well as reducing or eliminating a lane. Eliminating a lane at this location is problematic as it will create operational impacts, so Caltrans is unlikely to support this approach. We recognize that local control of a main street can help communities achieve their active transportation vision. Toward that goal, we remain open to discussion on relinquishing a portion of SR 1 to the city. We also recommend the plan include some narrative about relinquishment as an option for future consideration. The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types Fully connected Class 1 trails and neighborhood from low speed neighborhood greenways on local greenways should not be reserved for some streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on 113 Projects Sarah Flickinger neighborhoods, with only on -arterial pathways arterial routes. Portions of the Bob Jones Trail and available in others. Railroad Safety Trail will be completed over time through a mixture of development mitigation and city initiated projects. I feel strongly that the Bullock Ln and the Bob The Bob Jones Trail between Righetti Ranch and 114 Projects Jennifer Schaevitz Jones Trail connections should be built because Bullock Lane is currently in the planning stage in we don't feel safe riding on busy roads and cycle connection with an adjacent residential development. tracks won't make them safer. Packet Page 212 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Eliminating the BJT gap and the Bullock Lane gap along the railroad by the new subdivision The Bob Jones Trail between Righetti Ranch and 115 Projects Wendy Disch Would be two major improvements that would Bullock Lane is currently in the planning stage in benefit the most riders and pedestrians. I connection with an adjacent residential development. recommend that both of these should be listed in the Tier 1 category. Painting curb extension along the Neighborhood Greenways was discussed during all stages of the outreach for the 2020 Resealing Project which included two neighborhood meetings, flyers posted around the neighborhood, social media engagement and a dedicated City webpage with project specific information. This Slobikewalk.org I live on the Morro bicycle path and the city has planned art work was also included as agendized items 116 Projects Anonymous decided to place art in front of my home without at the Active Transportation Committee and City Comment ever contacting me. Council prior to the approval of the 2020 Resealing Project. Following that general planning effort, additional engagement was done specifically to encourage neighborhood participation in being an artist or serving on the selection jury, which was comprised of 14 jurors of residents who live within these neighborhoods. Slobikewalk.org Get the lighting under Chorro overpass in place Lighting the Choro overpass is part of the Anholm 117 Projects Anonymous before someone is injured or further serious Neighborhood Greenway, which is a Tier 1 priority Comment trouble occurs. project. Promote more walking in addition to biking While the Plan has a citywide focus, the final draft because 28% of the population are senior citizens. includes more description of proposed improvements in 118 Projects Allan Cooper The draft Active Transportation Plan does not the downtown including crossing improvements and adequately address mid -block crosswalks, traffic widened sidewalks for the benefit of pedestrians of all calming and sidewalk widening needed in our ages. In addition, an aspect of the prioritization process Downtown Core. included proximity of projects to senior living facilities. Packet Page 213 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 I love all of the support and effort put into making our community more safe for biking and walking. Comment has been forwarded to the City Natural 119 Projects Tate Isaacs I would also like to advocate for the expansion of Resources Manager. In addition, an aspect of the the trail systems in our open spaces and if prioritization process included proximity of projects to possible the addition of a bike park where riders parks and open spaces. can dial in their riding skills The Active Transportation Plan places an emphasis on a I hope you will consider raising the priority for Tier 1 network of projects that can be built with relative Slobikewalk.org the penny lane Fairview crossing. This would speed. The crossing of the railroad at Penny Lane would 120 Projects Anonymous allow the neighborhoods surrounding the hospital require an encroachment permit from Union Pacific. Past Comment to get downtown and to the northern part of town coordination with Union Pacific has taken up to ten without having to go out onto or cross Johnson years to achieve and therefore the Penny Lane crossing Right next to a very busy and dangerous was not recommended by the Active Transportation Committee for inclusion into the Tier 1 network. Slobikewalk.org Let's make sure these intersections, pathways and The Plan proposes increasing streetlighting in high 121 Projects Anonymous corridors are as safe to bike/walk/jog/ride along at demand locations. Comment night as they are in the day time! Slobikewalk.org There needs to be better bike safety lanes at the The Plan proposes protected bike lanes on both Broad 122 Projects Anonymous Broad St - South St - Santa Barbara Ave and South Street as well as a crossing improvement at Comment intersection. the intersection of the two streets. Packet Page 214 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Connect the SLO Bob Jones Trail section at LOVR to Johnson Ranch via the Octagon Barn. The Plan proposes the Bob Jones Trail from Los Osos 123 Projects Jack Shoulders The proposed Vallagio development should Valley Rd to the Octagon Barn, however it will require provide a walking/biking path that connects the coordination with the County as most of the segment is Irish Hills trails (Neil Havlick loop) to the near outside of the City jurisdiction. the SLO Bob Jones Trail at LOVR. The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types from low speed neighborhood greenways on local Slobikewalk.org Please focus on completing/connecting the bike streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on 124 Projects Anonymous and walking paths vs putting walkers and cyclists arterial routes. Portions of the Bob Jones Trail and Comment on busy roads. Railroad Safety Trail will be completed over time through a mixture of development mitigation and city initiated projects. it appears that the current bicycle lanes were built and future lanes are planned based mostly on "hope" and not on the reality that hardly any bicycles are actually using these lanes. On the Bicycle use in the city has been on a steady increase other hand, our city is getting bigger and more over the last 10+ years and is currently at just over 8% 125 Projects William Watson congested because of these new lanes, but not to of all citywide trips, which is significantly higher than the extent that people are "going to get fed up and the national average of less than 1 %. buy a bicycle". The latter is a pipe dream and expensive. People instead are going to use the more environmentally alternative of getting an electric vehicle rather than getting a bicycle. I am a Cal Poly student living off campus and The Plan includes a diverse mix of bike facility types ride my bike to campus daily. I hate riding on from low speed neighborhood greenways on local Slobikewalk.org busy streets and try to avoid them as much as streets, to shared used paths and protected bike lanes on 126 Projects Anonymous possible. I would prefer to have the connections arterial routes. Portions of the Railroad Safety Trail Comment of the current bike paths finished instead of leading to Cal Poly will be completed over time through leaving those be and adding larger bike lanes on a mixture of development mitigation and city initiated busy streets. projects. The City has just broken ground on a new portion of the trail fr L'kg.4e gg stwe1 15 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 LOVR from Madonna south to S.Higuera has Slobikewalk.org heavy traffic use (vehicles at —40-50 mph speeds, 127 Projects Anonymous juxtaposing for position for access to Hwy 101 The Plan proposes protected bike lanes on this segment Comment entrance ramps). Improved protective bike lanes of Los Osos Valley Rd. and/or separate dedicated bike lanes might improve safety. Slobikewalk.org A separate bike path next to tank farm road would The Plan proposes shared use paths on both sides of 128 Projects Anonymous be a huge improvement for local commuters and Tank Farm Road, however portions of it are in the Comment tourists. T County and will require coordination with that agency. Very supportive of grade separated crossing of 101 at Broad St. Have you considered an underpass or use of the existing and adjacent Brizzolara stream culvert? Alternatively, The Plan includes the Anholm Neighborhood Greenway, 129 Projects Devin Gallagher Consider daylighting overpass mid block on which will provide improved connections for bicycling Lincoln St. What about a connector along and walking across Foothill Blvd as well as connections Brizzolara Creek/101 to Santa Rosa Park/Cal to the downtown. Poly? Yes it is tight as but a shared path would provide an advantageous internal link for residents where cars can not go. Packet Page 216 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 I did not see any coordinated activity with County in planning routes. The City should be aware to promote bike commuting from outlying suburbs and towns requires some level of commitment, funding and research to perform coordinated routes with other governmental The Plan will work in coordination with the County 130 Projects John Hedgepeth entities. Second, shared pedestrian bike routes can Bikeways Plan to improve connections outside of the be a problem both in terms of safety to cyclist and city especially the Bob Jones Trail. pedestrian and also lowered efficiency especially to the cyclist. If you look at major European city routes, these two forms of transportation are separated. Quite often there is a bicycle path next to sidewalks Please repair the bike lane on tank farm road. I Comment has been forwarded to the maintenance 131 Projects Dorothy Curhan use it almost every day on my trike and the lane division. Depending on the location on Tank Farm Road, isn't quite wide enough and free from debris the request may need to be forwarded to the County as portions of the road are outside the city jurisdiction. To improve safety and therefore use for Sidewalks located on the frontage of private residences pedestrians the sidewalks on Chorro and Broad are the responsibility of the property owner. In addition, 132 Projects Crissa Hewitt and cross streets from Foothill to the freeway the Plan includes curb ramp and other pedestrian need to be completely redone. amenities as part .of the Anholm Neighborhood Greenway 133 Projects Slobikewalk.org Anonymous foothill blvd should have a protected bike lane The Plan does propose a protected bike lane on Foothill Comment Blvd. Packet Page 217 Attachment E - Response to Public Draft Comments Item 16 Given that the Plan is a high level document, more I wonder if the statement of feasibility of projects detailed engineering analysis and public outreach will be 134 Projects Gary Havas could be composed with more of a statement necessary as projects are initiated. Given project commitment to completion than this suggests unknowns it is necessary to point out that certain projects may be infeasible or have incompatibility with the community. Agree that LOVR is a Tier 1 project — our 135 Projects RRM Design Group employees who travel this route observe many Comment received near -misses related to cars pulling out into traffic and narrow lane situations. Packet Page 218 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to Active Transportation Committee Comments Number Page Comment Res onse 1 7 General Expand discussion of COVID-19-19 to include more Language added expanding the discussion on the general disruptions in the world. importance of general resiliency. 2 General Remove mentions that SLO is "unaffordable" and Many citations changed to "affordability" rather than instead rephrase to mention that the plan makes SLO "unaffordable." more affordable. 3 1 General Change "unshelteredpersons" to "unhoused" persons Revisions added. 4 General Many of the figures are very dense and cannot be Map resolutions have been improved and additional zoomed by the reader to provide more detail (e.g., changes made to make the maps easier to read. New Figure 12). Suggest these figures be placed in the maps of Tier 1 and 2 projects have also been added to the document at high resolution and with more detail (e.g., Plan. street names). 5 General Add language on the increase in the number of ebikes to Discussion on the increase, opportunities and challenges induce new riders and require monitoring for safety of ebikes has been added consequences 6 General More explanation needed on how the tiers achieve More explanation added on how completing the Tier 1 ridership goals. network by 2030 will help to reach General Plan and Climate Action Plan goals 7 2 Add previous ATC members in acknowledgements Previous members who provided input have been added section. 8 5-12 City Manager's introductory references three Section on the Plan objectives and other relevant sections innovations/focus points for the plan: 1) quick build, 2) amended LTS, 3) equity/sustainability/economy (page 5). The plan's objectives of safety/health/sustainability, access/mode shift, collaboration/equity are introduced page 8. On page 10, it says the plan will accomplish mode share, bike/ped network, connectivity to destinations, reduced pollution/GHG, and disadvantaged community input. Packet Page 219 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 2 On page 10, it lists quality of life improvements to the build environment, public health, housing, and climate action. On page 12, the three foundations of sustainability, equity, and economic resilience are introduced. In the Vision & Goals chapter (starting page 18), the goals are divided into four sections: build it, safety, accessibility, and equity. The plan will regroup goals, pillars, etc. At minimum, the goals as introduced in the beginning of the plan (yellow box on page 8) should correspond to the Vision & Goals chapter. 9 6 Suggest an addition to the Introduction stating that this Revision added. is a "living" document and as such will be periodically reviewed and updated as we learn from implementation of the plan and as the needs of city residents and visitors evolve — this will be particularly true of the project lists 10 14 Think Chapter 4, on community engagement, should be Given that the Plan will be consulted by grant funders, moved to the end. See how it flows chronologically, but Chapter 4 has been kept in its place to highlight the for anyone reading this plan that information is not as importance of community engagement in San Luis useful/relevant as subsequent sections (the important Obispo but has also been revised to remove redundancies results of outreach are included in the prior chapter between Chapters 3 and 4. about biking and walking today). 11 18 Remove wording "highest priority" "moderate priority" Revisions added. and "lower priority" in the project tier discussion box. 12 20 add the "ATC" in point 1.6. Revisions added. 13 21 7.25 Please consider removing U-style racks as an U-style racks are an approved option in areas where there option as they require bicycles to use kickstands. Unless is not enough room to install other racks which have you are willing to scratch/dent up your bike frame. Pg. larger footprints. However, language in this section and 21 Doors leading into buildings with bicycle parking the Design Guidelines has been added discouraging use need to be automatically operated or at the very least of U-style racks in favor of other racks when possible. Packet Page 220 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 3 not swing shut) to accommodate large bicycles. Also, Language added to encourage updating the Zoning make sure they are on the bottom floor. Regulations to reflect discouraging U-style racks as much as possible. 14 23 There is an existing reference to exploring changes to The Active Transportation Plan is a document for the Municipal Code as they pertain to micromobility (p. pedestrian as much as bicycle use. Allowing bicycle 23). This is currently the only reference to the Municipal riding on sidewalks may conflict with pedestrians and Code in the plan. Suggest making this a broader those with disabilities. However, projects in the Active exploration to review any conditions in the Municipal Transportation Plan will significantly increase the Code that pertain to bicycling and walking such as number of bicycle routes with physical separation from exploring allowing sidewalk bicycle riding. traffic thus helping to reduce the demand for sidewalk riding. 15 23 "Open streets" should be explained/defined (p. 122? As A definition for this citation of Open Streets has been first mention). added. 16 26 ACS data should be supplemented with local data on The Plan mentions using city survey data as well as mode share. national data ACS 17 26 Consider an equity performance measure. A performance measure for equity has been added with a goal that the demographics for active transportation modes should endeavor to be the same as for single occupancy motor vehicle use. 18 46 Like the side -by -side comparison of total collisions and Additional discussion has been added in the text severe/fatal collisions by mode but think the relationship highlighting the disproportionate impact of collisions on should be highlighted in the text as well. In my mind, active transportation modes. the conclusion is that active transportation collisions have a disproportionate share of the injuries. 19 47 The paragraph requires the reader to assume that the Additional discussion has been added highlighting the discussion is about collisions with cars, but this is not disproportionate impact of collisions on active stated and should be. The question is further clouded by transportation modes. the information in the "2017 Collisions by Type" pie chart. The chart shows 86% car, which we might assume means car versus car, but could mean car versus object (ex. tree, light pole) collisions. By default, does 8% bike collisions mean bike versus bike or object (potentially true, but not stated), or bike versus car Packet Page 221 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 4 collision? The description and the diagrams should be more clearly labeled. Additionally, the reader should be informed as to why (presumably) car versus car collisions are significant in a bike -pedestrian plan. 20 p. 53, This entire paragraph is very confusing and needs to be The section on Low -Stress Connectivity Islands has been column 2, re -written. A large part of the confusion lied in the error revised to make it simpler to understand. In addition, the para 1 of there being no symbols on Figure 10 to indicate corresponding map has been updated to show where significant colors of the roadways. This reader deduces barriers to connectivity exist. (maybe incorrectly) that on Figure 10, interconnected low -stress corridors are displayed in blue. The paragraph should lead the reader in by stating, "On Figure 10, interconnected low -stress corridors are displayed in blue." "Line two says, "When the color of a collection of roadways changes or the color is broken...." We don't actually mean the color of the roadway. The statement would be clearer if it said, "when the LTS of a collection of roadways changes or varies, ... 21 p. 53, The word "connected" is a jargon term in this document The section on Low -Stress Connectivity Islands has been column 2, that seems to be a shorthand implied definition for revised to make it simpler to understand. In addition, the para 2 "interconnected low stress travel". In this sentence the corresponding map has been updated to show where full "implied definition" should be written barriers to connectivity exist. out, ex. "These crossings provide the majority of the downtown area with more interconnected low stress travel." Make it clearer what "connected" means and provide more definition and explanation. 22 54 Figure 10's legend should include the low stress and The entire section on Low -Stress Connectivity Islands high stress symbols and descriptions. The colors used in has been rewritten to make it simpler to understand. In the figure are not defined and the scale is too small to addition, the corresponding map has been updated to highlight pertinent information, so the figure is not show where barriers to connectivity exist. informative. Packet Page 222 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 5 23 p. 55, Figure 11 should be presented before Figure 12, or the Revision added. column 2, labels should be switched. ara 1 & 3 24 80 Chapter 5 needs more explanation and examples of what A new section has been added with several photos protected bike lanes are with photos of different ways to showing that protected bike lanes can be designed in construct them. different was given the needs and context of a roadway. 25 80 In Chapter 5, more attention is needed to prevent right- The introduction of Chapter 5 includes language about and left -turn collisions and provide a clear Vision Zero policies to reduce injuries and that the understanding of the policies and design. They need to crossing improvements and corridor improvements will be stronger in the Design Guidelines, Appendix C, table address improvements at high injury locations. on page 19. Add language in chapter 5 on how some of these toolbox options help with these collisions. 26 80 In Chapter 5, consider adding a pathway project Plan revised to include a portion of the Edna -Price connecting Goldenrod Rd to the new business parks Canyon Trail as a non -city project that would need to be along Farmhouse Lane. initiated by the County. 27 96 Supplement text on Figure 18, which itemizes the gaps Map resolutions have been improved and changes added between existing and proposed, along with numbers that to made to make the maps easier to read. New maps of place these gaps on the map. The goal would be for Tiers 1-3 projects have also been created and added to community members to zoom in on their specific area of appendix B. Network viewer added to the table. concern and be able to understand the status. Make clearer that the network viewer is available. 28 112 Full page photo has great subject matter and facial Photo replaced. expressions but may elicit some cringe -worthy comments due to the camera angle and the shadows created by the skirt of the central rider. Strongly suggest replacing this photo with another. Some potential photos taken of micro -mode pedicab riders in SLO are provided as separate files in this commentary email. 29 117 Move mention of "fall prevention for seniors program" Revision added to earlier in Chapter 6. 30 128 Appendix A will be most useful if it includes details of Map resolutions have been improved and additional the specific projects, such as zoomed in Project maps, changes made to make the maps easier to read. New Packet Page 223 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 6 and description/diagrams of the various Project maps of Tiers 1-3 projects have also been created and Components (or links to city website documents with added to appendix B. Network viewer website link added these details). to the table. It would be helpful if the "Appendix A" wording were a live link like the Figure XX wordings are. Make public viewer footer more visible in Appendix A. Many of the public comments received to date express concern that the ATP is not addressing the gaps in the existing low stress bike and pedestrian network. And yet closing the gaps was one of the major goals when assigning projects to the Tier system. The conclusion is that the ATP is not clearly relaying the information so that the public can be better assured in the gap -closing priority. Repeating the comment on page 53 (above), the document relies on the wording "connected" quite often with the implication that the reader understands this word to mean `interconnected low stress travel". But that point is not well made, leading to questions and criticisms by multiple reviewers that the ATP does not address gaps in safe travel routes. The ATP needs to provide more detailed (zoomed in) maps and more detailed descriptions of the Tier 1 and 2 bike and pedestrian projects in order to address the common concerns voiced by the reviewing public. 31 132 Double check mileage total on Prado/Dalidio corridor. Revision added. 32 138-141 The cost range for a bike lane is shown at $100k- The cost for a bike lane has been revised $400k/mile (page 138), but the subsequent case study of the Higuera street bike lane says the project cost $15k total. That project is at least half a mile (measured on Google Maps), so that would be only $30k/mile. If we recently implemented a project for less than the low Packet Page 224 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 7 range for a facility, think we should adjust the estimate range. 33 140, fig 29 The dollar cost estimates should be rounded to the Revision added nearest $100 or $1,000. Showing costs to the penny presumes more detailed cost analysis than anyone realistically has and makes the table look cluttered. 34 141-142 Really like the suggestion to consider EVERY project as While many projects (though not all) in the Plan have a having potential to be a quick -build project. Due to the potential for quick -build implementation, the map shows high cost of implementing the Tier 1 plan, it will be the projects with the highest potential for quick -build crucial to use quick build techniques as much as implementation. Further study will indicate which possible. See no reason why quick build techniques additional projects have potential for quick -building cannot be used in at least some aspect of all projects. based on more engineering analysis Also like the suggestion of removing the quick build map as it does seem to be limiting. 35 143, fig 30 This figure has no reference in the text. Every figure Revision added should have some textural reference. Also, Figure 30 begs the question of, "How is this figure related to the Tier 1 and 2 project Figures 26 and 27"? The text could address this question, as in, "all quick build projects fall within the Tierl and 2 categories." (this is example wording - not checked for accuracy) - or some similar discussion. 36 144, para 1 Pre -approved designs are a time- and cost -saving Pre -approved designs are mentioned in Goal 7.4.2 measure that the City should pursue. However, this action is not listed as a stand-alone goal in this document. Pre -approved designs should be included as an Implementation Policy. 37 144 Make a clearer distinction between a pilot project and a Revision added quick -build project. 38 149 "Continue progress towards the City's Vision Zero goal The Plan has been revised to reflect that the City will of eliminating traffic fatalities and severe injuries, endeavor for a 100% reduction in fatal and severe injuries endeavoring towards a 75% reduction by 2030" 1 by 2030. believe this should be a 100% reduction by 2030 since Packet Page 225 Item 16 Attachment F: Response to ATC Comments Page 8 Vision Zero calls "to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries" We received a few correspondences regarding Vision Zero and I suggest staff incorporate stronger language into the plan. There is room for improvement and revising these policies to use the newest techniques. The categories in which we capture these statistics have a car centric perspective. We need to update our Vision 0 perspective to the latest standards. 39 149 Remove this mention of the Performance Measures The performance measures have been repeated in the since it already appears in Chapter 2. Implementation chapter since they are inextricably linked to the Vision and Goals of Chapter 2 Design Appendix 40 Throughout Avoid use of paint for colorized bikeways — reduced The City's preference on permanent installations is for friction, particularly when wet. Use thermoplastic or thermoplastic, MMA or other permanent materials, MMA instead (which also require less frequent however paint is an approved material when applied maintenance). according to State guidelines especially for quick -build installations. 41 5 Add a reference to a few Cal Bike resources. The design guidelines mention Cal Bike Quick -Build ide and other advocacy resources 42 7 Made this comment the last time around and maintain Staff and the consultant were not able to find alternative that describing children and teen pedestrians as having national guidance, however the AASHTO guidance will "insufficient judgement" is completely backwards. The still help the designer understand the variety of needs and design should be sufficient for the range of population abilities of pedestrians when designing projects. using it, not the other way around. I get that these are from AASHTO, but I don't think we're beholden to repeat that language in our plan. (look for other national guidance on this to reference). Packet Page 226 'Ll"N"R5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Active Transportation Plan Roll and stroll towards a safe, equitable, and sustainable community ZER CMDPBN4LItt$0 0 GAT Y OJh CITY OF SH111 DELIS OBISPO L�rs o� Recommendation As recommended by the PC and the ATC, adopt a resolution to: 1. Adopt an Initial Study / Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact 2. Adopt the Active Transportation Plan 3. Authorize the Public Works Director or their designee to approve future administrative revisions to the plan as necessary Plan at a Glance ■ First comprehensive plan on both bicycling and walking transportation recommending: ■ Policies ■ Projects ■ Programs ■ Plan will act as a blueprint for transportation investments ■ Increase readiness for State grants which have added a focus on Disadvantaged Communities POW VdERE U�Iq SC �, 4N 0D ti.� H �5}}OES_ Plan at a Glance 4 Major Goals: 1. Build it 2. Safety I Convenience 4. Equity Climate Action Plan Goals • Goal of carbon neutrality by 2035 • Transportation largest producer of GHG C Of City (T) Resident Type of Transporta i;nn Trips GAT Y O.n CITY 4F S.1II1 LUIS OBISPO LEI so - GENERAL PLAN - - • Lora use - a . _ - — - • circulation - - - Housing - _ - - Ncise safety - _ _ Conservation and and Open Perks and water and MAY 2eI5 CITY OF SAH 111.E OB IS P❑ R i- 5 VOLUME 7 Technical Foundation and Work Program ClimaL-Action Plan for CnrnrnNnity RAuwAry Project Prioritization rity MEIIK�pr—io -A Tier 1 Projects with the greatest potential to increase bicycling and walking Tier 2 that plav an important role in the future bike and walk network but with less potential than Tier 1 projects Tier 3 Projects that help complete the bike and walking network but not likely to generate measurable increases in bike and walk trips. Actively pursue funding for these projects first opportunities arise but not at the expense of delaying Tier 1 projects Mostly through grants and where required as a condition of new development Public Draft Comments Public Review Period: 11/19/20 - 12/31/20 • Draft available on city website and www.slobikewalk.org • Total of 437 comments received • 135 substantive comments & 302 unsubstantive comments (Attachment E) 0 42 ATC Comments (Attachment F) Highlights of Final Plan Revisions ■ Additional explanation of concepts including: ■ Plan goals ■ Level of Traffic Stress analysis ■ Project Prioritization ■ Electric bikes ■ Name of Goal 3 changed from "Accessibility" to "Convenience" ■ Provided clarification on the survey statistics only results from the statistically valid survey used ■ Provided more data on the causes of causes of bicycle and pedestrian collisions Neighborhood Compatibility ■ Add language to Goal Policy 4.5 on Neighborhood Vitality and Livability Added: "Endeavor to design and implement active transportation projects that are compatible with existing neighborhoods, encouraging neighborhood residents to participate with project planning and identifying specific design elements that best fit the unique character of their neighborhoods" ■ Removed Montalban Bridge project (will also be removed from project list) Neighborhood Greenways ■ None of the neighborhood greenways would currently require traffic diversion or any other significant improvements than striping and signs (except Anholm and Oceanaire) ■ Anholm Neighborhood Greenway is included as approved in 2018 � ■ Oceanaire will undergo additional outreach and design study Oceanaire Neighborhood Greenway Na tij ese Eto Cir Protected Bike Lanes Patected Hike Lane An arrstreet bikeway that is separated from traffic by a vertical harrier, such as a cub, median, ar hollards. Also caged a "cycle track" ar "separated bikeway'. May he one- ar two-way. Protected Bike Lanes are most halpfut on streets with high traffic voiume, rEKj dar truck traffic, Ng<n pwWnq turnover, or with a posted speed limit greater than 30 mph. While ctcb W4 type protected hike larhW are tlt4 prelerred treatment, there are Various Ways tq design protected hike lanes green the context and cheractertsftcs of a particular street. 93 Improved maps / Added maps �r V RZ ;� p1 i, � ♦S .. �� .•• L �4 '�4 O• a.... _ San Luis Obispo Pr°weds Pedemeian Her 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Corridors 9 Ma«c'^sry��e, Y 1 , a°'"P'°•°"'"^' Pa,k«open -----Sna.U. N. ----- Protected 6ity[le Lana Proposed &[y[Ie,PedesVidn �'^«C,ossinp[morowment Raa BwyGe La^e •••••ueipnbo'baoa G'ee^+.ay n �� T,aiK BwYGe Rouse G,ade-Sep 'yW Crweseg e a� , Se! iirrwy a mti..rrn,ae.:u.e.��y o s (� Equity New Equity Performance Measure The demographics for those using active transportation modes should be the same as those using single occupancy motor vehicles Equity ■ Update Bicycle and Pedestrian Education to reflect diversity, equity, inclusion ■ Explore outreach in non-English languages ■ Target focused outreach to women and people of color ■ Explore ways to lower the cost of eBikes for disadvantaged community members Equity ■ Policy 4.13 When allowed and appropriate, use icon signs and striping rather than text Figure 9C-3. Word, Symbol, and Arrow Pavement Markings for Bicycle Lanes Normal "Jhi lne A - Bike Symbol Normal white line 72 inches T2 mches ` t 44 inches 1 64 inches 4114144 44 inches B - Helmeted Bicyclist Symbol C -Word Legends Bob Jones Trail and Railroad Safety Trail ■ More explanation on implementation of shared use paths ■ Clarifying which portions of shared use paths are proposed in Tiers 1, 2, and 3 ■ Bob Jones Trail (LOVR — Octagon Barn): If the County secures funding for the portion from Avila Beach to the city, then this segment will be recategorized from Tier 2 to Tier 1 Downtown Concept Plan ■ More explanation on how the Active Transportation Plan echoes and implements specific bike/ped projects ■ Pedestrian and bicycle crossing improvements in the downtown concept plan ■ Discussion about sidewalk widening ■ Shared streets ■ Permanent parklet program LEGEND. =.. n.. Reea� Z, R.n.. £A. sl v 0 �MA1 uy 3 Additional Pedestrian Improvements Citywide ■ More discussion on improvements to: ■ Sidewalks ■ filling sidewalk gaps ■ curb ramps ■ street lighting FF Prioritized Areas for Pedestrian Improvements Figure 33. Pnorriized Pedestron Improvements k srr "'Ma"m P. • J l lraNa c !• �4 •... A 01 x�f o 05 t M" a r r 1 San Luis Obispo C"*lSen Opportunity Areas Prioritized for Pedestrian Improvements 1 sow, - - - - Fmistng and Proposed Greenway Pubi-c Facilities A Parke Ras K0 Concentrator Trails ``}} Senior Living LoriC rwwVrraw+ alas I Bike Parking ■ Program Policy 6.8: Opportunities to combine bike parking with public a rt Minimize use of U- Style Racks The Plan is a Conceptual Blueprint ■ The Active Transportation Plan is a conceptual blueprint. While it does propose specific projects, each project will require focused community outreach and more in-depth design study prior to construction. Approving the Plan does not automatically approve each individual project. ROLL& STROLL �NPIAN A710 CITYOFSLOACr�JA NSPORT �V C Y O� CITY 4F SqIl LUIS OBISPO L�Ig 04 r Rider ROLL& STROLL NPIAN A710 CITYOFSLOACr��JA NSPORT Sam Fig r Rider A;_ * kk �' AR d 411111 r �T,STRO r � - 40 '4. .IW 1\v r Or MARE m6 FLAGS TO WALK AND HIRE? � NCW WayLD YGV HR AND HIKE? PI-AfE YD mm Af' MaW WaULp Y6V MAKE :C p PLACE 7'a W BE7TE4 pLK AND HIKE] r s 14 r-- a i t MpyZ 5� A aETY<R i HPW urowy ��� a00 e«L ro �-x <w slrt? lop tomC ' Nbmp YOU Mp,*" SLG A 8E77ER p AGE TO WALK AND HIKE? w, ` / � k /[ACE TP u�l SZO n s<r/ES'�ol mal a . � 01. /J6W WOVLD YOV MAKE SLO AT<IfF< ` PLACE TO WALK A<D 8lKE? �� r r� ■ Other Activities Household Transportation Survey 2019 Bicycling 4- Which of the fotlowing best describes your bicycling behavior? itE.:. I'll ride in any conditions I feel safe riding on most I'll ride in protected streets facilities Not interested / Not comfortable 1� Ob' Vp L�quna talaPti• ! i ii �c.iy� �rar Active Transportation Committee Input Over 19 Meetings ATC M eetin gs can the Active Trans p ortatiton Plan Date Subject Outcome Feb 2, 2018 flan Kickoff' Discussion and Input March 15, 2018 Early Plan Development Discussion and Input July 19, 2018 Early Flan Development Discussion and Input e t 20, 2018 Early Plan Development Discussion and In Lit Nov 1 2018 Plan Update Discussion and Input Nov 29, 2018 Plan Updato Discussion and Input Jan 17, 2019 Plan Update Discussion and Input Feb 26, 2019 Bike fPed Network Discussion and Input March 21, 2019 Bike fPed Network Discussion and Input April 17, 2019 Bike fPed Network Discussion and Input May 16, 2019 Plan Update Discussion and Input June 27, 2019 Bike fPed Network Discussion and Input July 18, 2019 Bike fPed Network Discussion and Input Aug21 2019 Bike fPed Network. Discussion and Input e t 19, 2419 ATP Policies Discussion and Input e t 5, 2019 Crossing Improvements Discussion and Input [act 24, 2019 Open House Work5hop Workshop Input Nov 21, 2019 ATP Outreach results Discussion and Input Dec 10, 2019 Project Prioritization Methodology Discussion and Input Jan 1, 2020 ATP Policies Discussion and Input March 10, 2020 Project Prioritization Tier List Action Item May 4, 2020 Vision and goals Action Item June 11, 2020 Design Guidance Action Item Aug 20, 2020 Implementation and Comprehensive List of Policies in the ATP Action Item In person meetings or other input ■ Cal Poly ASI and Administration ■ Save Our Downtown ■ RISE SLO ■ Downtown SLO ■ SLO U40 ■ HEAL-SLO ■ SLO Chamber of Commerce ■ And many others Public Noticing ■ Legal ad published in the SLO New Times ■ Press Release ■ E-notification ■ City website posting (www.slocity.org) ■ Project website (www.slobikewalk.org) ■ Email Blasts to those signed up for plan updates ■ Announced on KCBX Radio Concurrence Unanimous recommendations adopt Active Transportation Committee ✓Planning Commission 2/9/20 2/3/30 Fiscal Impact PRIORITY LEVEL COST ESTIMATE (LOW) COST ESTIMATE (HIGH) Tier 1 Projects $16,842,000.00 $195,378,000.00 Tier 2 Projects $3,119,000.00 $27,533,000.00 Tier 3 Projects $30,888,000.00 $181,431,000.00 Environmental Review ■ An Initial Study / Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact ■ Public Comment Period: Nov 19, 2020 — Dec 31, 2020 ■ The Active Transportation Plan is a programmatic / policy -level document and the adoption of it does not authorize any land use changes or development ■ Individual projects from the Active Transportation Plan will require a project specific CEQA analysis when initiated ■ The Initial Study does not identify any potentially significant impacts that would occur as a result of adoption of the Active Transportation Plan Recommendation As unanimously recommended by the PC and the ATC, adopt a resolution to: 1. Adopt an Initial Study / Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact 2. Adopt the Active Transportation Plan 3. Authorize the Public Works Director or their designee to approve future administrative revisions to the plan as necessary, so long as the revisions do not alter the policy framework, project recommendations, and substantive content of the February 2021 edition of the Plan and any such revisions are documented in writing and provided to the City Clerk for record keeping GA� Y _gip .'' •� � " L r 'S '► �► 4 . �'k fir r� J lid K. JL i• MI a , y' �y t ' 14P GAT Y O n CITY 4F SqIl LUIS OBISPO LEIS OO V \ I S Plan Kickoff ATC Council Planning Council February Dec 3 Study Commission Adoption 2018 Session Dec 8 1 Dec 9 Feb 2 �k, Y G., ti CITY 4F SMI LUIS OBISPO Questions for Discussion ■ Question #1: Does the policy framework of the Plan provide a suitable roadmap for reaching mode share targets identified in the Circulation Element? ■ Question #2: Is Council satisfied with the overall organization of the Plan? ■ Question #3: Does Council have additional input on the proposed bicycle and pedestrian network? Questions for Discussion ■ Question #4: Would Council like to make changes to proposed project prioritization, namely projects in the Tiers 1-3? ■ Question #5: Does Council have concerns with establishing an ambitious target date of 2030 for completing the Tier 1 network? ■ Question #6: Is Council satisfied with the proposed Performance Measures and plan to monitor success? Response to ATC Comments 1. Improved clarity of maps and ability to "zoom in" 2. Additional explanation of plan concepts including the project tiers 3. Added language on the causes of collisions involving bicycling and walking and how the number of collisions are disproportionate to the number of motorists. 4. Added or change certain photos to illustrate key concepts including protected bike lanes Barriers to Walking? IT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME To WALK IN TOWN MORE OFTEN BECAUSE... Drivers don't watch out for me — 52% of respondents are I don't feel safe walking at night 47°/❑ concerned about It takes too long 4% drivers not paying There are no sidewalks during some parts of my trip 35� attention when people There aren't enough safe crossings 2$°i° are walking Sidewalks are in poor condition 22% Sidewalks are too narrow 177 % I don't feel safe walking during the day 6% I am not in good health to walk S% d% 25% 50% 75% 1 DO% Pedestrian Facility Types PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL & PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON SIDEWALKS & PASEOS Different types of crossing improvements can greatly enhance the experience of walking throughout the City. It is important to note that some of the facilities listed below in the toolbox promote both pedestrian and bicycle safety. The crossing improvements below are part of the City's toolbox. PEDESTRIAN SCRAMBLE HIGH -VISIBILITY CROSSWALK BULB -OUT CURB RAMP REFUGE ISLAND RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON Barriers to Bicycling? don't like to bike in heavy traffic Gaps in the bicycle network make it difficult to travel safely Drivers are speeding or are too aggressive There aren't enough bicycle lanes The streets are too dark at night can't carry all my stuff Bike lanesipaths are poorly maintained (debris. faded striping, potholes) Biking isn't safe for my children There isn't enough secure bike parking IT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO BIKE IN TOWN MORE OFTEN BECAUSE... 66% 6296 _ dos 43% ' 40% 3S% 34% ft takes too long - 29% There are no showers or lockers at my destination1?(, I don't have a bike 1$0 I am not in good health to bike 1196 I don't want to wear a helmet 1 %; 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% I I 'O of respondents are concemed about bicycling in heavy vehicular traffic Types of Bicyclists in SLO Afong + Feadam ViUru m We a beyde a, arN mad" mqW&B&S I m� Cafrrfortable L*wq tre lam _rkd nciN -n a vmiarar rria neF on rma u _,hum but mod scme exirmm Nwraus ::Cyckrkg more rr-xJUWe f t UOY tak armor m rhe 3EMOY& Not vermode Awng tr* food rM rsrr., :r ndd-g an m-qw 3DEets. ewm mM a bkm Ana- Praer seer PRrMH S ar h3*4MlfiC s% Enthug. astc + CanM ent OD&*My wdb auurnaWe walk in aorr= rrLarm taa Orow ID AdE n #mr am 1% No Way No Now Pm offas w,re 9rn* am- rut somml; ncyorg for nmmwma of nac Or snphf aWWSYD aM Ul2Br 13M CO rile tramlp in adopt tag n aryr day_ 60% of SLO Residents Would Bike More If More Low -Stress Routes and Crossings Were Available i CITY OF SqII LUIS OBISPO s { is r f{J I �4V r K GkT Y 0A CITY OF SqIl LUIS OBISPO L�Ig o4 Bike and Ped Network Figure 17. Proposed Bicycle Network � `t"'� smre Unlwh ey 01 a • v b-"Own �'\ _. _A. 9 0.5 1 Miles o- • - ...........L t San Luis Obispo W4 Proposed Bicycle Network -- - Shared -Use Path Bicycle Route -- - - - Protected Bicycle Lane School ---- Rail - - Bicycle Lana •---• Neighborhood Greenway f.) BicyclelPedestnan Grade- Park or Open Space Trads Separated Crossing 0 alta Over 240 projects of routes and crossing improvements Existing and Proposed Bicycle Shared -Use Path Network Shared Use Path 11 31 Bicycle Lane 37 13 Bicycle Route 26 0.4 Neighborhood 1.5 10 Greenway Protected Bike 0.1 25 Lane 63 Crossing Improvements 30 Grade Separated Crossings Cost Estimate: $50 million (low) - $406 millio (high) Figure 26. Tier 1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects State UnIWL ser—r Can a 'N mar., taf io 0.5 1 WIN So, TX5 San Luis Obispo 0 Proposed 84cyclelPedestrian School 01ty of Sm WS Qbwo Tier I Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects Major Crossing Impiovement •see Ch 5 V MilUMorrol Park or open space prt*a9edb4eway —Anh-olm Neighborhood Greenway — Hig;jera$tWersh$t Railroad Safety Trail Proposed BicyclelPedestrian Rail ar-d CIDSSIFF9 VWS Broad St! Santa Barbra Cordder Los Clsos Valley Rd PradedDilidio Minor Crossing Improvement Proposed RicyclelPedlestran Trails Foothill Blvd — Madonna RdV Tank Farm Rd Cm-minn &ft MUM Tier 1 Network: Highest priority with greatest potential to increase citywide use with potential to be built in a timely manner vacheco ementary School ��-0 F o�c� ion Santa Rosa Park Q The Monday Club 7 O 8 O % poi Rile Mission San Luis Aid trips Obispo de Tolosa Charles A and L D O W N Mary R Maino H I S T IC Open Space D I S T R T von or QHa Ele nta School {d9 t Q SLO Swim Center ake ... ny's � ©le Lagt.School Irish Hills Laguna Park Q a South Hills rk 0—It Rd Natural = Open Space Reserve 0 Q Cost hotesale Dignity Ith La bnrato ri RRM Design Group _ ,TpdOrcwr,l L ( Islay Open! `$ Whiz Kids T 0 WaAace Gr p Engineering n Luis.. San L 's Obispo Co ty c Regional y Airport S 0 i W1:J i Prioritization Factors GAT Y O.n ti CITY OF SMI LUIS OBISPO Safety and collisions Destination Proximation Disadvantaged communities - n----7N V \IS Outreach results Pavement Projects chools Parks and Open Space Cal Poly Downtown Retail and Employment Centers Transit Connections Senior Services ti CITY OF SMI LUIS OBISPO V -tS Structure of the Plan ■ Chapter 1: Introduction ■ Chapter 2: Vision and Goals ■ Chapter 3: Bicycling and Walking in SLO Today ■ Chapter 4: Community Engagement ■ Chapter 5: Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects ■ Chapter 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs ■ Chapter 7: Implementation ■ Appendices: Detailed Project Information and Design Guidelines Response to Questions • Why does the Plan not include more emphasis on active transportation within the Downtown Core? • Considering the current economic environment, why is the City prioritizing millions in spending on bike and pedestrian projects? • Will individual neighborhoods be able to provide input on specific projects identified in the ATP? • Have the effects of the ATP on auto traffic circulation been considered? • How does the Plan accommodate the needs of seniors, young children, and those with disabilities —many of whom will likely have to rely on automobiles for transportation? i Response to Questions Why Does the Plan Prioritize Protected Bike Lanes Over Shared -Use Paths, Low -Stress Neighborhood Streets and Recreational Facilities ? State University � tt •, �taw � f'g F r � Sud.n.. vu 01 J Y 0 N 0.5 1 Tier 1 Bikeway Network: Shared -Use Path Neighborhood Greenway Protected Bike Lane State University What About the RRST & Bob Jones Trails? Shared -Use Path (Future) Shared -Use Path (Existina or Alreadv Tier 1 ] State University it t Why Not In Tier 1 Network? • Right -of -Way (numerous land owners, including UPRR) • Creek Impacts • Lack of connectivity to destinations • Personal security concerns • Constructability challenges — challenging to build in a timely manner Figure 27. Tier 2 and 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects . % Cagiomla 1 P7 Pc6yteehrwa sta4a Univaraly �. h � Yry `0� L kc Nffur Resn p"k A 6 sr* Rrsrrv�or Nai vra+ � se Q 0.5 A/ SL J 0 San Luis Obispo City orsmuuso Tier 2 and 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects -SEV C0FVF Tier 2 Projects Major Proposed BicydeJPedestrian Proposed 8fcydelPedesban S&,00l �--� Rail andcrossmgtypes Major Crossing Improvement Grade -Separated Crossing . Park or Open Space Trails 0 GkT Y 0A '° CITY 4F SqIl LUIS OBISPO LEIS 0 0 x Additional Pedestrian Specific Improvements Figure 2a. Priaritzed Pedestrian Ernpravemnents 1 ` �5 i � ya 9g s E ,�0 o:s 711�e San Luis Obispo Opportunity Areas Prioritized for Pedestrian Improvements New Pedestrian Programs and Goals$, ■ Continue ongoing safety and education campaigns ■ Parklets: Provides design guidance on parklets and recommends establishing a formal parklet program ■ Safe Routes to School: Proposes that the City will create a SRTS Plan for every K-12 School ■ Supporting Open Street Events Such as Ciclovia ■ Neighborhood Traffic Calming, public art, and placemaking opportunities. Implementation ■ Plan will be built over a number of years depending on funding and staff resources through the 2-year budget process ■ Leveraging Funds: Incorporate improvements as part of larger roadway resurfacing projects. ■ Quick -Build: semi -permanent projects that can be designed and implemented quickly, often with lower -cost materials ■ Projects Built as a Condition of Development: Transportation Impact Fees which collect fair share funding from development