HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/11/2020 Item 6, Otto
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Garrett Otto <
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:6/11 ATC Meeting Item 6
Dear ATC,
In reviewing the proposed design guidance and policy, it was a bit difficult to determine what was a
guidance and what is policy. I suggest the policy language be designated somehow in the final memo. I
think it's important to have strong policy language. There are plenty of details in the many pages of the
document, but I want to focus on some high level policy that will be most effective in implementing the
plan quickly and achieving many of the City’s ambitious goals. A few months back I gave a presentation
to you on Quick Builds. In discussions with staff, they agreed that the ATP would be a suitable place to
include a quick build policy. Let me remind you of my recommendations quick build policy language that
mimics other cities who have adopted such policies:
Quick Build/Rapid Implementation Policy:
1. San Luis Obispo is committed to achieving its Vision Zero safety goal, Circulation Element’s
mode share goals, and Climate Action Plan by prioritizing non-private automobile transportation
and implementing key elements of Active Transportation Plan.
2. Use Quick Build strategies to provide separated and protected (Class IV) bikeways to
complete the core bicycle network by 2030.
3. City Traffic Engineer to approve reversible and/or adjustable parking and traffic
modifications such as painted safety zones, bike lanes, adjustments to parking regulations,
parking and loading changes, changes to the configuration of traffic lanes and/or other safety
improvements to be implemented using materials such as roadway and curb paint, traffic signs,
traffic delineators, traffic signal changes, and transit boarding islands.
4. Quick Build Projects shall remain installed for a 24 months evaluation and to allow enough
time for behavior changes. A report will be provided at the conclusion of the evaluation period
with findings and future recommendations.
5. Improvements and resurfacing projects shall implement elements of the Active
Transportation Plan.
6. The city shall develop pre-approved low cost temporary residential traffic calming
design/elements in the public right of way such as traffic circles, painted intersections, mid-road
flex posts, chicanes, medians and roadway planters that residents can apply for, fund, and build
with City’s oversight. The intent is to make neighborhood streets feel safe for walking, running,
biking, playing, and socializing especially for our youngest and most vulnerable residents. Pre-
approved design and resident led implementation will reduce the time and cost it takes the City
to typically implement these features. The City may decide to make these permanent or
upgrade them during road repaving efforts.
1
Here are some suggestions for other policy language that I think would greatly impact safety, ridership,
and funding ATP projects.
Major Policy Additions:
1. All streets with posted speed limits of 35MPH or greater shall include Class IV bikeways.
2. All streets shall be designed or redesigned for a maximum speed of 35MPH. A collision at
speeds greater than 35MPH, a pedestrian or cyclist is more like to be killed than to survive.
a. Methods: Narrow travel lanes to minimum allowed width, remove additional travel
lanes which only encourage passing and higher speeds, use of vertical barriers to visually
narrow roadway width.
3. New developments and projects which increase VMT mitigate the increase by building or
providing fair share funding for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities in proportion to the
City’s mode share goals.
4. An impact fee shall be collected at all city owned parking lots, structures, and metered
spaces to fund projects and elements of this active transportation plan. Fees shall not be less
than $0.25 per hour or less than 10% of long-term pass cost.
Though I did not want to spend time on every proposed policy in the attachment I want to point out a
couple of items with regards to guiding documents.
Attachment 5, Page 8 of 74
1.1 –Consider amending to not reference just the California Highway Design Manual. This manual
may be many years behind best practices and can be more car focused in sever aspects. If we have
adopted guidelines from organizations like NACTO and AASHTO then we should expand the
statement to read some like this instead:
“All bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall meet or exceed minimums set forth in guidance
documents list previously including future updates or revisions to those documents.
Thanks for all of your hard work and effort on this.
Sincerely,
Garrett Otto
SLO Resident
Bike SLO County Advocacy Chair
SLO Streets for All committee member
2