Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08/31/1993, 1 - Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan
���NII�NII�IIIIIIIIIII'I��N�f Ilulll c san r MEEyTING DATE: llu city of lugs o��spo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT STEM NUMBER/ FROM: Michael McCluskey, Public Works Director PREPARED BY: Terry Sanville, Principal Transportation Planner Craig Anderson, Bicycle Coordinator SUBJECT: Consideration of the Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. CAO RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should adopt a resolution: A. Adopting the Bicycle Committee's recommended Bicycle Transportation Plan with additional amendments suggested by Staff (see Section VII below). B. Approving the Negative Declaration for the Bicycle Transportation Plan (including specified mitigation- - see Section VIII below). I. WHAT IS THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND WHY WAS IT DEVELOPED? The Bicycle Transportation Plan is San Luis Obispo's blueprint for fostering bicycle transportation. The Plan provides for a network of on-street bicycle lanes and routes, off-street bicycle paths, bicycle parking facilities, and educational programs that promote an increase in bicycle ridership and ensure bicycling safety and convenience. In September, 1991, the City Council found that San Luis Obispo needs a comprehensive program to address the needs of commuter and recreational cyclists as a way of enhancing tourism, reducing local vehicle congestion, and promoting clean air. The Council created the ad hoc Bicycle Committee composed of five cyclist advocates and five City staff and directed the Committee to (among other tasks) bring to the Council a Bicycle Transportation Plan that meets the above stated goals and objectives. II. WHAT PROCESS DID THE BICYCLE COMNIITTEE USE TO DEVELOP THE BICYCLE PLAN? Between June, 1992, and March, 1993, the Bicycle Committee held 17 public input meetings to evaluate specific bike lane and boulevard proposals (reference Exhibit 13). In June, 1993, the Public Works Department staff published a draft Bicycle Plan that incorporated the outcome of those meetings. The draft Plan also includes other programs that address education and promotion. l— ! �►►����Ni�uIIIIIIIUp Ill city of San tuffs OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The draft Bicycle Plan was considered at five public hearings by the Committee in June and July, 1993. After receiving significant public input, the Committee forwarded recommendations to the City Council. III. WHAT IS THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION? The Bicycle Committee has recommended that: A. Twenty-three specific amendments to the draft Bicycle Plan be accepted by the City Council. B. The City Council adopt the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan as amended. C. The City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and support findings made by the Committee. IV. WHAT ARE STAFF'S RECOM(M[ENDATIONS? Staff recommends that the City Council: A. Modify 8 of the 23 Committee recommendations and accept the remainder. B. Adopt the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan as amended. C. Approve the Negative Declarations including specific mitigation measures for potentially significant environmental impacts. V. WHAT PROCEDURE IS RECOMMENDED FOR COUNCIL ACTION? Staff recommends that the City Council: A. Receive a presentation of the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan by the Public Works Staff and invite further comment by the Bicycle Committee Chairperson, Richard Marshall. B. Open the hearing to public testimony. C. Close the public testimony segment of the hearing and return the discussion to Council and Staff concerning: 1. Bicycle Committee and Staff recommendations (see Section VII). 2. Other issues identified by Council members. 3. Identification of mitigation measures and adoption of the Negative Declaration. ����► ��IIIII�I�U������III city of san lues oBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT D. Adopt a resolution: 1. Adopting the Bicycle Committee's recommended Bicycle Transportation Plan with additional amendments as recommended by Staff (see Section VII). 2. Approving the Negative Declaration for the Bicycle Transportation Plan (including specified mitigation -- see Section V.). VI WHAT ARE THE BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE DRAFT BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN? Section I of the Bicycle Plan presents a brief history of the Plan's development and its relationship to other adopted plans and programs. Section II presents goals and objectives. The overall goal of the Plan is to foster an increase in bicycling by ensuring that essential facilities are provided and educational programs are undertaken. Provision of essential facilities is addressed in Sections III and IV. Educational programs are addressed in Section V. Section III presents definitions and standards for various types of"bikeways:" Class I separated bike paths; Class II bike lanes on streets; and Class III bike routes (streets with bike route signs). Map #1 shows where bikeways should be established within the urban reserve and beyond to connect with bikeways in the County. The overall objective addressed by Map #1 is to "... complete a continuous network of safe and convenient bike lanes and paths that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and with county bike routes..." (Policy 3.3, draft Circulation Element, May, 1992). Section IV presents specific standards for bicycle parking. The Bike Plan addresses the need for both short-term bike visitor/patron parking and long-term employee/resident parking. Parking standards are recommended for each of the land use categories described in the draft Land Use Element. To implement these standards, the Bicycle Plan calls for an amendment to the Zoning Regulations, to revise existing bike parking requirements, and to the ARC guidelines to establish site planing criteria for bike racks and lockers. Section V identifies an array of promotional and educational programs that the City would sponsor. These activities will require City staff to work within a network of transportation, environmental, business, law enforcement and educational agencies. The programs recommended by the Bike Plan would be ongoing and supported by Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds that are earmarked for bicycle and pedestrian programs (2% of the City's total annual TDA allotment). Section VI identifies priorities that will be placed on implementing the various parts of the plan. High priority elements include: �uH�► ►�IIIII(I��I ►UU�II city of San WIS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The installation of bike lanes and bicycle boulevards that serve the transportation needs of people using bicycles for work or shopping trips. Construction of the Railroad Bicycle Path; and Sponsoring promotional and educational programs. Lower priority activities include establishing Class I bike paths that serve primarily recreational needs. VII. WHAT ARE THE 23 AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT BIKE PLAN RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE AND THEIR RESPECTIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS? The Committee's recommended revisions, presented below, fall into two categories: (A) Recommended Amendments to Objectives, Policies and Programs; and (B) Recommended Additions, Deletions, or Modifications Concerning Bicycle Paths, Lanes, or Routes. Staff comments and recommendations follow each Committee recommendation. AAmendments tui i�b�ecttyes, �otteres at:d Frnrarxis 1. Add the following objective to page 3 and amend the last objective on the page: Construct a network of Class I bicycle oaths within the City's urban reserve to connect with Paths in surrounding county areas. Provide technical assistance to property owners, a*4 developers and institutions such as Cal Poly in the design and location of facilities that encourage and accommodate bicycling. Comment. The Committee felt that since the draft Bicycle Plan included an objective for completing a network of Class II bike lanes, the plan should also include an objective for Class I facilities. Also, since institutions such as Cal Poly can have a significant impact on promoting bicycling, technical assistance from the City would be helpful. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 2. Revise policy C.3 (page 5), D.3 and D.7 (page 7), E.2 and G.1 (page 10), D.6 (page 14) to include the following minor word changes: C.3 The City should secure adequate rights-of-way in developing and redeveloping areas as part of any development or annexation activity. D.3 Bicycle lanes should be installed at the times specified by Policy 3.7 of the General Plan Circulation Element. iuH�ibH►�IIIII�I�I���►���1I MY Of San LUIS OBISp0 l COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT D.7 Bicycle lanes on the outside of parking should be deuble striped on both sides. The line closest to the parked vehicle should provide a reference for motorists to park efficiently next to the curb. E.2 Traffic levels and 85% vehicle speeds along streets designated as Class 111 bicycle routes should not exceed 10,000 ADT and 35 mph respectively. If these standards. are exceeded, designated facilities should be considered for upgrading to Class II bike lanes or Bicycle Boulevards after further study of alternatives. G.1 8ieyele—lane Bikeway demarcation (striping and stenciling) should be remarked on a regular basis. D.14 The Public Works Department will maintain a library of vendor information on bicycle racks and lockers and will assist develeprnen spensers developers with the selection and location of bicycle parking facilities. Convenient and secure parking encourages people to ride bicycles. (First sentence, page 12) Comment. The Committee made these minor word changes to clarify the intent of the policies. For further discussion, refer to the July 26, 1993 Bicycle Committee Minutes, attached as Exhibit 9. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 3. Include the following policy (already included in Section Q under Sections D and E: All bicycle (lanes) (routes)should meet or exceed minimum standards set by the California Highway Design Manual and those in this plan. Comment. The Committee felt that compliance with State design standards should apply to all types of bikeways: Class I paths, Class 11 lanes, and Class III routes. Therefore, this policy should appear in Sections C, D and E of the Bicycle Plan. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 4. Delete policy C.5 from page 5 and D.2 from page 7 and add a new Section C.1 to Chapter VI: Plan Implementation: paths.easements, and dFainage easements fer use as bieVele —5 �������►►►�Illllll�p� ��� �1 MY of San .UIS OBISpo Nii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT E).2 in the leng term, a" Gity arterial sweets sheuld safely eeeemmedate C_1 Plan Amendments: Any person may file an application for amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Plan with the San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. Applications will be acted on biannually by the City Council. Comment. The Committee deleted policy C.5 because it implies that the Bicycle Plan is not a complete effort to establish a network of bicycle paths, lanes and routes. The Committee also felt that policy D.2 was internally inconsistent with the Plan since the Plan map does not show Class II bike lanes on all arterial streets. The Committee also supports the inclusion of an administrative policy for amending the Bicycle Plan. The Staff-prepared policy C-1, shown above, identifies the City Council as responsible for acting on amendment requests scheduled for consideration twice a year. Staff Recommendations: support the deletion of C.5 and the inclusion of a new plan amendment policy shown above. Retain policy D.2 as a long-range goal of the City. Staff believes that within a 30-50 year period (build out of the General Plan), bicycle lanes will be warranted along all arterial streets. 5. Add the following as program statement #16 on page 7: 16. The Railroad Bicycle Path should extend north of Highway 101 to the Hathway Avenue intersection and be terminated. Stop controls should be Placed on California Boulevard to allow bicyclists at this intersection to allow safe access to on-street bike lanes from the Railroad Bike Path. When a bicycle crossing system is designed for Foothill Boulevard (eq. underpass or special signal system at California and Foothill), the Railroad Bicvcle Path may be extended north of Hathway Street to connect with the Cal Poly Campus and beyond. Comment. The Committee was concerned about how the railroad bicycle path would cross Foothill Boulevard to connect with the Cal Poly Campus. Since bike lanes already exist on California Boulevard that parallel the railroad and since many cyclists access Cal Poly via Hathway Avenue, the recommended solution was seen as a good strategy for initially establishing the Railroad Bike Path north of Highway 101. It will take greater effort to design and install a crossing system at Foothill that ensures safe bicycle crossings yet allows the Foothill-California intersection to function properly. Staff supports the general phasing strategy suggested by the Committee but feels that specific language concerning phasing be included and that the bicycle path should be terminated at the Taft Street intersection north of Route 101 and not Hathway Avenue. Taft Street handles higher levels of traffic and will meet warrants for signalization. Staff believes that a crossing of California Boulevard from the Railroad Bike Path should be made at this signalized location. ������►►�IIIII�IP�9��11 MY of San LUIS OBiSpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The signal system can include an actuation button for bicyclists. Staff Recommendation: modify the Committee's recommendation to terminate the Railroad Bicycle Path at Taft Street instead of Hathway Avenue and clarify that this is part of a phased implementation strategy. 6. Amend the second half of policy D.8 on page 9 to read as follows: Where right-hand turn lanes are not present, afe-heavy, all bicycle lane delineations should be dashed end prior to the intersection to remind eneeWage through-moving bicyclists to merge with dg!1 turn thFeugh moving traffic. Comment. The Highway Design Manual permits bike lane stripes to be dashed as the lanes approach intersections. Consistent with the Vehicle Code, when the bike lane striping is dashed, right-turning motorists are required to occupy the dashed bike lane prior to turning. The Highway Design Manual also permits the option of terminating bike lane striping prior to the intersection. This option provides a traffic mixing area where through-moving cyclists are supposed to merge with right-turning traffic. After significant discussion, the Committee felt that the "dashed striping" alternative was a better strategy for alerting motorists and cyclists. The committee felt that this option should be consistently applied at all City street intersections that have bicycle lanes and where right-hand turn pockets are absent. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 7. Amend policy F.1. on page 10 to read as follows: .,.a..ee the level ofseF;FieeSurrounding The flow of traffic, impacts on surrounding land use, and changes to the level of service on surrounding streets are factors that should be considered when establishing Bicycle Boulevards. Comment. The Committee felt that the original policy would preclude the establishment of Bicycle Boulevards since some reduction in the level of service on surrounding streets is likely in most cases. Land use and circulation impacts should be considered but should not preclude the installation of Bicycle Boulevards. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 8. Amend policy GA on page 11 as follows and add a new program (program #8) to Section B Chapter V: l��n�irH►�IIIIII�II ���11 City Of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 4. Potential hazards and needed improvements, such as: the following, should be corrected as identified: • Improvements to grates, manholes, longitudinal and horizontal cracks or joints, or other obstacles in the portion of the roadway typically used by bicycles. (rest of policy unchanged) 8. Expand existing reporting procedures that enable citizens to easily report potential road hazards and needed improvements to the Public Works Department. Comment. The Committee was concerned with the original wording because it implied that the City will establish a routine inspection program which might expose the City to additional liability if hazardous situations are not corrected. One of the Committee members noted that reduction in City staff would make it more difficult to support a routine inspection program. The Committee favored a strategy that makes it easy for the public to notify the Public Works Department about maintenance problems along City bike routes. The Public Works Department's existing procedures can be expanded to accomplish this objective. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 9. Add the following as standard #6 on page 11: 6. When streets are repaved or their surface materials changed, Class 11 bike lanes will be defined by striping, pavement markings and signage (consistent with the Highway Design Manual and this plan) and by surface materials with contrasting color and/or texture. Comment: The Committee felt that something more than bike lane striping and pavement markings were desirable in San Luis Obispo. Committee member Wesley Conner was familiar with European examples of using color pavement materials or materials with different textures to define bike lane areas. The Committee felt that this was a good idea and should be pursued whenever a street with bike lanes is repaved, slurry sealed or chip sealed. The Committee's recommendation would result in more "distinctive" bicycle lanes but could incrementally increase street maintenance costs depending on the pavement technique selected. Staff Recommendation: Do not support the Committee's recommendation. While bicycle lanes constructed with alternative paving materials would be very attractive, their installation will significantly increase construction and maintenance costs. Furthermore, these types of lanes will ��� ► ►VUIIIIII�I� IIUIII city of San tins OBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT not increase bicycle ridership or safety above levels afforded by lanes designed consistent with standards recommended by the draft Bike Plan. 10. Delete the definition of "showers" on page 12, the following policy from page 13, and eliminate the "showers column" from Figure #7 on page 15. 2. She weFs should be pro vided in all new eemmefe&l e#:;ns&utienal uses-, fen she wem;-- Comment. The Committee felt that showers were not needed because the number of people commuting by bicycle from surrounding communities would be small and would not warrant the expense. Staff indicated that the Air Pollution Control District had conducted a survey as part of"Bikefest 93." The results of this survey showed weak response for showers. APCD's initial thinking was to require showers for employers with 50 or more employees at a rate of one shower per 25 employees. While the survey showed relatively low response for showers (compared with other bicycle facilities such as bike lanes), APCD staff feels that if employees were surveyed at work, the support for showers would be significant. The standard recommended by the draft Bicycle Plan is more conservative: requiring showers for employers with 100 or more employees at a rate of one shower per 25 employees with a maximum number of ten. While the Committee understood the differences between City and APCD standards, the majority did not feel that showers were warranted. Staff Recommendation: support the following alternative policy statement: Area employers should pro vide showers for commuter bicyclists consistent with provisions of the Commute Alternatives Rule (Rule 901) adopted by the County Air Pollution Control Board. The draft Circulation Element includes a policy that would require new development to provide showers (policy 3.4, page 12). However, the element does not stipulate a standard nor does it address existing employers. In light of the difficulty of coordinating with APCD's Commute Alternatives Rule (Rule 901) which will apply to employers within the City, staff suggests the policy presented above. This policy acknowledges City support for the provision of showers but leaves the establishment of precise standards to the Air Pollution Control Board -- the agency charged with adopting and implementing Rule 901. 11. Amend program B.4 on page 17 as follows: 1 - ��I�► ►�IllllllUp �����1 city of San WI S OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 4. Encourage the licensing and identification of bicycles by: • Working with the City Police Department to offer free bicycle identification programs at schools and promotional events. (remainder of policy is unchanged) Comment. The Committee did not feel that offering free bicycle licenses was an important promotional activity. Based on comments made by the Police Department representative on the Committee, the Committee voted to support the Police Department's existing program which uses an engraving tool to inscribe identification numbers on bicycles -- a program which helps with the recovery of stolen bicycles. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 12. Amend policy BA on page 19 as follows: 4. The City will set aside at least 10% of its street reconstruction and maintenance funds for bicycle lane and path maintenance and installation, untm! all Glass 11 bike lanes have been installed. StfFplus TO fttnding me, I i substituted ferthis-pdrpese. :MiS 8FReU ,t Sh8 •tee Comment. One member of the Committee favored a budget strategy of establishing a separate general fund account for bicycle projects. Another felt that bike lane maintenance and installation are projects affecting City streets and that it should be a routine part of the streets resurfacing and maintenance budget -- with a minimum set aside percentage identified. Others commented that 10% of the street funds may not be sufficient in any given year. In I response the committee inserted the additional language as noted above. There was no specific discussion of the other components of this policy. Staff's intent in drafting this policy was to use part of the streets fund (10%) to install new Class R bike lanes identified in the bike plan (which involves new striping on streets) and to maintain (repaint) existing Class 11 facilities. However, this funding strategy would go away after all Class II facilities have been installed. No specific apportionment of street funds would be set aside for maintenance after that point. Maintenance of bike markings would become part of the City's normal and ongoing pavement marking program. Upon further evaluation, staff believes that there will be sufficient funds from the State Highways Account (SHA), City Bikeway Projects account (unused segment of general fund account established in 1991), and State grants to pay for the first-time installation of Class H city of San tuts OBIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT bike lanes (See section IX of this report for further funding analysis). Road reconstruction and resurfacing funds (general funds) are not needed to support these initial capital costs. Staff therefore recommends that the Bicycle Plan include a more generic policy that commits the City to ongoing bike lane maintenance (see below). A greater challenge for the City will be establishing funding programs for Class I bicycle paths. The Public Works Department is aggressively pursuing grant programs that can help support Class I paths (such as the Railroad Bike Path) that are used by commuter bicyclists. Recreational paths (such as the Laguna Lake Park bike paths) are typically not eligible for transportation grant funding. Therefore, some new form of financial support will be needed. One suggested policy is shown below: Staff Recommendation: Replace policy #4 above with the following: Once instal/ed, Class // bicycle lanes will be maintained as part of the City's ongoing pavement management program. Add the following new program statement: As part of the City's financial planning cycle, the Public Works Department will identify Class / bike path projects for City Council consideration. The Department will evaluate all strategies for implementing targeted proposals including grant funding sources,pubic/private partnerships, and the creation of a non-profit foundation to solicit private sector participation. 1 . Recommended Add�t,osf Detet�ans or 1Vladxfcations:;Concernmg Bike Pats, Lanes or mutes Amend Figure#1: "Bicycle Transportation Map" and Figure#2: "Bicycle Paths and Lanes: New Segments" to reflect the following new projects or amendments (see attached Exhibit 2): 13. Sinsheimer Park: include a Class / bicycle path from the north end of Southwood Drive, through Sinsheimer Park to the south end of Boulevard De/ Campo. Comment: These connections would acknowledge the informal and formal path system that already extends through the park area. The connection would primarily benefit neighborhood residents and students of Sinsheimer School. The Committee had identified the proposed linkage as a Class III bike route. However, since the path will not follow public roads through the park, it is more accurately identified as a Class I facility. Also, Staff recommends that a connection through the park should be made to Helena Court. The precise alignments of these paths will require further analysis. �ti�iu�►�►���IIIIIII�I ���II City Of San LUIS OBISPO Gij% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Staff Recommendation: modify the Committee's recommendation to include two Class I bike paths connections connecting Southwood Drive with Boulevard Del Campo and Helena Court. 14. Sinsheimer School Access: include a Class /bicycle path on the west side of the creek adjoining Sinsheimer School that connects Southwood Drive with Augusta Street. Comment: This connection would provide access to and from Sinsheimer School via Southwood Drive. It would allow cyclists to use the Southwood-Laurel intersection which provides access from residential areas east of Laurel Lane. There is already an informal path used by cyclists along the west side of the creek. Establishing a public path at this location will require the cooperation of San Luis Coastal Unified School District. If cooperation of the School District cannot be achieved, then the option for extending the bike path along the east side of the creek should be considered. While this location may require the reorganization of some area in Johnson Park, it would involve land that the City controls. Further study and contact with the School District will be necessary to select a preferred option. Staff Recommendation: modify the Committee's recommendation to read: "include a Class /Bicycle Path along the east or west side of the creek...". 15. Southwood Drive Bike Lanes (Laurel Lane to Sinsheimer Park): Remove parking on-both sides of Southwood Drive and install Class II-B bicycle lanes. Comment: Southwood Drive provides direct access to Sinsheimer Park which is the City's most developed recreation facility. It also provides access from residential areas east of Laurel Lane to Sinsheimer School via paths north of the creek that borders Johnson Park. There are approximately 70 parking spaces along this segment of Southwood Drive. Much of the parking is not used because a segment of the street fronts vacant land, the TRW building is vacant, and the bowling alley complex has off-street parking and no access onto Southwood. The highest parking demand was observed along the northern 300± feet of Southwood. Cars parked at this location appeared to be mainly patrons to Johnson Park, and patrons and employees of the YMCA. For parking survey information refer to Section IV.B.2. of this report. While parking utilization on Southwood Drive is not high, neither are traffic levels or the potential for traffic conflicts. Therefore, consistent with the Bicycle Plan's strategy for minimizing the removal of curb parking, staff recommends the alternative described below. Staff Recommendation: modify the Committee's recommendation as follows: Southwood Drive Bike Lanes (Laurel to Sinsheimer Park):remove parking along the south side and instal/a Class 11-B bike lane next to the curb. Retain parking I�� �����N�Ililll j►���► City of San LUSS OBIspo Oman 1 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT along the north side of Southwood Drive except along the bowling alley frontage and install a Class 11-A bike lane on the outside of the parking bay. Selectively remove one or two spaces adjoining the creek and Johnson Park to provide adequate sight distance for cyclists using the Class I creek route accessing Sinsheimer School. 16. Morro Street: identify Morro Street as a "bicycle boulevard" between Pismo Street and Santa Barbara Street. Stop controls would be reversed on cross streets to give travel preference to Morro Street bike traffic. Install a through traffic diverter at the Church or Leff Street intersection. Identify Mono Street between Pismo and Mill Streets as a Class Ill bike route. Osos Street: Modify the plan's recommendations to include a northbound Class 11--A bicycle lane on Osos Street between Leff and Pismo Streets and Class 11-A bike lanes on both sides of Osos Between Pismo and Marsh Streets (no parking removal). Comment: This project was the Committee's response to a proposal made by the Chamber of Commerce, BIA and Sierra Club to establish a two-way bicycle boulevard on Morro Street. The Committee opted for recommending a "bicycle boulevard couplet" where northbound cyclists would use Osos Street while Morro Street would be designed to encourage southbound cyclist use but could also accommodate northbound cyclists. For a complete evaluation of this "couplet" proposal, refer to Exhibit 3). Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 17. Sacramento Drive-Capitolio Way Area: include a Class I bike path along the east side of Acatia Creek from Orcutt Road southward to its intersection with Broad Street. Include Class If bike lanes on Capitolio Drive between Broad and Sacramento Drive, and along existing segments of Sacramento Drive as shown on attached Exhibit 4). Comment. When the Planning Commission reviewed the Parkside Research Center project on the south side of Orcutt Road, it recommended that bike lanes be established along a new segment of Sacramento Drive. The Bicycle Committee reviewed this recommendation at its July 19 meeting. The Committee felt that since the area is currently undeveloped, there is an opportunity to take advantage of the creek corridor to include a Class I bicycle path that would separate bicycle traffic from the area's industrial traffic. The Committee understood that establishing a Class I facility may require amendment to the Parkside Research Center development plan. The Committee also understood that this Class I facility could be established regardless of the City Council's action to approve or disallow the extension of Sacramento Drive to connect with Orcutt Road. -I3 city of San tins OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA.REPORT Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. If Class I facilities are not acceptable to the City Council, the Class II facilities recommended by the Planning Commission along the new northern segment of Sacramento Drive are a workable alternative; and a Class I bike path should still be established along the segment of Acatia Creek between Broad Street and Sacramento Drive (see Exhibit 4). 18. Johnson Avenue Bike Lanes: (a) Lizzie to Buchon: include Class 11-B bike lanes on both sides of Johnson, eliminate one north bound travellane, and redesign San Luis Drive intersection. (b) Buchon to Pismo: make no recommendation for any bikeway designation. (c) Pismo to Marsh: include Class 11-B bike lanes on the west side with parking removal, include Class 11-A bike lanes on east side with parking retained. (d) Marsh to Monterey:include Class 11-A bike lanes on the outside of parking bays on both sides of this street segment. Comment: These street segments were discussed in detail by the Committee in March and again in July (reference Exhibit 5 and Committee minutes). Parking removal continued to be one of the key issues although pubic testimony focused on "safety" issues surrounding bike lanes on Johnson Avenue. The central question seemed to be: Will bike lanes improve safe bicycle riding or will it create a "false sense of security" for cyclists? The Committee supported (on a 5 to 4 vote) bike lanes along three of the four segments that were discussed. The Committee deadlocked (4 to 4 vote) on the segment of Buchon between Pismo and Buchon Streets. (Committee member Sanville abstained from discussing or voting on this segment because he lives along this block of Johnson.) Staff Recommendation: staff supports recommendation #6 (a), (c), and (d) as described above. Staff cannot support the Committee's non-action concerning #6 (b) Johnson: Buchon to Pismo. This particular street segment handles high volumes of traffic and warrants reservation of roadway space to safely accommodate cyclists similar to the other segments of the street that were discussed by the Committee. The Public Works Department recommends the following: Remove curb parking from both sides of Johnson and install Class 11--B bicycle lanes (6 feet wide) adjoining the curb. This option would allow for 12 foot travel lanes and a 10 foot center turn lane. The impacts on curb parking is discussed in section V.B.2 of this report. 19. South Higuera: City limits south to Route 101 intersection: resurface and install Class II-B bike lanes on both sides of the road. / -14 i��H�►�►►lulllll�lp� ����ll city of San LUIS OBISp0 MONZa COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Comment. The County is planning to resurface South Higuera Street and install bicycle lanes. The Committee supported bike lanes along this segment of South Higuera because it is heavily used by people riding to the south county and the Avila Beach area. The County would be responsible for implementing this project. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. Amend Figure #1: Bicycle Transportation Map and Figure #5: Class III Bicycle Lanes: 20.a. Add the street segments identified on Exhibit 10 to Figure #5 and continue to show these routes on Figure 1: Bicycle Transportation Map as Bicycle Routes. 20.b. Delete the routes shown on Exhibit 10 from Figure #1: Bicycle Transportation Map. Comment. The Committee felt, as a matter of policy, that all bicycle routes shown on Figure #1 (the yellow lines) should be signed as Class III bicycle routes. Following this general policy, the Committee recommended that Figure #5 include 48 additional street segments that would be signed as Class III routes -- reference recommendation 20.a. The Committee was aware of staff's concern for the cost and effort of providing bike route signage throughout the community. One member suggested that bike route signs be installed only where the route changes direction. This strategy would limit the amount of signage required. The draft Bicycle Plan designates as Class III routes, only those routes that provide connections between Class I paths and Class II bike lanes (reference Figure #5). Other routes were not designated as Class III routes (no signs provided) but are identified on Figure #1. The purpose of this identification was: To alert the City to their potential use by cyclists. To inform the public about convenient routes used for recreation and secondarily for commuting. As changes to land use and circulation occurs along bicycle routes, the City may consider improvements that ensure safe and convenient bicycling -- e.g. maintenance of sight distances at intersections, setting pavement maintenance priorities. Staff does not feel that signage is essential to the extent recommended by the Committee. The Committee also felt that some of the recommended streets should not be identified as bicycle routes. Recommendation 20.b. identifies those street segments that would be eliminated from Figure #1. Some committee members felt that there was too much shown on the bicycle map, and that it needed to be "cleaned up" to eliminate non-essential routes. Staff feels that streets that are used by bicyclists should be identified as some form of bikeway. A "bike route" is the lowest level of designation afforded by the draft Bicycle Plan. - 15 i���itiH►�I11111�IInII�l11 city of San Luis osIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Staff Recommendation: approve the designation of bike routes as originally shown in the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan (June 1993). 21. Amend Figure #1, Class I Bike Path cross section to identify the space between the separated path and motor vehicle lanes as "open area." Comment. A member of the Committee was concerned that this particular cross section would promote the installation of Class I bike paths in back of sidewalks along major streets. He did not support this concept because of potential safety concerns with the separated paths intersecting with driveways and cross streets. The Committee felt that by eliminating the cross section's reference to "sidewalk area" the drawing would better fit the application of this concept in San Luis Obispo. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 22. Amend Figure #2, Bicycle Paths and Lanes: New Segments to sort the listing of projects in alphabetical order by jurisdiction. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. 23. Amend Figure #3 to include the following as a project "... to be considered for further study:" Consider bicycle trails in open space areas at the periphery of the City and i coordinate their development with City and County open space and recreation planning efforts. Comment. The Committee felt that if the City's and County's Open Space Elements were considering trails in peripheral hillside areas, that this planning should consider the selective installation of un-paved bicycle trails. Staff indicated that this level of planning will require significant additional evaluation (including environmental and risk management analysis) before specific routes might be identified. Staff Recommendation: support the Committee's recommendation. VIII. WHAT ARE THE KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED? Adoption of the Bicycle Transportation Plan is subject to the reporting requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Environmental Study was prepared that identifies two potentially-significant environmental impacts and mitigation measures. (A copy of the Initial Environmental Study is attached as Exhibit 6.) Each of these impacts are summarized below along with Bicycle Committee action and Staff recommendations. �� I �u�irl►►►IVIIIIl�II�IiI����N city of San tins OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT A. Traffic Diversion. Establishing Broad Street between Lincoln and Murray Streets as a "bicycle boulevard" by closing Broad Street to through traffic would divert traffic to Chorro Street and increase traffic levels on Chorro and interconnecting side streets. These increases would cause traffic levels to exceed environmental standards recommended by the draft Circulation Element. Mitigation Measures. To address impacts caused by traffic diversion, the initial environmental study identifies four optional mitigation measures. The City Council should select one of these options or identify other measures that will mitigate the impacts caused by traffic diversion. The array of mitigation measures are listed below in order of staff preference: Option 1: Chorro Street Bike Lanes. Amend the draft Bicycle Plan to establish Class II bicycle lanes on Chorro Street and maintain Broad Street as a through traffic route. Comment: Staff continues to feel that Chorro Street is the primary bicycle route that is currently (and will be) more heavily used than Broad Street. Improvements to Broad Street will not attract north or south bound riders except if their trip origins or destinations are west of Broad Street. While removal of curb parking on one side of Chorro Street will not be convenient for some adjoining residents, off-street parking on individual parcels is typically available and the use of curb parking (e.g. between Lincoln and Murray Street) is low. Option 2: Chorro Street Traffic Controls. Discourage traffic use of Chorro and Broad Streets by installing bulb-outs and additional stop signs as recommended by the 1988 DKS Associates report (Exhibit 6). Coordinate the State's traffic signal at the Foothill/Santa Rosa intersection with City's signals at Broad and Chorro Streets to facilitate eastbound traffic flow. Install a right- hand turn lane on Foothill Boulevard at Santa Rosa Street. Establish a bicycle boulevard on Broad Street only after these changes have been made. Comment: By constructing these area improvements, the impacts of traffic diversion onto Chorro Street may be mitigated. However, the cost of these improvements are significant ($300,000 to $500,000) and the time frame for completion is lengthy since they involve State-owned facilities. This option would encourage the use of Santa Rosa Street at the primary route to the downtown. Its implementation will require the cooperation of Caltrans. Option 3: Class III Route on Broad Street. Amend the draft Bicycle Plan to designate Broad Street as a Class III route and maintain through traffic use. �I �����i�N►�IIIIIII11in ���U city of San IDIS OBISPO Wjj% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Comment: This would be the low-cost option, requiring only the installation of bike route signs as a designated Class III route. It is unlikely that additional bicycle ridership would be attracted to this corridor. Traffic diversion impacts would be eliminated. Option 4: Amend the Circulation Element Standards. Amend the standards within the draft Circulation element to set higher limits for ADT on Local Residential and Neighborhood residential Streets. Or redesignate Chorro Street as a Residential Arterial Street (which does not specify an ADT standard) and Murray and Meinecke Streets as Residential Collector Streets which have an ADT limit of 5,000. Comment: By changing the standards, the City would determine that higher traffic levels than recommended by the Circulation Element would be acceptable in residential areas. Based on past experience, this strategy is inconsistent with the wishes of residents in the Broad/Chorro Street area. Bicycle Committee Action. The Bicycle Committee reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration, as required by CEQA, and found that traffic diversion associated with the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard is not a significant impact and therefore does not require mitigation (motion passed on 5 to 4 vote). At the July 19 meeting, the Committee received testimony from area residents who were concerned about the impacts of additional traffic diverted to Murray, Meniecke and Chorro Streets. The City Council should expect to receive significant public testimony concerning this particular plan proposal and environmental determination. Staff Recommendation. The Council should uphold the findings of the Initial Environmental Study and determine that traffic diversion impacts as potentially significant. The City Council should review the alternative mitigation measures described above and select its preferred option or identify another option that mitigates traffic diversion impacts. The Council's preference will be reflected in the Council's Resolution adopting the Bicycle Plan. B. Plan Inconsistency. The draft Bicycle Plan recommends bike parking standards that are different than those reflected in the Zoning Regulations. Mitigation Measure. The City Council should initiate changes to its Zoning Regulations to achieve consistency with the Bicycle Plan. Bicycle Committee Action. Since the Bicycle Committee supported plan provisions that call for amending the Zoning Regulations, the Committee supports the recommended mitigation measure. Staff Recommendation. Support the Committee's action. Required mitigation for plan inconsistency will be incorporated into the Council's Resolution adopting the Bicycle Plan. 1-I �►► iuulllill�p �����I City Of San LUIS OBISPO mllmiis COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT I%. WHAT ARE THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE BICYCLE PLAN? The implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan involves both capital and operating costs. Capital costs include the installation of bicycle paths, lanes and boulevards, and short- and long- term bicycle parking. Operating costs include the cost of bicycle facilities maintenance, program staffing and promotional and educational activity expenses. Implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan is guided by priorities established on page 18 of the draft plan. Table #4 presents a rough estimate of the cost of implementing the first two priority work areas within the upcoming 1993-1995 Financial Planning Period. "First Priority" activities include the installation of facilities that promote bicycle commuting — e.g. bike lanes, boulevards, bicycle parking and the Railroad Bicycle Path. "Second Priority" programs include promotional and educational activities that encourage safe bicycle riding. Based on the preliminary cost estimates shown in the following table, about 39% of total program costs (both capital and two years of operating) are supported by City funds, 57% is State and Federal Funding, with the remaining 4% requiring other funding sources. Projects where additional funding resources are needed includes Phase II of the Railroad Bicycle Path, and a portion of the costs of rubberized railroad crossing systems. The "City Bikeway Projects" account are capital resources approved by the City Council as part of the 199-1-1993 Financial Plan. Approximately $240,000 remains out of$400,000 originally allocated. These funds are earmarked for bike lane projects to be installed after the City adopts the Bicycle Transportation Plan. The following capital funding for bike projects is included in the 1993-95 Financial Plan: $26,000 in matching funds for the Railroad Rubberized Crossing Project; and $6,000 in matching funds for the Downtown Parking Program (reference page E-11 of the adopted 1993- 1995 Financial Plan). Consistent with provisions of the draft Bicycle Plan, the City will continue to seek grant sources to fully support the funding of first and second priority activities. The installation of Class I bicycle paths will require additional funding research and may be accomplished as part of peripheral growth of the City consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element. No specific cost estimates or funding analysis for these projects has been prepared since their implementation is seen as a long-term activity involving right-of-way acquisition (e.g. the Laguna Lake Bike Path System) or securing of bike path improvements as part of City approval of development/annexation proposals (e.g. the Margarita Area/Airport Area annexations). i1i'mQJ$111I��������U city of San Luis OBlspo = COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TABLE #4 Program Costs for Implementing the Bicycle Plan 1993-1995 Financial Planning Period Plan Component Cost Estimate Funding Sources A. Capital projects Class II Bicycle Lanes $320,000 State Highway Funds ($230K) & Bicycle Boulevards State Bicycle Account ($27K) City Bikeway Projects ($63K) Intersection Improvements $450,000 State Minor A/Minor B Funding (Includes Foothill Blvd.) and Regional STP funding Railroad Bicycle Path $1,166,000 Prop 116 Grant ($400K) (Phase I and ll) TEA Grant ($150) Parkland Development Fund ($616K) Railroad Bicycle Design Study $75,000 City Bikeway Projects ($75K) . Rubberized Railroad Crossings $131,000 City Bike Fund ($61K) Approved Capital Outlay ($26K) Other Sources ($44K) (or TEA Grant $105K) Public Bicycle Parking $30,000 City Bikeway Projects ($24K) Approved Capital Outlay ($6K) (or TEA Grant $24K) Bike Lane Signage $5,000 City Bikeway Projects ($5,000) Total Capital: $2,177,000 Funding Sources Amount % of Capital Costs State Highway Account Funds $230,000 11 % BLA Grant $27,000 1% State MinorA/Minor B Project $250,000 11% Regional STP Funds $200,000 9% Proposition 116 Grant $400,000 19% TEA Grant $150,000 7% City Bikeway Projects $228,000 10% Approved Capital Outlay $ 32,000 1% City Parkland Development Fund $616,000 29% Other Sources $ 44,000 2% Total Capital = $2,177,000 100% r II��►�N��IIIIIIUIII°�°'9�dlll City of San LUIS OBISpo MIGi COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT B. Operating Expenses (FY 1993-1995) Plan Component Cost Estimate Funding Sources Bike Fest (94', 95') $12,000 City Bikeway Projects Other Promotional Activities $8,000 TDA Funds (part of 2%) Promo/Education Literature $7,000 TDA Funds TV/Radio/Newspaper Advertisement $5,000 TDA Funds Publications/Materials $1,000 TDA Funds Public Works Staffing $40,000 Unspecified operating funds Total Operating: $73,000 Funding Sources Amount % of Capital Costs City Bikeway Projects $12,000 16% Transportation Development Act (2% Set Aside for Bike/Ped) $21,000 29% Unspecified Sources $40,000 55% Total Operating: $73,000 100% Note: The availability of State and Federal funding is very fluid. It will be the City's first priority to use these sources prior to using limited City Bike Fund dollars. The information presented above is based on the best available information at the time that this report is prepared. However, the financing picture will change over time. 11111111111111111M jj�1 city of san tuis ogispo SMA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT X. ARE THERE OTHER ISSUES OR TOPICS THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE AWARE OF OTHER THAN THE RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS? Yes. The remainder of this report evaluates the following topics associated with the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan: • Impacts of Bike Lanes on Curb Parking • Pacific Street Bicycle Boulevard Concept • Bicycle Parking and Shower Requirements • Promotion and Education Activities ' Bic< i:;:<:.;,:.a ;.::,>>:"' ':<:>;:< < , ;::>«<; Y�.es and llmpactS. on Curd Parlung 1. Underlying Philosophy: to understand why the use of City Streets by bicyclists is an important issue warrants a presentation of the underlying philosophy of the Bicycle Plan: BICYCLIST USE OF CITY STREETS • Reduction in the use of single occupant motor vehicles is an adopted City policy. Promoting "bicycling" is one of the most cost effective ways of reducing dependance on motor vehicles. • Bicyclists have the right to use all City streets. Therefore, all City streets should accommodate bicyclists at one level or another. • Local streets have light traffic and do not need bike lanes to channelize bicycle traffic. • Arterial and Collector streets are preferred by bicyclists and motorists alike because they provide direct connections to destinations. That's why they carry a lot of traffic. • Arterial streets should include bicycle lanes to better organize bicycle and vehicle traffic. Bike lanes can improve the comfort level for cyclists and encourage people to use bicycles for transportation. • ON-road corridors (such as the railroad) should be developed as Class l bike paths when they provide direct connections to important destinations or provide a recreational experience. Class I facilities are not substitutes for the on-street network of bike lanes. • Roadways should be reserved for the movement of vehicles -- private motor vehicles, bicycles and public transportation. Only when all vehicle movement needs are met should roadway space be reserved for vehicle parking. ���H�ib►►►�Illlll��in ����l city of San Lacs OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 2. Overall Parking Removal Impacts: Figure #2 of the Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies the segments of the City's arterial street system where Class II-B bicycle lanes will be installed. With a few exceptions, installation of Class II-B bicycle lanes will require the removal of curb parking spaces. The overall strategy of the Bicycle Plan is to minimize the removal of curb parking while accommodating bicycle lanes by: • Providing bicycle lanes on the outside of parking bays on one side of a street (Class II- A), shifting the street's center line, removing curb parking on the other side of the street and installing a bike lane adjacent to the curb (Class II-B). or • Eliminating traffic lanes when they are not needed for vehicles and installing wide Class II-A bike lanes on the outside of curb parking. (A recent example of this type of project is Foothill Boulevard, west of Tassajara Drive.) Other options that avoid removal of curb parking include widening streets or identifying bicycle routes that parallel those currently used by cyclists. Since the widening of streets can have significant impacts on adjoining land uses and are costly, this strategy is not reflected in the draft Bicycle Plan. Identifying alternative parallel routes will not provide convenient and direct connections for bicyclists. Bicyclists, even more than motorists, are sensitive to trip lengths and will take the shortest and safest route between origins and destinations. In staff's view, if bicycling is to be promoted as an attractive alternative to private vehicle use, then facilities that accommodate bicyclists need to be as convenient as possible. Shifting bicycle lanes to alternative routes for the primary purpose of preserving on-street curb parking and giving preference to the accommodation of motor vehicles is not consistent with the objectives of the Bicycle Transportation Plan nor with the goals of the Circulation Element. In new growth areas of San Luis Obispo, it should not be difficult to reserve sufficient roadway area for bicycle lanes. However, in the fully-developed parts of San Luis Obispo (70% of its projected ultimate area), there is competition for the use of limited roadway area. If bike lanes are to be established in some locations, some curb parking must be removed. Table#1 shows a significant difference between daytime and evening parking usage. One would expect residential street frontages to experience peak parking use during evening hours. However, in most of the cases shown below, peak parking demand was experienced during daytime hours. For example, curb parking along the east side of Chorro Street between Palm and Walnut is heavily used during the day by what appears to be downtown employees. Since there are no parking limits or fees for this segment of street, curb parking may be preferred over nearby public parking in lots or structures. I- 3 1111111111111U110 city city of San LUIS OBISpo 911 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT In general, residential areas that are near commercial areas experience higher daytime demand for curb parking. Staff evaluation of each of the street segments where curb parking would be removed indicates that replacement parking is available on adjoining parcels, in nearby public parking lots, structures or in adjoining private parking lots. TABLE #1 LOCATIONS WHERE CURB PARKING IS REMOVED (1) Street Segment Side Spaces Removed (2) Maximum Use Minimum Use M % Used(3) (f!) % Used Broad (High to Marsh) east 85 25 (D) 29% 13 (E) 15% California (Marsh to Higuera) west 6 3 (D) 50% 1 (E) 17% Chorro (Palm to Walnut) east 20 18 (D) 90% 3 (E) 17% Johnson (Buchon to Pismo) both 10 6 (E) 60% 2 (D) 20% (Pismo to Marsh) west 15 5 (D) 33% 1 (E) 6% Marsh (at intersections) both 39 20 (D) 59% 8 (E) 24% Santa Rosa (Marsh to Pismo) east 11 8 (D) 73% 2 (E) 18% Southwood (Laurel to both 40 10 (D) 25% 2 (E) 5% Sinsheimer Park) Total: 226 (4) (1) Parking spaces removed is based on staff recommendations in Section II of this report. (2) The number of parking spaces was counted in the field allocating 20 feet of curb length per parking space. (3) All street segments were reviewed during daytime (D) and evening (E) periods. The maximum and minimum observed parking utilization is shown. (4) Number of spaces removed reflects staff recommendations. If the Council supports the Committee's recommendations, 20 additional spaces would be removed: 10 spaces would be retained on Johnson (Buchan to Pismo) while 30 more spaces would be removed from Southwood Drive. 3. Bicycle Lanes on Marsh Street: The Bicycle Plan proposes to eliminate one travel lane on Marsh Street between Higuera Street and Johnson Avenue. Two travel lanes would be created with Class H-A bicycle lanes on the outside of existing parking bays. To facilitate turning movements at intersections, left- and right-turn pockets would be established at key intersections (reference Exhibit 7). To ensure that intersections would function properly, Associated Transportation Engineers(ATE) was hired to evaluate the impact of reducing travel lanes from three to two. The results of this analysis is part of Exhibit 7. ATE's report indicates that intersections will operate at the same or improved levels of service after the lane changes are made and turn pockets are installed. In order to install turn pockets, curb parking spaces near the intersections needs to be removed. The number of parking spaces removed will range from 27 (the minimum number as recommended by the Bicycle Committee) to 39 (the number recommended by the traffic consultant). City Of San LUIS OBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The Chamber of Commerce and the Business Improvement Association (BIA) have expressed opposition to the creation of bicycle lanes on Marsh Street. The primary reason for the opposition appears to be a concern for loss of curb parking. The Chamber of Commerce, BIA and Sierra Club suggested that the City consider an alternative strategy of using Pacific Street as a parallel bicycle boulevard to accommodate bicycle traffic. Each of these issues are analyzed below. Removing Curb Parking. The table on the following page identifies the number of parking spaces that will be removed to incorporate turn pockets at key intersections. The degree of impacts of removal of parking depends on the availability of convenient alternative parking spaces and the degree to which the current spaces are being used. It also depends on the parking supply that is considered in meeting the needs of Downtown patrons and employees. The Worst Case Perspective: There are a total of 118 curb spaces within the CC zone area on Marsh Street. 29 of these spaces (number recommended by Consultant) would be removed at key intersections. This would result in 24.5% reduction in curb parking along this street segment. The Best Case Perspective: There are a total of 1,844 public parking spaces in the downtown serving CC zone patrons and employees. The reduction of 17 spaces (minimum number recommended by Bicycle Committee) spaces along Marsh Street constitutes a 0.9% reduction in parking. Table #2 identifies various methods for determining the "significance" of the parking removal. It is staff's conclusion that the degree of parking removal is not significant. Alternative parking locations are available in the Chorro Street parking garage and private parking lots including lots at Wells Fargo Bank, 7-11 Center, Rexall Drug Store, Great Western Bank, the Post Office, Union Bank, and the Santa Barbara Savings Building. Furthermore, by facilitating bicycle access directly to the Central Commercial area and by providing convenient bicycle parking (consistent with the Bicycle Plan), additional riders will be attracted to the downtown. If greater percentages of downtown patrons and employees ride bicycles, parking demand should be reduced and the "significance" of parking reduction further reduced. After extensive public testimony, the Bicycle Committee voted unanimously to continue its support for Marsh Street bike lane project. However, the Committee recommended that only the minimum number of parking spaces at targeted intersections be removed, that the operation of these intersection be monitored, and that additional spaces be removed only if it is necessary to maintain adequate intersection operations. This initial strategy would reduce the need to remove parking by about 12 spaces for a total parking removal within the BIA area of about 17 spaces (14% reduction under "worst case" perspective; 0.9% reduction under "best case" perspective). I � city of San LUIS OBISpo Mia; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT H 0O' Ecom .. CA C r N c_ 0 E ° c Y O N �+ C CD m T C am mC > V W _ m m L C1 w0. E O N r ? CL N V G m 0 N to N m 9 m CL m Y O Co Y Nu U V U C m m N a) 0m CO > y N Cl C ul N moe )C 7 OO _ m ^ UO � O C C C U U m r CO L N N O_ r E r +�. 7 7 O C O d N ~ m O C m C CL W y O C E E " CT 0 m E p m V m m E N = y Y 3 r m O U1 m L m m C1 O CM r N d .., C) U m 3 m N O C) m CS CL O ~ C •E m m m m 0 `+ �_ m C m CS CVO m «�., L 10 Y V 7 Cl m C1 Q. w •C +' > > C m O O Cn O y m H y w O O U U rn L m a CO r� O .' U C C V .E a m i N U � Cm C O O > C m O O10 \ 9 T m 0 (m 0 o C CT C LO N o Cr n op-` a CO O N o 6 Ln Lo CD 0 C3L m off° N N N O m a. « C O N CO _ E '«. a y 3 c o c. > j o m CoQ 0 c O aw c i m Co 7 7 C9 y 0 o m O N m Q Y w w Y m O Y E m m C O Cr Q N m C + + a Ol r C O CV m CL U a7 d m A C C7 7 7 § N N a of v v= t o m m ui _ N N C L ` L '0 Q m (� 00 00 CO CO to Q A Cf V U N C m L) ' -r r � CO m CO m �, CL .. O CO O. O C C C C m C1 >. m u O m a N — 'D m m m m N ccO C9 ! C C CL r CL O C C C C m V1 O '- 7x C7 N N LO 7t (n N N 7 () G W O C m a a U m C r � o O O 0 m «O+ ,t 0 C v > m CD o . 0, t � U v Q c E c E a m v ., C y U U C E C c 0 m ° m E E c E t 0 o y E 0 00 00� La go o Eo E `_' � m � � IL N U O? C _�_, O C ,� w ON O •aC ` ` N U 0 .0 $ om 'o L) U v m o m o U m m „ „ „ 0 " E m m c m m o m m > > 0 0 _w 0 m C aO+ O O� V C7 U 4 N C) O N O m N C L V O t 7 Q Y 10 m C m m �, C m E C E m m rn F- C N « 0 o m a._ o.-M a O a m m E w 0_ O N Y N 7a N ._ Cn cc O: Q OW m m c « E « a, « m « .m c « « c « C E c O O C7 OO w O O 000 00 O ._ 0 N U F- ccF- O F- o F- m V F- F- N F- N U Z ►►� ►►�Illllp�l `��III City Of San LUSS OBISPO FMCm COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT I . ..... ... ........:f < c > leiePac : tBouNw' As a alternative to establishing bike lanes on Marsh Street, the Chamber of Commerce, BIA, and Sierra Club (Alternative Transportation Task Force) requested that the Committee support the concept of establishing Pacific Street as a "Bicycle Boulevard." The Staff met with Chamber, BIA and Sierra Club representatives to identify design options for the boulevard. The Staff evaluated ten options and presented this evaluation to the Bicycle Committee (see Exhibit 8). The central issue was the removal of parking spaces on Marsh Street needed to establish bicycle lanes and turn pockets at key intersections vs. the feasibility and attractiveness of using Pacific Street as a parallel bicycle route. Option #10, the preferred option of the Chamber of Commerce, BIA and Sierra Club, would cause the loss of about 108 parking spaces on Pacific Street. At the public hearing on the various options, the Committee heard near-unanimous opposition to the concept of the bicycle boulevard from residents and businesses along Pacific Street. (Also, refer to petition from Pacific Street property owners included in attached Exhibit 11.) The Committee voted to support the Bicycle Plan's recommendation -- i.e. establish Class II-A bicycle lanes on both sides of Marsh Street. The Staff concurs with the Committee's action and does not support the Pacific Street bicycle boulevard-concept because: 0 Marsh Street provides a more direct and convenient route into and through the downtown. • Pacific Street is too narrow (34 foot roadway) to accommodate bike lanes, travel lanes and parking. • Changes to Pacific Street to establish a bicycle boulevard would change travel patterns, limit access, eliminate significant amounts of parking, and cause congestion on arterial cross streets. 0 The cost of implementation could be significant since key intersections may need to be signalized. For additional background on this well-discussed project, see Committee minutes attached as Exhibit 9. ''%: •:5!>;>�:::):' :%�r: .,::..::�>::a'<.;sy.,.: 13. 13zcyce;PaWttgegauerEtents and Slagwers ....... Figure #6 in the Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies bicycle parking standards for various types of land uses. As mentioned in preceding section IV-A, implementation of these standards will require amendment of the City's Zoning Regulations. In general, the new standards would �mn���►�Illllll��in �111 city Of San LuiS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT require more bicycle parking than is now required by Zoning and would establish requirements for both short-term (bicycle racks) and long-term (lockers) bicycle parking. The following are highlights of the proposed standards: • Application. The standards would only apply to land uses that require 10 or more motor vehicle parking spaces. Based on current parking standards, the thresholds for providing bike parking are as follows: Retail Commercial Uses > 2,000 square feet Central Retail > 4,000 square feet Office Uses > 3,000 square feet Service Commercial/ Manufacturing > 5,000 square feet Motels/Hotels > 10 rooms Multi-family Housing > 5 dwellings (2 bedroom units) • Retrofit Requirement. The Bicycle Plan also establishes standards for existing commercial and institutional uses. Bicycle parking would have to be provided consistent with the time frames shown in Figure#7 on page 14 of the bike plan. These time frames are dovetailed with the implementation schedule recommended for the Commute Alternatives Program (rule 901) sponsored by the Air Pollution Control District. The threshold standards noted above would apply to existing uses and multi-tenant work sites. • Long-Term and Short-Term Parking Requirements. Bicycle lockers would be required to serve employees of commercial uses. The goal of the proposed standards is to provide lockers for at least 10% of the work force for retail and industrial uses and 15% of the work force for office uses. Parking standards for tourist commercial uses are lower than other types of land uses because of the characteristics of the work force and clientele. • Location Standards for Bicycle Racks. All too often, bicycle racks are placed in locations that are inconvenient for bicyclist use -- e.g. far from the entrance to destinations and not visible for the interior of destinations. The Bicycle Plan suggests that the ARC guidelines be amended to direct the location of bicycle racks. The intent of the principles described on page 12 of the Bike Plan is to provide racks at locations that are secure and convenient for bicyclists. • Costs of Providing Bicycle Parking. The cost of inverted "U" style racks is about $100.00 for a two-bicycle rack. A locker that houses two bicycles costs about$600.000. The costs of complying with the proposed standards are estimated as follows: , g city of San LUIS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TABLE #3: Costs of Bicycle Racks and Lockers Project Type Protypical Size Racks Lockers 'Total (Square Foot) Retail (1) 10,000 $500 $900 $1,400 Office $100 $600 $700 Service Commercial $100 $300 $400 Hotel/Motel 50 rooms $100 $300 $400 (1) Parking requirements and costs for downtown (CC zone) uses would generally be 50% of what is shown here. �SJi9S4�, y,��t,,..� ��y..yei .S' tY, 3/?:.yu�•ya t�a.: ,�,/,� y.:::r oar.i3::/.a".W.�S9`L`.�1:;aQ'd.+F::a. [.kiidf[ubUCx:K For the first time, a City transportation plan identifies promotional and educational activities that the City should sponsor. These programs include bicycle safety classes and vehicle code education in schools, publication of maps, flyers, other promotional materials, cosponsoring annual promotional activities such as "Bike Fest" and incentive programs for City employees. The implementation of these activities will require close coordination and networking with numerous-agencies and organizations such as: SLO Transit The County Air Pollution Control District County Ride Sharing Office San Luis Coastal Unified School District Cal Poly and Cuesta College Chamber of Commerce SLO County Visitors Bureau Business Improvement Association (BIA) County Sheriff's Department Local Bicycle Clubs Bicycle Shop Owners The Bicycle Plan proposes to use the City's Transportation Development Act Funds (the 2% reserved for bicycle and pedestrian programs) to support promotional andeducational activities (see Policy B.5., page 18). Staff estimates that between $10,000 and $11,000 will be available each year during the upcoming financial planning period. I��n�►�N►IVIINI�IIp ��B�N City of San CU1S OBISPO -....!; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1: Draft Council Resolution approving a Negative Declaration and adopting the Bicycle Transportation Plan Exhibit 2: Map identifying recommended additions, deletions and modifications concerning bike lanes and paths Exhibit 3: Morro Street bicycle boulevard concepts and options Exhibit 4: Bicycle lanes and paths in the Sacramento Drive area Exhibit 5: Johnson Avenue bike lane proposals and consultant evaluation of options Exhibit 6: Initial Environmental Study for the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan Exhibit 7: Marsh Street bike lane proposals and consultant evaluation Exhibit 8: Pacific Street bicycle boulevard proposals and staff evaluation of options Exhibit 9: Bicycle Committee Minutes Exhibit 10: Committee Recommended Changes to Bicycle Routes (Figure 1 and Figure 5) Exhibit 11: Correspondence Exhibit 12: Bicycle Planning Position Paper: Michael Ronkin, Program Manager, Oregon Department of Transportation (June 2, 1993). Exhibit 13: Street Segments Discussed by the Bicycle Committee for Bicycle Lane Installation Exhibit *1 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADOPTING A BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council established the Bicycle Committee in August, 1991 and directed the Committee to update the 1985 Bicycle Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Committee held public meetings between July 1992 and March 1993 to provide Staff with input to the preparation of a draft Bicycle Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, on June 4, 1993, the Public Works Department published a draft Bicycle Transportation Plan and the plan was reviewed at five public hearings held by the Bicycle Committee between June 21 and July 26, 1993; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Committee has forwarded recommendations to the City Council for adoption of the Plan and action on the Plan's Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has published a negative declaration for the Bicycle Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Negative Declaration and has identified specific mitigation measures identified in the following sections of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing on August 31, 1993,the Council considered Bicycle Committee recommendations, staff recommendations, and public testimony concerning the content of the Bicycle Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan supports its Circulation Elements goals and policies that call for the "... the per capita reduction of automobile use in the City and the use of alternative forms of transportation such as bicycles...." (Reference Resolution 4755, 1982 Series). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1: Thee Bicycle Transportation Plan of the City of San Luis Obispo is hereby adopted. The text of the adopted Plan is attached as Exhibit A; Section 2: The City Council hereby approves a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts associated with implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan with the following mitigation measures: A. Impact: Proposed bicycle parking provisions inconsistent with current zoning regulations. r-31 Mitigation: Initiate amendments to the Zoning Regulations and other City land use and devel6pment regulations to implement the Bicycle Transportation Plan. B. Impact: Diversion of vehicle traffic from Broad Street (between Murray and Lincoln Streets) to Chorro Street due to the closure of Broad to through traffic and the creation of a bicycle boulevard. Mitigation: (City Council to specify); Section 3: The Bicycle Facilities Plan adopted by Council Resolution Number 5672 (1985 Series) is hereby rescinded; Section 4: The Public Works Department shall publish and make available to the public the adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan and shall distribute copies to appropriate members of City government, to.the California Department of Transportation, and other appropriate agencies and local libraries. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1993. Mayor Peg Pinard ATTEST: City Clerk Diane Gladwell APPROVED: lrlltto ey ffr Jorgensen 1 -3� Ex # s somas•-• CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIS?O i FOILL R.M IVl FRED ' Rec.a5l l Environmental Mitigation A° ° I • Rec.a16 I I I j o t Rec.s16NIC 11 ) I • J__ I I 11... Recs.s13,14, and 15 V S • ` �Y,o I 1 • Rec.a17 �• P � w7w �'' 'p ?0 1�i� •, �J+•� a I � 1 yr; TANK FARM •`• .l 61 �I .I 0p . •` eUCKLEY L.—. Reo.4r19 i i •`• I Exhibit *3 BICYCLE BOULEVARD OPTIONS FOR MORRO STREET Option 1: Two-Way Bicycle Boulevard/Bicycle Lanes (suggested by Chamber/BIA) • Remove parking on east side of Morro between Pacific and Pismo and install class II bike lanes on each side. I P B ' T ' T ' B 8' S' 11' 11' S' • Establish four-way stop controls at Pismo Street. • Install through-traffic vehicle barricade at the Church Street (or Leff Street) intersection. • Reverse stop controls at Church, Islay, Buchon, and Pacific Streets to give preference to Morro Street bicycle traffic. • Establish three-way stop control at Morro and Santa Barbara Streets. • Provide bike boulevard signage. Pros Cons • Comfortable for bikes from Santa • Stop control on Santa Barbara cause Barbara to Pacific congestion and diversion may be ignored • Eliminates about 10± parking spaces • Difficult left turn movement for bikes onto Morro from Santa Barbara • Increases trip distance and inconvenient for bikes bound for north city areas • No bike facilities between Pacific and Marsh • Increased congestion on Pismo due to 4 way stop control • Requires bicyclists to ride up hill to connect with Mill Street. Option 2: Bicycle Boulevard Couplet Morro Street (South Bound Bicycle Boulevard) • Reverse stop controls at Church, Islay, and Buchon to give preference to south bound Morro Street bicycle traffic. • Establish four-way stop controls at Pismo Street.. • Install through-traffic vehicle barricade at the Church Street (or Leff Street) intersection. • Provide signage on Morro Street between Pismo and Santa Barbara Streets and on approach sections of Pismo Street. osos Street (North Bound Bicycle Lane) • Install Class II-A north bound bike lane between Leff and Pismo Streets; establish 10- foot travel lanes and 8-foot parking bays on both sides of street. ' P ' T ' T ' BP ' 8' 10, 10, 4' 8' I-3Y IL s: Gp. iso D •a `$ A lu LU cr 40cr ki cc .0 SANDERCOCK 17 1-1 F13 cc Q �c I I of �x HASKiNScn W W LU cnc cr 40 cr c� V I U Vis:: WCM 7- Dwou f AVE.AE SOUTH nn F OPTION 1: TWO-WAY BICYCLE BOULEVARD Four-Way Stop Signs-,,,, ; Two-Way Stop Signs Curb Parking Removed Barricades 1 -35 � 0 �� .POS ; •y I 9 •�'_ 1 �nI U N ♦i�F Q W TG C yji S 1 Scc V y spy a F1 F—I F1 °C c o SANDEACOCK 3 -T v �ASKIN$ c (� V EE it �iCO a K cr o s I cc —29 ROUNDHOUSE AYE. z SOUTH I Cl W nn F1�a I OPTION 2: BICYCLE BOULEVARD COUPLET Four-Way-Stop Signs Two-Way Stop Signs Curb Parking Removed { - Barricades I -3� • Install Class II-A bike lanes on both sides of Osos Street between Pismo and Marsh Streets with parking on both sides and 10-foot travel lanes. P B T T B P 8' 4' 10' 10' 4' 8' • Install signage. Pros Cons • No parking removal • Substandard travel lanes for City • Comfortable for bikes between transit and emergency vehicles Pismo and Santa Barbara • Minimal bike lane width; traffic • No additional stop controls levels warrant wider bike lanes where needed on Santa Barbara Street possible (1) • South bound bikes continue to use Osos between Pismo and Santa Barbara and will share minimum travel lane • Minimal bike lanes between Pismo and Marsh • Increased congestion on Pismo due to 4 way stop.control Option 3: Bike Lanes on Osos Street (Included in the Bicycle Plan) • Remove parking on the east side of Osos Street and install a 5-foot Class II-B bicycle lane (retain short term parking in front of Gusses Grocery) ; retain parking on the west side of Osos Street and install 5-foot Class II-A bike lane and two 11-foot travel lanes. P B T T B 8' S' 11' 11' 5' o Install Class II-A bike lanes on both sides of Osos Street between Pismo and Marsh Streets with parking on both sides and 10-foot travel lanes (1) . P B T T BP 8' 4' 10' 10' 4' 8' Pros Cons • Direct access to/from downtown • Removal of 26 parking spaces (14 are adjacent • No impacts to existing circulation to Mitchell Park) patterns • Minimal bike/travel lanes between Pismo and • Efficient connections to north Marsh city routes END COMMENTS (1) The Bicycle Transportation Plan recommends that bike lanes on streets with a 24-hour traffic volume (ADT) of more than 10,000 vehicles should be at least 5 feet wide. Along Osos Street, the parking bays could be narrowed slightly to 7.5 feet to provide for a 4.5 foot bike lane. 1 -37 . .�� AO t. O I o ^ v �S q �= y c= J; lu LU �F Q J Te c v c a c HIC4 FISH I Q Ay ❑ ❑ El C c a SANDE�cacx ❑ 3 � In F�sWr�s D y N W N _C rt z teo — ,>._ ROUNOMOUSf AVE. ❑ a _ z SOUTH SGL'T4 W a. F�F� F\'a OPTION 3: BICYCLE LANES ON OSOS STREET Four-Way-Stop Signs ; Two-Way Stop Signs Curb Parking Removed -�- Barricades doo Orr ♦ �'' too �• 00 10 'o v v Cie r a _ I'1�N Ohl �. ♦.♦ �� , _•. O � lop , Qi J • ti N y to • — cc cn cc m P' o m g e "Moo ,r �• Ji CTC V m �. 3 Y Y �--- 0 . X ld v • ! Exhibit #5: Johnson Avenue Bike Lanes San Luis Drive E Y6 ' I1 Trakl IZ' Tvrn II' 71, el 4' Tsrcc �^ LTo ?ISMO ' i m c 0 0 m 1 -� /j` I3r4c�T��•c� 101 I01Tia.�cl S'$,ht $'P.'k V p r V n, i 5Y 8" 7�..k �k olTrw.-r.( !0� Tv�n .. 101 Tare/ `1�2%*r) $'77 •f i/ C CO G 1 co N t N N • L L CD 7 _ ASSOCIATED TRANSP ORTAPON ENGINEERS IIS 100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Santa Barbara, CA 93110 • FAX (8051682-8509 • (8051687-4418 Maynard Keith Franklin,P.E. (a C 11.77 9, u Robert L.Fars,P.E. }� 1 Richard L.Pool,P.E. U Scott A.Schell V yy�u�s oB;�P1 �gpRKslUllll'�=' May 21, 1993 930471_01.RPT Mr. Terry Sanville Principal Transportation Planner City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 JOHNSON AVENUE BIKE LANE STUDY The following is our study of bike lane alternatives for Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Pismo Street. STUDY OBJECTIVES The objectives of this study are to discuss alternatives for installing bike lanes on both sides of Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Pismo Street, and to analyze the effects of these aftematives on traffic flow in the area. EXISTING CONDITIONS South of Buchon Street, Johnson Avenue is a four-lane street with left-tum channelization at major intersections. The curb-to-curb width varies from 48 feet to 60 feet. Bike lanes exist on both sides of Johnson Avenue between approximately Ella Street and San Luis Drive. Between San Luis Drive and Buchon Street, a bike lane exists only on the west side of Johnson Avenue. Parking is prohibited on both sides of Johnson Avenue between Ella Street and Buchon Street. Between Buchon Street and Pismo Street, Johnson Avenue is a two-lane street with left-tum channelization at Pismo Street and right-tum channelization on the southbound approach to Buchon Street. The curb-to-curb width of Johnson Avenue is 48 feet. Parking is allowed on both sides of Johnson Avenue north of Buchon Street. _ i- 1-a Tr EXHIBIT A Engineering Plor.ning . Parkins rJl_n2l C)'c_c ^c ^C: -?�7r'S �'k_;q 2\'O • ~� . s Mr. Terry Sanville Page 2 May 21, 1993 Traffic signals exist at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive and Johnson Avenue/Lizzie Street intersections. These signal installations are not interconnected. Buchon Street and Pismo Street are controlled with stop signs at their intersections with Johnson Avenue. Traffic count data for the Johnson Avenue/Pismo Street intersection were obtained from the traffic study prepared for the Payless Store/Scolari's Market Project. New counts and queue length measurements were obtained for the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. Count data forms are attached. BIKE LANE ALTERNATIVES Johnson Avenue -- San Luis Drive to Buchon Street Six bike lane alternatives were considered for Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Buchon Street. A brief discussion of each is included below. Levels of service (LOS) were calculated using the Planning Method contained in Transportation Research Board Circular#212. Level of service calculation sheets are attached. Alternate 1: Alternate 1 would restdpe Johnson Avenue providing four 10-foot wide traffic lanes and two 4-foot wide bike lanes. At the San Luis Drive intersection, the southbound left-tum lane would be eliminated and the Johnson Drive approaches to the intersection phased independently. The existing P.M. peak hour level of service is A (0.48). This level of service would degrade to LOS B (0.68) if the proposed striping and'signal phasing changes were implemented. Alternate 1 is a substandard design since it provides only 2 feet of bike lane width outside the gutter lip rather than the required minimum of 3 feet, and the adjacent traffic lane is only 10 feet wide rather than the required minimum of 11 feet (12 feet recommended). In my opinion, Alternate 1 is not acceptable because vehicle and bicycle speeds, the amount of truck traffic and the curving street alignment all indicate that substandard vehicle and bike lane widths should not be used. Also, the operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would worsen and the traffic signal phasing would be less desirable. Finally, the increased liability exposure associated with substandard bicycle facilities is something the City may not want to accept. Alternate 1 a: Alternate 1 a is identical to Alternate 1 except the street and gutters would be overlayed to eliminate the gutter lip. Technically, this alternate meets the requirement that the bike lanes be a minimum of 4 feet wide; however, the other substandard and undesirable features of Alternate 1 remain. Alternate 1 a is not an acceptable design. Alternate 2: Alternate 2 is identical to Alternate la except the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection geometrics would be modified to provide dual westbound left-turn lanes as shown in Ficure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.56). Again, this aitemate is unacceptable because it retains most of the substandard design features 1 -#3 Mr. Terry Sanville Page 3 May 21, 1993 Alternate 3: Alternate 3 would dedicate the sidewalk on the east side of Johnson Avenue for the exclusive use of northbound bicyclists. Existing lane widths would be modified slightly to provide a 5-foot wide southbound bike lane, 11-and 10-foot wide southbound through lanes, and 10- and 12-foot wide northbound through lanes. Ramps would be constructed at San Luis Drive and Buchon Street to allow bicyclists to ride between the sidewalk and the northbound on-street bike lane at each end. While improving some of the substandard features of Alternate 1, Alternate 3 would cause other problems including pedestdan/bicycle conflicts where the bike lane and sidewalk share space at intersections, a 6-inch drop off(curb) between the bikeway and the traffic lane, and a nonstandard design which might confuse motorists and pedestrians, and encourage bicycle riders to-ride on sidewalks. Also, City staff is concerned about shifting all pedestrian use to the west side of Johnson Avenue in this area since this would require additional crossings of this busy street. The level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not change significantly with Alternate 3. Alternate 4: Alternate 4 would eliminate one of the southbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and San Luis Drive. Existing lane widths would be modified to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, two 12-foot wide northbound through lanes, and one 12-foot wide southbound through lane. On the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5-foot wide bike lanes, two 11-foot wide northbound through lanes, one 11-foot wide southbound through lane and a 10-foot wide left-tum lane would be provided. This striping configuration would degrade the P.M. Peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection to LOS B (0.70). Alternate 4 would meet vehicle and bike lane width requirements; however, the lower level of service and reduced southbound approach capacity at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not be acceptable. Alternate 5: Alternate 5 would eliminate one of the northbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and south of San Luis Drive. The street would be restriped to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, two 12-foot wide southbound through lanes, and one 12-foot wide northbound through lane. On the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5-foot wide bike lanes, two 11-foot wide southbound through lanes, one 11-foot wide northbound through lane, and a 10-foot wide left-tum lane would be provided. The P.M. peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would be LOS B (0.66) with this striping configuration. Also, the operation at the Johnson Avenue/Buchon Street intersection would worsen somewhat because of the loss of one through lane on the northbound Johnson Avenue approach to the intersection. As with Alternate 4, lane widths with Alternate 5 are acceptable but the increased congestion which would occur at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection is not. AltemM-ts 6: Ater-,ate 6 is identical to Alternate 5 except dual westbound left-tum lanes would be added to the Johnson AvenueiSan Luis Drive intersection as shown in Figure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.54). 1-4;4 Mr. Terry Sanville Page 4 May 21, 1993 Alternate 6 meets all bike lane design requirements and maintains the existing level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. This alternate should be considered further by the City as a way to provide bike lanes on this section of Johnson Avenue. Alternate 6 striping is shown in Figure 1. Johnson Avenue — Buchon Street to Pismo Street Two bike lane alternatives were considered for Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and Pismo Street. A brief discussion of each alternative follows: Alternate A: Alternate A would eliminate parking on the east side of Johnson Avenue and restripe the street to provide a 5-foot wide southbound bike lane adjacent to the parking on the west side of the street, an 11-foot wide southbound through lane, a 10-foot wide left-tum lane, an 11-foot wide northbound through lane, and a 4-foot wide northbound bike lane. Since the vehicle lane widths and striping configuration proposed under this alternate are approximately the same as the existing, the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue would not change significantly. Alternate A conforms to minimum bike lane design standards with the exception that the 4-foot wide bike lane on the east side of the street provides only 2 feet of bike lane width outside the gutter Up rather than the required minimum of 3 feet. Since traffic speeds are mone moderate and Johnson Avenue is straight in this area, this substandard bike lane may be acceptable to the City as a trade off for being able to retain parking on the west side of the street. Alternate B: Alternate B would eliminate parking on both sides of Johnson Avenue and restripe the street to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, one 12-foot wide southbound through lane, one 12-foot wide left-tum lane, and one 12-foot wide northbound through lane. Because of the wider vehicle lanes proposed as part of this alternative and the lack of parking conflicts, the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue and at its intersections with Buchon Street and Pismo Street would improve slightly. Alternate B meets all bike lane design standards. The loss of on-street parking would, of course, impact abutting property owners and residents. Alternate B striping is shown in Figure 1. QUEUE LENGTH STUDIES Traffic counts and a queue length study were conducted between 4:15 P.M. and 5:45 P.M. at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection on Wednesday, May 19, 1993. The results of the queue length study are shown in the attached table and summarized below. The numbers shown in the table represent the total number of vehicles queued in both through lanes on the northbound and southbound Johnson Avenue intersection approaches, and in the single left-turn lane on the San Luis Drive approach. The number of vehicles in each queue was reCc.ded at the beginning of the green signal phase an each approach. Mr. Terry Sanville Page 5 May 21, 1993 Also shown in the table are average queues which were calculated using two transportation modeling software programs. The Passer-II program was used to analyze the operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection in conjunction with the nearby signalized Johnson Avenue/Lizzie Street intersection. The CAPSSI signalized intersection analysis program was used to forecast average queue lengths for the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. Vehicle Queue Length Study Total Number of Vehicles in Queue Intersection Feld Study Passer-II CAPSSI Approach Average Maximum Exist. ' Alt.6 ' Exist. ' Alt.6 Northbound Johnson Ave. 4.6 Veh. 10 Veh. 4.6 Veh. 6.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 4.0 Veh (Total, Both Lanes) Southbound Johnson Ave. 3.6 Veh. 9 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 1.0 Veh (Total, Both Lanes) San Luis Drive 4.8 Veh. 14 Veh. 5.2 Veh. 4.2 Veh. 4.0 Veh. 1.5 Veh (Left-Tum Movement) Average queues As shown above, queue lengths do not seem to be a problem during the P.M. peak hour at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. The field study showed existing average queues are approximately 4 to 5 vehicles, and maximum queues vary from 9 vehicles to 14 vehicles on the intersection approaches. The Passer-ll and CAPSSI computer models indicate that the elimination of one northbound through lane and the addition of a westbound left-tum lane, as proposed in Alternate 6, will not cause a significant increase in queue lengths at the intersection. This is because the length of the signal green time on Johnson Avenue is increased as a result of the additional westbound left-tum lane and the reduced green time required on San Luis Drive. This additional green time helps to offset the reduced capacity on the northbound Johnson Avenue approach to the intersection. Finally, the City could verify the data presented above and the traffic impacts of Alternate 5, Aftemate 6 and Alternate B by setting out temporary "NO PARKING" signs and placing traffic cones on Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive to duplicate the proposed striping modifications. Please call me if you have any questions regarding the contents of this study. A Robert L. Faris, P.E. RLF/ejd a ftachments MAY-25-1993 16:25 FRUM riic rrin t-tr. out-ooc--o�U7 c. • _x �_ _ a° ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS 100 N. Hope Avenue. Suice 4. Santa Barbara. CA 93110 • FAX (805) 682-8509 • (805) 687-4418 Post-ft"brand tax transmittal memo 7671 r of P•s" ' Maynard Keith Franklin. P.S. Fl01w Robert L.Faris.P.E. To S Richard L Pool.P.E. Co. Go. Soost A.SchellO Dapt /�Q Plw o FOX 0 -75 1 1 r 93047L02-LTR May 2S, 1993 Mr. Terry Sanville Principal Transportation Planner City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 JOHNSON AVENUE BIKE LANE STUDY Dear Terry: One impact I neglected to mention in the Johnson Avenue Bike Lane Study is the Increased delay which would be experienced by Buchan Street drivers stopped at Johnson Avenue. if one lane is eliminated on northbound Johnson Avenue at Buchan Street, the number of available gaps In Johnson Avenue traffic would be reduced and the delay to waiting side street drivers would be increased. We did not count Buchan Street peak hour turning movements, so 1 don't know if this increase In delay would be significant ' Associated Tr'anspor'tation Engineers By: Robert L Faris RLF/ejd I �7 } W zlz A ELS (LU JW �� �► JLL z ¢ WEA Y2a COHp WwCOz z ::) } < W Q > za z Z I Z Lu z 4 y (Dwa 1:Z CL i � I a V '4 � AR ►R WL OL DLoLf LU �{ 'fib c h h r►i /- z / WD W CDQm LU (L d~ LL JZ¢ �7� \ W a J 76 Who Z Z [CW \ � > Za 1 Qpm ZLu :nw 1 CO Ocr< 2a ° 133UIS NONons 4 I I I I t . _ t t 4 0 = a A A .LL O 4 I I � I I 14 I 133EUS OWSId .q7EX%HjBPT 1 I Exhibit #6 city of San tuts OBISpo A, INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SITELOCATION (18=j of S4�'"� S O61 Spo APPLICATION NO. 70- 9 PROJECT DESCRIPTION C7,0 c (,�-1 2 S 19 0�= %.j t')oo o t�2 v✓ j f Gy r\-P- ::�WYlr jJ rz!C!�=A- l rev) P l z" _ APPLICANT rL";�A 0`� - _ ( �c�1011 C w X21( t,¢ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED _ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED PREPA�BY DATE S-� A2I�" 93 COM UNITY*V OPMENT IRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE �fL Lg� SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS I.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 11.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................................................... lsr,2- C) B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.......................................... C. LAND USE ....................................................................... c g D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ......... ...... f�--� E. PUBLIC SERVICES ............... ...... . .................. .................. . ..... YES " Cd 1 S7 F. UTILITIES........................................................................ n!� G. NOISE LEVELS ................................................................... hl \ H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ....... ............. Y 5 S _ry 1 t� ) I. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... NO J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY .............................................. N O K. PLANT LIFE...................................................................... Y�5 .s L ANIMAL LIFE..................................................................... YES ()�?.I7� M. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL ................................................... YES * C p 1 7�) N. AESTHETIC .................................... .................................. O. .ENERGYIRESOURCE USE .......................................................... Q Y P. OTHER ......................................................\\..................... III.STAFF RECOMMENDATION 'SEE ATTACHED REPORT sabs 1 - 50 Initial Environmental Study ER 78-93 DRAFT BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Bicycle Transportation Plan will replace the 1985 Bicycle Facilities Plan. The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan has three main parts. The first part shows where bicycle paths, lanes and routes are planned to extend throughout the City and its urban reserve, connecting with paths and lanes outside the urban reserve, for use by commuter and recreational bicyclists. These facilities would meet or exceed design standards presented by the Highwav Design Manual, California Department of Transportation, fourth edition. Bridges,underpasses, or"low flow"crossings would be constructed where bicycle paths, lanes or routes intersect arterial streets, the railroad, or are needed to cross creeks. The locations of these facilities are shown on Figure #1. This part also sets standards that guide City construction and maintenance of bicycle facilities. The second part sets standards for short-term (rack) and long-term (enclosed) bicycle parking facilities throughout the City, related to the type and size of development. The third part outlines promotional and educational programs that foster bicycle transportation and safe riding. Once the Bicycle Transportation Plan is adopted by the City Council, it will be implemented through specific City budget items and actions on development applications. II. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW A. CONSISTENCY WITH COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS 1. General Plan Circulation Element The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan is consistent with the hearing draft Circulation Element. However, if the street network is changed on the draft Circulation Element as part of the adoption process, adjustments may be necessary to the Bicycle Transportation Plan to maintain full consistency. The draft Circulation Element calls for updating of the Bicycle Facilities Plan "..consistent with the objectives policies and standards of this Circulation Element.' The Bicycle Facilities Plan shall establish official city bike routes." It calls for the completion of ".. a continuous network of safe and convenient bike lanes and paths that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and with county bike routes..." (Circulation Element policy 3.3). The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan shows official City bike routes. � c ADENDUM TO THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Bicycle Committee recommended the following chances to the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. These changes, if adopted, should not chance the environmental effects of City's implementation Of the Plan. Amendments fs; tqb .......lectiv.es.: P li x. 0 icfes,:Zn roarams 1 Add the following objective to page 3 and amend the last objective on the page: Construct a network of Class I bicycle oaths within the City's urban reserve to connect with paths in surrounding county areas. Provide technical assistance to property owners, ai:4 developers and institutions such as Cal Poly in the design and location of facilities that encourage and accommodate bicycling. 2. Revise policy C.3 (page 5), D.3 and D.7 (page 7), E.2 and G.1 (page 10), D.6 (page 14) to include the following minor word changes: C.3 The City should secure acleguate rights-of-way in developing and redeveloping areas as part of any development or annexation activity. D.3 Bicycle lanes should be installed at times consistent with provisions wR4 of the General Plan Circulation Element. D.7 Bicycle lanes on the outside of parking should be deuble striped on both sides. The line closest to the parked vehicle should provide a reference for motorists to park efficiently next to the curb. E.2 Traffic levels and 85% vehicle speeds along streets designated as Class 11 bicycle routes should not exceed 10,000 ADT and 35 mph respectively. If these standards are exceeded, designated facilities should be considered for upgrading to Class 11 bike lanes or Bicycle Boulevards after further study of alternatives. GA Sieyele lane Bikeway demarcation (striping and stenciling) should be remarked on a regular basis. D.14 The Public Works Department will maintain a library of vendor information on bicycle racks and lockers and will assist 4-eve1epr%+efi4 spensefs developers with the selection and location of bicycle parking facilities. 1 5 sccvrc6; ef theiF tFiPS. Convenient and secure parking encourages people to ride bicycles. (First sentence, page 12) 3. Include the following policy (already included in Section Q under Sections D and E: All bicycle (lanes) (routes) should meet or exceed minimum standards set by the California Highway Design Manual and those in this plan. 4. Delete policy C.5 from page 5 and D.2 from page 7 and add a new Section CA to Chapter VI: Plan Implementation: {Tr ThL-n1ty sheul .vr,lom , Z�.r-• and dFainage easements far se as bleyele paths. ele lanes. )C.1 Plan Amendments: Any person may filean application for amendment to the Bicycle Transoortation Plan with the San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. Applications will be acted on by the City Council. 5. Add the following as a program statement #16 on page 7: 16. The Railroad Bicycle Path should extend north of Highway 101 to the Hathwav Street intersection and be terminated. Stop controls should be placed on California Boulevard to allow bicyclists at this intersection to allow safe access to on-street bike lanes from the Railroad Bike Path. When a bicycle crossing system is designed for Foothill Boulevard MiZ. underpass or special signal system at California and Foothill!, the Railroad Bicvcle Path may be extended north of Hathwav Street to connect with the Cal Poly Campus and beyond. 6. Amend the second half of policy D.8 on page 9 to read as follows: Where right-hand turn lanes are not present, but right tuFn treffie aFe heaw1f, all bicycle lane delineations should be dashed e+d prior to the Intersection to remind eflesurege through-moving bicyclists to merge with right- turn threugh moving traffic. 7. Amend policy F.1. on pale 10 to read as follows: BieyLl,. t.....1.......d.. ..1,....1., be nsik%'Lie-re--epi-a -Vs-te *Ge -53 eaused by auses, er f� tee#$- The flow of traffic, impacts on surrounding land use and changes to the level of service on surrounding streets are factors that should be considered when establishing Bicycle Boulevards. 8. Amend policy G.4 on page 11 as follows and add a new program to Section B Chapter V: 4. Potential hazards and needed improvements such as: the following should be corrected as identified: 0 Improvements to grates, manholes, longitudinal and horizontal cracks or joints, or other obstacles in the portion of the roadway typically used by bicycles. (rest of policy unchanged) 8. Establish reporting procedures that enable citizens to easily report potential road hazards and needed improvements to the Public Work_s Department. 9. Add the following as standard #6 on page 11: 6. When streets are repaved or their surface materials changed, Class bike lanes will be defined by striping, pavement markings and signage (consistent with the Highway Design Manua/ and this plan) and by surface materials with contrasting color and/or texture. 10. Delete the definition of "showers" on page 12, the following policy from page 13, and eliminate the "showers column" from Figure #7 on page 15. ineWft mufti tenant sites; Mae eff�pAsy 100 or- mefe peepAq or- as se she Staff Recommended Alternative Area emplo yers should pro vide sho vers for commuter bic yclists consistent with pro visions of the Commute Alternatives Rule(Rule 90 1) adopted by rhe County Air Pollution Control Bozrd. 11. Amend program B.4 on page 17 as follows: 4. Encourage the licensing and identification of bicycles by: v Periedieally allewing thee ffee lieen sing ef bieyeles in sehee sand Working with the City Police Department to offer free bicycle identification programs at schools and promotional events. (remainder of policy is unchanged) 12. Amend policy B.4 on page 19 as follows: 4. The City will set aside at least 10% of its street reconstruction and maintenance funds for bicycle lane and path maintenance and installation. 1-intil all 11 bike lanes have been installed. Surplus TOA fundingfunding Fnay he substituted fGF this purpese. This affleent sheuld be $ )teconunended ddit�oiu or Clia1 to �g .... , #Z,anc #3 Amend Figure #1: Bicycle Transportation Map and Figure #2: Bicycle Paths and Lanes: New Segments to reflect the following new projects or amendments (see attached Exhibit 13. Sinshe/mer Park: include a Class /l/ Bicycle Route from the north and of Southwood Drive, through Sinsheimer Park to the south end of Boulevard Del Campo. 14. Sinsheimer School Access: include a Class /Bicycle Path on the north side of the creek adjoining Sinsheimer School that connects Southwood Drive with Augusta Street. 15. Southwood Drive Bike Lanes (Laurel Lane to Sinsheimer Park): Remove parking on both sides of Southwood Drive and install Class II-B bicycle lanes. 16. Morro Street. identify Morro Street as a "bicycle boulevard" between Pismo Street and Santa Barbara Street. Stop controls would be reversed on cross streets to give travel preference to Morro Street bike traffic. install a through traffic diverter at the Church or Leff Street intersection. identify Morro Street between P/smo and Mill Streets as a Class 111 bike route. Osos Street: Modify the plan's recommendations to include a northbound Class 11--A bicycle lane on Osos Street between Leff and Pismo Streets and Class /1-A 1 -55 bike lanes on both sides of Osos Between Pismo and Marsh Streets (no parking remo Val). 17. Sacramento Drive-Capitolio Way Area: include a Class I bike path along the east side of Acatia Creek from Orcutt Road southward to its intersection with Broad Street. Include Class II bike lanes on Capitolio Drive between Broad and Sacramento Drive, and along existing segments of Sacramento Drive as shown on attached Exhibit �. 18. Johnson Avenue Bike Lanes: (a) Lizzie to Buchon: include Class II-B, bike lanes on both sides of Johnson, eliminate one north bound travel lane, and redesign San Luis Drive intersection. (b) Buchon to Pismo: make no recommendation for any bikeway designation. (c) Pismo to Marsh: include Class II-B bike lanes on the west side with parking removal; include Class II-A bike lanes on east side with parking retained. (d) Marsh to Monterey:. include Class II-A bike lanes on the outside of parking bays on both sides of this street segment. Staff Alternatives for 18.b: Option 1: remove curb parking from both sides of Johnson and install Class /P B bicycle lanes (6 feet wide) adjoining the curb. This option would allow for 12 foot travel lanes and a 10 foot center turn lane. Option 2: remove curb parking-along the east side of Johnson and install a 4 foot Class /l-B bike lane next to the curb. Retain parking on the west side and install a 4 foot Class //-A bike lane. 19. South Higuera: City limits south to Route 101 intersection: resurface and install Class II-B bike lanes on both sides of the road. 20.a. Add the following bicycle routes to Figure #5 and continue to show these routes on Figure 1: Bicycle Transportation Map as Bicycle Routes Street From To Comments Highland Route 1 Patricia Patricia Highland Foothill Tassajara Foothill Ramona Ramona Tassajara. Broad Montalban Route 1 Lincoln Sign when bridge over creek installed Lincoln Montalban Chorro Sign when bridge over creek installed Montalban Route 1 Stenner Hath%vay California Slack Slack Hathway Grand -5�0 Murray Broad Railroad Casa Murray Foothill Loomis Grand Cuesta Park Mill Chorro Grand Chorro Mill Pismo Johnson Mill Monterey High Nipomo Broad Pismo Johnson Higuera Santa Rosa Pismo Railroad Sign when Jennifer St. Bridge installed Ella Johnson Jennifer Jennifer Railroad Rachel Rachel Jennifer Florence Florence Rachel Bushnell Buchnell Florence San Carlos San Carlos Bushnell Del Campo Del Campo San Carlos Sinsheimer Park Park Route Del Campo Southwood Augusta Bishop Sinsheimer School Flora High School norther terminus Sign when County access secured Southwood Laurel Johnson San Luis California Andrews San Luis Andrews Route 101 Sign when connection to freeway or to Cuesta Park under Route 101 made Hopkins Broad Acatia Creek Sign when hillside path installed Sante Fe Buckley Tank Farm Farm Rd. Vachell Creek Sign when creek trail installed Bridge Higuera Exposition Exposition Bridge Corrida Corrida Exposition Woodbridge Woodbridge Corrida Broad King South Corrida Beebee South Bridge Margarita Higuera east Sign when South Hill path installed Laurence Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Francis Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Alphonso Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Prefumo LOVR West City Limits Oceanaire LOVR Madonna Laguna Lake Park routes Sign when bike paths connect w/Foothill or LOVR Calle Joaquin LOVR north/ ft. Sign when. Dalidio path installed 20.15. Delete the following bicycle routes from Figure #1: Bicycle Transportation Map: Street From To Chorro Highland Lincoln Boysen Chorro Route 1 � - 57 The bike routes recommended by the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan are along existing and proposed streets recommended by the draft Circulation Element. The Bicycle Transportation Plan also includes a Class I bike path along the Southern Pacific Railroad which is specifically called for by the draft Circulation Element (program 3.13). 2. General Plan Land Use Element The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan is consistent with the hearing draft Land Use Element. The Bicycle Transportation Plan proposes bicycle facilities that will serve neighborhoods, activity centers, and the pattern of City growth as envisioned by the draft Land Use Element. (Refinements to the Bicycle Transportation Plan may be needed 'when more specific planning is done for City major expansion areas and the Airport Area.) Furthermore, the draft Land Use Element includes the following goal that supports bicycle transportation: Provide safe and pleasant places to walk and ride a bicycle, for recreation as well as for commuting and doing daily errands. (Reference, goal 28, page 7) 3. General Plan Open Space Element The Bicycle Transportation Plan, with its included mitigation measures, is consistent with the draft Open Space Element (see measures in box on following page). Focused environmental evaluations of Class I facilities will be required when specific designs are prepared. The Bicycle Transportation Plan proposes that Class I bicycle paths be established along creeks in the Airport Area, Dalidio and Orcutt expansion areas, along segments of San Luis Obispo Creek south of the downtown, bordering parts of Laguna Lake, on South Street Hill, and along the west side of Highway 101 between Broad Street and Madonna Road. The primary purpose of Class I routes is to provide recreational opportunities for cyclists. However, some of the proposed routes will also serve the needs of commuter cyclists (such routes include the railroad bicycle path, connections to Cuesta College via bike paths bordering Laguna Lake and O'Connor Way, and the bike path along the west side. of Highway 101). � QQ r f -SV Class I liicycle Futh Design Standards 1. Bicycle paths should provide smooth hard surfaces at least 12 feet wide. Exceptions to this standard maybe made in hillside areas where grading would cause visual impacts or along creeks where space is limited. 2. Bicycle paths on agricultural properties should: • Be fenced and signed to discourage trespassing onto adjoining areas. • Use existing service roads whenever possible. Avoid dividing agricultural areas in ways that significantly impact their operations. The City will work with property owners to identify locations where bike paths can best fit in with agricultural operations. 3. Bicycle paths along creeks should: Be located outside setbacks required to protect creek banks and riparian vegetation. Assess points to the creek should be limited in number and avoid the remoNal of significant habitat or impacts on important fishery areas. • Provide a landscape buffer of indigenous vegetation between the top of the creek bank and the path. The buffer should ensure visual access to the creek while controlling the location of pedestrian/bicycle access. Avoid causing creek bank erosion, siltation of stream beds, or the removal of trees with trunk diameter of 12 inches or greater. Be closed when flood hazards exist. 4. Where bicycle paths cross creeks, lightly-constructed clear span bridges or low-flow crossings should be installed where they. Avoid the removal of significant trees or streamside vegetation; and • Minimize grading of creek banks or changes to the creek channel. 5. Bicycle paths around Laguna Lake should: • Be located beyond any wetland habitat. J • Be constructed at grade, not impede the flow of flood waters, and be closed when flooded. • due to the sensitivity of the area's bird population, be preceded by a census of bird life in adjoining wetland areas. Bird populations and related available research efforts should be periodically monitored to determine any residual impacts of the path's use. 6. The installation of bicycle paths in sensitive resource areas (defined by the Open Space Element) should: • Be proceeded by a specific survey of wildlife resources along the trail alignment. Avoid direct or indirect damage to sensitive wildlife resources. 3 I -v- 9 The draft Open Space Element includes the following pertinent goals and policies: Provide recreational uses adjacent to creeks only when they are sensitive to the creek environment (Page 15, goal 3). Enhance creek corridors and their habitat value by (1) providing an adequate creek setback, (2) maintaining creek corridors in an essentially natural state, (3) employing creek restoration techniques where restoration is needed to achieve a natural creek corridor, (4) utilizing riparian vegetation within creek corridors, and where possible,within creek setback areas, (5) prohibiting the planting of invasive, non-native plants (such as vinca major and eucalyptus) within creek corridors or creek setbacks, and (6) avoiding tree removals within creek corridors except where determined appropriate by the City .Arborist. (policy 3.c., page 19) Adopt an ordinance that establishes creek setbacks and allows and prohibits uses within creeks (prohibited uses should include both motorized and non-motorized off road vehicles). (program Lb, page 20). Encourage passive recreation within the outer perimeter of creek setback or a habitat buffer. (Table IV, page 50). Passive recreation means low-intensity recreational activities such as hiking, bird watching, nature photography, trails [emphasis added] individual picnic areas, nature study, viewing stations, interpretive areas, and similar uses. (definition, def 4.) Require public or private development to locate development outside a wetland and wetland buffer except in the following cases: ... (4) the location is necessary for the construction of new roads, bridges, trails [emphasis added] or similar infrastructure where the Community Development Director determines the project has minimized environmental impacts through project design and infrastructure placement. (policy 2.f, page 24). It is important to note the draft Laguna Lake Master Plan (also under consideration by the City and recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission) suggests that a trail be extended through the park from Madonna Road to Foothill Boulevard. However, no specific alignment has been recommended at this point. 4. General Plan Parks and Recreation Element The Bicycle Transportation Plan is consistent with the Park and Recreation Element, and proposed bike path locations and standards do not conflict with that element's recommended urban trail system. The Parks and Recreation Element includes a map on page 10 that shows an "urban trail system. The element states that the City shall in all cases attempt to secure access rights needed to carry out the trail plan. The element also calls for the City to refine the trail plan and develop precise design standards that control the type of access to and use of 4 specific section of the trail system. Some of the bicycle paths recommended by the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan are also identified by the Parks and Recreation Element as off-street trails. Specifically, bike paths along San Luis Creek south of the downtown, on South Street Hill connecting Meadow Park with the Margarita neighborhood, bordering Laguna Lake, and using creek corridors off of Orcutt Road are also identified as trails by the Parks and Recreation Element. The Draft Circulation Element includes the following program statement: 4.6 The City will adopt an Urban Trails Plan as part of the Open Space Element to encourage walking and to expand off-street facilities that provide pedestrian linkages throughout the community. To achieve continuity between the development of Class I bicycle paths and future trail development, the draft Bicycle Transportation.Plan includes the following policy: 2. The planning of Class I bicycle lanes should be coordinated with the implementation of the Urban Trails Plan, as called for by the Circulation Element. Where dual facilities are proposed, the need for separation between cyclists and pedestrians will be evaluated. 5. The Downtown Concept Plan The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan is consistent with the.Downtown Concept Plan. The Downtown Concept Plan includes an illustration of how the central commercial area may be changed in the future. The plan also includes broad goals, policies, and recommended capital projects, some of which address the downtown's, transportation needs. The plan includes the following policy: "Provide more facilities that encourage and enhance the use of bicycles." The plan does not make any specific recommendations for the installation of bicycle facilities. The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan recommends bicycle facilities in the downtown (such as bike lanes on Marsh Street and bicycle parking distributed throughout the core) that should "encourage and enhance the use of bicycles." 6. Adopted Zoning Regulations The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan is not consistent with existing Zoning Regulations. The Zoning Regulations will need to be amended to achieve consistency with the Bicycle Transportation Plan (or the Bicycle Transportation Plan standards modified to match existing zoning requirements). Zoning Regulations amendments are already called.for by the draft Circulation Element. The City will need to amend its downtown parking in- 5 1 0 lieu fee program to included bicycle parking. The Bicycle Transportation Plan recommends standards for bicycle parking for multi- family residential and commercial projects. The recommended standards are shown in the following table. Section 17.16.060(F) of the Zoning Regulations requires new developments that are required to provide 10 or more vehicle spaces must also provide facilities for parking bicycles and motorcycles at the rate of one bicycle space and one motorcycle space for each twenty car spaces. Projects that provide more bicycle/and or motorcycle spaces than required may reduce the required car spaces at.the rate of one car space for each five motorcycle or bicycle spaces, up to a ten percent reduction. Existing zoning standards stipulate that bicycle parking will be provided at a rate equal to 567o of the required number of vehicle parking spaces. As noted above, this standard is retained for tourist commercial and multifamily residential land uses. For other types of commercial uses (office, retail commercial, manufacturing) the standard would be increased to 15% of the number of required vehicle parking spaces. Furthermore, the Bicycle Transportation Plan sets minimum standards for the provision of short- and long- term ongiterm parking. The objective of the proposed standards is to require long-term bicycle parking for at least 10010 of the on-site work force for most commercial uses with a target of 15% for office employees. The draft Circulation Element includes the following program statement: 3.13 The City will modify its Zoning Regulations to establish standards for the installation of lockers, and secured bicycle parking, and showers. 6 BICYCLE PARKING STANDARDS Land Use Bike spaces as Minimum % Minimum % Category required % of Short Term Long Term auto spaces (1) Medium -, Medium- 5% 100% (2) High, & High Density Residential Central Commercial (3) General Retail/ 15% 50% 40% Neighborhood Retail Offices 15% 10% 80% Tourist Commercial 5% 10% 80% Services-& 15% 10% 80% Manufacturing (1) Requirements apply to projects that require 10 or more vehicle parking spaces. (2) In addition to short-term parking, bicycle lockers or interior space within each dwelling or accessory structure (eg. garages) should be reserved for at least two bicycles. (3) In the downtown (CC Zone), businesses pay the City an in-lieu fee for the installation of short range parking. Where on-site space is not available, business pay an in-lieu fee for long-term bicycle parking to be installed in public areas such as surface parking lots, parking garages, or areas within street rights-of-way. 7 C. LAND USE Facilities and activities proposed by the Bicycle Transportation Plan, for the most part, utilize pubic streets or other publicly-owned areas. Therefore, no significant land-use conflicts are anticipated. (Installing bike lanes within existing rights-of-way is identified by the CEQA Guidelines as "categorically exempt"). Where Class I bicycle paths are located in agricultural areas, care will be needed to ensure that bicycle travel will not limit agricultural production or increase trespassing. Areas where these concerns may be felt include Class I bike paths along: ♦ Laguna Lake and extending north to Foothill Boulevard (see Section A.3) ♦ The south side of the Dalidio property bordering the creek ♦ Acacia Creek extending south of Tank Farm Road ♦ Along the west side of Route 101 adjoining Cerro San Luis Obispo Class I bicycle paths are also planned in other areas that are currently used for agriculture but are designated for urban use by the hearing draft Land Use Element. Class I paths are proposed along: ♦ The base of South Street Hill through the Garcia Ranch ♦ Creeks west of Orcutt Road ♦ San Luis Obispo Creek between Elks Lane and Prado Road The City anticipates integrating these bike paths into specific plans or development plans for the areas they pass through. If the City establishes bike paths prior to approval of such plans, the mitigation measures included in the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan and identified in Section A.3 of this initial study will reduce impacts to below significant levels. D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 1. Impacts on Street Capacity Installation of bicycle lanes within existing roadways will not adversely impact traffic circulation. Bicycle lane projects that involve the reduction of travel lanes will not significantly reduce the level of service along street segments or at intersections. Also, increased bicycle use is expected to reduce vehicle traffic. As part of the long term traffic monitoring program called for by the draft Circulation Element (program 7.5), streets where travel lanes have been eliminated should be monitored and corrective action taken, as needed, to maintain the Element's level of service standards for arterial streets. In some locations, the Bicycle Transportation Plan recommends the elimination of vehicle lanes and the installation of center turn lanes and bicycle lanes within the existing roadway. These street segments are identified in the following box. An example project that has already been completed is the segment of Foothill Boulevard between Tassajara Drive and the western City limits. Prior to implementation of the 4 OT Foothill project, City engineering staff evaluated the elimination of travel lanes and determined that doing so would not significantly affect current or projected traffic flow. A similar analysis was done for eliminating travel lanes on Higuera Street between High and Marsh Streets. This project has been approved by the City Council and awaits implementation during Summer 1993. A synopsis of potential impacts of the other projects is provided after the box. Streets Where Travel Lanes are Recommended for Elimination Street Name From Two Recommended Change Marsh Street Higuera Johnson Remove 1 travel lane; install left, right turn pockets at intersections; install Class II-A bike lanes both sides. Johnson Avenue San Luis Buchon Remove 1 north-bound travel lane; extend left-turn pocket for Pismo Street; install Class II-B bike lanes both sides. Johnson Avenue Bishop Orcutt Remove 1 travel lane in each direction; install center turn lanes; install Class II-A bike lanes both sides. Laurel Lane Johnson Orcutt Remove 1 travel lane in each direction; install center turn lanes; install Class II-A bike lanes both sides. ♦ Marsh Street (between Higuera Street and Johnson Avenue): In February, 1993, Associated Transportation Engineers were hired to evaluate the impact of reducing travel lanes on Marsh Street on the level of service at key intersections. The engineer's report concludes that the current level of service would be maintained and in some cases improved since the installation of turn lanes would facilitate traffic flow. ♦ Johnson Avenue (between Buchon and San Luis Drive intersection): In May 1993, Associated Transportation Engineers (ATE) were hired to evaluate alternatives for, and traffic-flow impacts of, providing bike lanes on both sides of Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and the San Luis Drive. Six bike lane alternatives were evaluated. ATE found that if a second left-turn lane was installed at San Luis Drive and the green time of the San Luis Drive signal was increased for Johnson Avenue, that one of Johnson Avenue's northbound travel lanes could be eliminated. By eliminating one of the travel lanes, bicycle lanes could be provided on both sides of the street. The San Luis Drive intersections would operate at LOS A. _ 9 � �L ATE analyzed two bicycle lane alternatives for the area between Buchon and Pismo streets: Alternative "A" would eliminate parking on the east side of Johnson Avenue and install a bicycle lane along the curb. On the west side of Johnson Avenue, parking would be retained, with a bicycle lane provided along the roadway side of the parking bay. This striping alternative would not significantly change the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue or at the Johnson/Pismo intersection. Alternative"B"would eliminate parking on both sides of Johnson Avenue and install six-foot-wide bicycle lanes along each curb. Because of the wider travel lanes and the lack of parking conflicts associated with this alternative, the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue and at the Johnson/Buchon and Johnson/Pismo intersections would improve slightly. ♦ Johnson Avenue (Ella to Orcutt Road), and Laurel Lane (Johnson to Orcutt):. Projected traffic volumes on these street segments based on build out of the draft Land Use Element can be accommodated by a two-lane street. The City's traffic model shows the following: Johnson (Ella to Bishop) 20,782 ADT Johnson (Bishop to Laurel): 12,469 ADT Johnson (Laurel to Orcutt): 5,230 ADT Laurel (Johnson to Orcutt): 13,421 ADT Installing center turn lanes can improve traffic flow and partially compensate for the reduction in capacity caused by removing travel lanes. 2. Traffic Diversion Impacts Proposal Description The Bicycle Transportation Plan proposes to close Broad Street south of Murray Street to through traffic and create a "bicycle boulevard." The purpose of the bicycle boulevard is to provide convenient travel for bicycles with minimal conflicts with vehicle traffic. While no specific design for the boulevard has been proposed to date, it is anticipated that barriers to through traffic would be established south of Serrano Drive. Stop signs and speed bumps along Broad Street would be removed to facilitate bicycle traffic flow. 10 1—(oso 5 Coordinate signals and reduce cycle length �--� �.- 4 Add free right turn .a�.� lane Tr, I III Li ! r1 I ' III Choke Intersection down Choke Intersection down to to 32 foot travel way. 30 foot travel way through, _ _ Intersection off sets. _ — Add 4 way stop control Add textured walk ' -and textured crosswalks L_ 1lYY�i R I GGG II � F I III I R}T R Me 01 rr• '. 1 + 1 , . 1111 '! f. � , �\ 7 - Add •. , _-;'.. t'ry textured 1 +a'00 crosswalks 3 �; NIS , I I Figure 2 city Of NEAR TERM RECOMMENDED a San luis OB1SPO IMPROVEMENTS 490 Palm StmetlPOa1 Ot1+ce Bos 8100•San Line Obispo,CA 93AC3.8100 Broad-Murray Area 11 CHANGES IN TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE BROAD-CHORRO AREA Street Location Current Count After Broad Closed (ADT, 1/92) (ADT -- % Change) Broad Street South of Foothill 4,300 4,300 0% Ramona 6,900 6,900 0% Meinecke 41400 4,400 0% Murray 2,500 1,000 -6017,o Mountain View 21200 880 -60% Chorro Street South of Foothill 8,600 8,600 0070 Meinecke 9,000 9,750 8% Murray 11,500 13,000 1367o Mountain View 11,000 12,500 14% Meinecke Street East of Broad: 2,100 2,850 36% Murray Street East of Broad: 2,300 3,050 33% Previous Traffic Analysis During 1988, DKS Associates conducted traffic studies in the Broad-Chorro neighborhood to address residents' concern for increasing traffic volumes and speeds. DKS evaluated traffic volumes on Broad and Chorro Streets and found that about 60 percent of traffic did not have an origin or destination in the neighborhood. To address the problems of increasing traffic volumes and speeds, DKS Associates recommended several street design measures, shown on the following Figure #2. Summary of Effects on Traffic Patterns Closing Broad Street to vehicular traffic will divert through traffic to Chorro Street as the alternative route and will increase traffic on cross streets connecting Broad with Chorro. Additional traffic would also use Chorro Street and cross streets (especially Lincoln) to reach Highway 101. Using traffic estimates provided by DKS Associates, 60% of the Broad Street traffic south 12 I r^ of Murray Street would be shifted to Chorro Street. There would be corresponding traffic increases on Murray and Meinecke Streets that connect Broad and Chorro. The following table provides an estimate of the traffic changes to the effected streets. Traffic counts were taken during the winter quarter of 1992 after additional stop controls had been installed at the Chorro/Meinecke intersection. Estimated traffic volumes after the closure of Broad to through traffic were based on the estimate made by DKS Associates. In sum, traffic would be reduced on Broad Street south of Murray (by up to 60%) and increased on Meinecke and Murray Streets (33% and 36010 respectively) and on Chorro Streets south of Meinecke (8% to 14%). These increases would not exceed the traffic capacity of any of the streets, although the level of service at the Meinecke and Murray intersections with Chorro Street would decline. Consistency with General Plan Circulation Element Standards The hearing draft Circulation Element includes recommended standards for the use of City streets and classifies streets according to their function. The following table is an excerpt from the draft element. The Circulation Element classifies Chorro Street as a "Neighborhood Arterial" and Broad Street as a "Residential Collector," while Meinecke and Murray Streets are identified as "Local Residential' Streets. STREET CLASSIFICATION AND STANDARDS Street Type Maximum ADT Travel Lanes Desired Speed Local 2,500 2 25 Residential Residential 5,000 2 25 Collector Neighborhood 10,000 2 25 Arterial Local Residential: Directly serve non-residential development that front them and channel traffic to residential collector streets. Residential Collectors: Collect traffic from residential areas and channel it to residential arterial streets. Arterial Streets: Provide circulation between major activity centers and residential areas. Neighborhood Arterials: Are arterial streets with residential property frontage where preservation of neighborhood character is more important than providing for traffic flow, where speeds should be controlled and traffic growth avoidcd. 13 The standards included in the draft Circulation Element are based on residents' perceptions of acceptable traffic amounts and speeds, considering such environmental effects as noise. While these standards have limited relationship to the capacity of the streets to carry a certain traffic volume at an acceptable level of service, they do address residents' concerns for the number and speed of vehicles in residential areas. Based on these standards and classifications, traffic diversion onto Chorro Street from Broad Street and increases on Murray and Meinecke would have the following immediate results: ♦ Traffic levels on Broad Street would comply with suggested standards for Residential Collector streets. ♦ Traffic levels on Chorro Street (south of Murray Street) would conflict with the suggested ADT standards for Residential Arterial Streets. Diversion of traffic from Broad to Chorro Street would conflict with the definition of Neighborhood Arterials since it would be City policy to avoid traffic increases on these types of streets. ♦ Traffic levels on Murray and Meinecke Streets would exceed the recommended ADT standard for Local Streets. Its important to note that segments of Chorro Street already exceed the ADT standard suggested by the draft Circulation Element. Furthermore, based on growth projected for San Luis Obispo and the central coast region, traffic growth on Chorro, Murray and Meinecke will continue to cause these standards to be exceeded. If these standards are to be achieved, the City will need to take actions to divert traffic from this area and provide traffic capacity elsewhere in the street system. City staff has recommended that the draft Circulation Element include the widening of Santa Rosa Street to six lanes, the installation of a right-hand turn lane on Foothill at Santa Rosa Street, and the closure of the southbound off ramp at Highway 101 and Broad Street. These actions will tend to retard, although not totally eliminate, traffic growth on Broad or Chorro Streets. Findings and Mitigation If a bicycle boulevard is established on Broad Street, traffic will increase on Murray, Meinecke and Chorro Streets. These traffic increases will not exceed the traffic-flow capacities of these streets. but they will exceed environmental standards for streets recommended by the draft Circulation Element. These impacts may be significant. Each of the following measures can mitigate the traffic diversion impacts and conflicts with draft Circulation Element standards to below significant levels: (a) Revise the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan to designate Broad Street as a Class III bike route and maintain through traffic use. This alternative would not improve bicycle transportation within this area. (b) Revise the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan to establish Class II bicycle lanes on 14 Chorro Street, and maintain Broad Street as a through traffic route. This strategy will improve bicycle transportation but will require the removal of curb parking on one side of Chorro Street. (c) Discourage traffic use of Chorro and Broad Streets through the installation of bulb- outs and additional stop signs as recommended by DKS Associates. Coordinate traffic signals on Foothill Boulevard (at Broad, Chorro and Santa Rosa) and install a right-hand-turn pocket on Foothill Boulevard at Santa Rosa Street. This project will encourage the use of Santa Rosa Street as the primary route to the downtown and will require the cooperation of Caltrans. Establish a bicycle boulevard on Broad Street only after these changes have been made. (d) Amend the standards within the draft Circulation Element to set higher limits for ADT on Local Residential and Neighborhood Arterial streets. Or, redesignate Chorro Street as a Residential Arterial (which does not specify an ADT standard) and Murray and Meinecke Streets as Residential Collector streets (which have an ADT limit of 5,000). These changes in street classification would reflect how the streets are being used. E. EMERGENCY SERVICES While emergency access may be constrained in limited locations, there are design alternatives that can ensure that adequate access is provided. Impacts to emergency services are not significant. As noted in section A.2, focused environmental studies will be required when specific designs for Class I facilities are prepared. Whenever possible, bicycle facilities should be accessible to emergency vehicles (paramedic services). Since most proposed facilities are within streets or accessible public areas, access should not be a problem. Class I bicycle paths separated from the street may experience some limitations to emergency services. The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan includes the following design standard that would apply to construction of Class I paths: 1. Class I bicycle paths should provide a smooth hard surface at least 12 feet wide. Exceptions to this standard should be made in hillside areas where grading would cause visual impacts or along creeks where space is limited. This standard should enable emergency access. However, there are a limited number of locations where uniform application of these standards may not be possible or desirable: Creek paths extend along segments of San Luis Obispo Creek between Dana Street and Elks Lane. Alternative emergency access can be provided through adjoining properties and at the stub ends of public streets. 15 I �� 1 Railroad bike path passes through road cuts and bridges streets and creeks. Emergency access can be provided from adjacent properties, stub streets, and from the railroad right-of- way. South Street Hill ridge path extends along the northern face of South Street Hill. Providing for emergency vehicle access along this trail alignment would require significant grading of the hillside. From the south, it appears that existing farm roads can be used to provide access to the top of the hill where the path descends to Meadow Park. Also, access can be provided to the east end of the trail via the service road to the Edna Saddle water tank. Laguna Lake trails extend to Foothill Boulevard from Los Osos Valley Road and from Laguna Lake Park. Depending on the precise alignment, portions of the trail may extend through flood prone areas. Standards within the Bicycle Transportation Plan (see section A.3 of this Initial Study) suggest that the path be constructed at grade and closed during flooding. While emergency access would be restricted during wet weather periods, so would bicycle traffic. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. H. TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS Establishing bicycle lanes and paths will not significantly alter topography. Since most bicycle facilities will use existing City streets and public areas, few topographic modifications will be required to implement the Bicycle Transportation Plan. There is a potential for topographic changes where Class I paths bridge creeks or where crossing structures are built along the proposed railroad bicycle path. Mitigation measures for creek crossings that are part of the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan are identified in section A.2. Along the railroad bicycle path, bridge structures will be needed at Johnson Avenue, San Luis Obispo Creek, and Monterey Street. There are existing railroad bridges at each of these locations. It is unknown whether Southern Pacific will allow the City to modify existing bridges to include bicycle paths (possibly by attaching a cantilevered structure for bicycles to the exiting bridge) or whether parallel bridge structures will be required. If parallel bridge structures require the construction of new bridge abutments, significant excavation may be required that could impact adjoining land uses or eicisting vegetation. At Mill Street, the bicycle path would pass under the existing bridge and would require excavation of the embankment with retaining walls. No adverse impacts are anticipated from that action. It is speculative to determine the impacts of constructing bridges associated with the railroad bicycle path. The City has budgeted for an engineering design study to evaluate options that are acceptable to the City and Southern Pacific. Once these studies are complete, a specific project description will be developed for the railroad bicycle path and focused environmental studies undertaken. 16 1 -77C K,L PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE Impacts will not be significant. Additional site-specific environmental studies will be required prior to locating Class I bike lanes in sensitive wildlife areas. Sensitive wildlife resources that may be affected by construction and use of bicycle facilities are located along creeks, in wetland areas surrounding Laguna Lake (valley fresh water marsh plant communities) and on South Street Hill (serpentine plant communities). Mitigation measures that are included in the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan and presented in Section A.3 of this initial study address potential impacts to these resources. M. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES Determination of impacts is speculative at this time. Site surface evaluations will be required when specific alignments of Class I bike paths have been identified along creeks or in open field areas where archaeological resources may exist. Most bicycle facilities will use existing City streets and public areas. Subsurface work is not anticipated and these areas have been previously disturbed. Therefore, impacts on subsurface archaeological or historical archaeological resources are not anticipated. Class I bicycle paths are proposed in open field areas and along creeks. A review of archaeological resource information on file in the Community Development Department does not show that proposed Class I facilities would impact recorded prehistoric sites. Nevertheless, the potential for finding archaeological resources in these areas is high. Without specific designs and further surveys, its is speculative to gauge the potential significance of archaeological impacts. The following mitigation measure has been incorporated into the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan and is a continuation of the listing presented in section A.3 of the Initial Study: 9. Bicycle paths in areas where archaeological resources may be present should: A. Be preceded by a surface survey conducted by a qualified archaeologist to determine the presence of significant archaeological resources. B. Avoid subsurface disturbances. C. Comply with other mitigation strategies including relocation of the path as required by Archaeological Survey Guidelines adopted by the City of San Luis Obispo. 17 N. AESTHETIC IMPACTS The aesthetic effect of implementing the Bicycle Transportation Plan is not significant. Consistent with the provisions of the Bicycle Transportation Plan, Class I bike paths in hillside areas, along creeks, and across agricultural properties will use service roads whenever possible, involve minimal grading, and include creek corridor landscaping. Therefore Class I Bike paths should not significantly reduce the aesthetic value of these areas. The draft Bicycle Transportation Plan includes provisions for the installation of bicycle signing along all Class II bicycle lanes and designated Class III bicycle routes. Contrary to past City practice, standards within the Bicycle Transportation Plan limit the number of signs to be installed and requires the consolidation of signs by using existing utility, traffic signal, street light, and traffic sign poles. MITIGATION SUMMARY Traffic Diversion Impacts The City will select one or more of the following measures, to mitigate to below significant levels the traffic diversion impacts and conflicts with draft Circulation Element standards: 1. Amend the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan to designate Broad Street.as a Class III bike route and maintain through traffic use. 2. Amend the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan to establish Class II bicycle lanes on Chorro Street and maintain Broad Street as a through traffic route. 3. Discourage traffic use of Chorro and Broad Streets through the installation of bulb- outs and additional stop signs as recommended by DKS Associates. Coordinate traffic signals on Foothill Boulevard (at Broad, Chorro and Santa Rosa) and install a right-hand-turn pocket on Foothill Boulevard at Santa Rosa Street. This project will encourage the use of Santa Rosa Street as the primary route to the downtown and will require the cooperation of Caltrans. Establish a bicycle boulevard on Broad Street only after these changes have been made. 4. Amend the standards within the draft Circulation Element to set higher limits for ADT on Local Residential and Neighborhood Arterial Streets. Or redesignate Chorro Street as a Residential Arterial Street (which does not specify an ADT standard) and.Murray and Meinecke Streets as Residential Collector streets which has an ADT limit of 5,000. 14. 1 -7`� Inconsistency with Zoning Regulations and City Parking In-Lieu Fee Program 1. The Zoning Regulations will be amended to achieve consistency with the Bicycle Transportation Plan or the Bicycle Transportation Plan standards will be modified to match existing zoning requirements. (Zoning Regulations amendments are already called for by the draft Circulation Element.) 2. The City will amend its downtown parking in-lieu fee program to included the cost of providing bicycle parking. GMABIKE.IES �uN �NEER,NG 19 CL xhibit #7 LU a `—A a m Lu 0 x 'o -- V) UJ2 n o Z Y W LCD � J m �+ 0 gLU LU y * C) o m v U cn w a a U J II II Q1 41 j in I �— Old F®R I n L w LU LLJ L L o I� I ¢ a_ N Z T II / 0 /. a I� f 14 l a ' '� o 1 j m I I / m n r Ij m N.o..,m P.n. I I m m li U. � o I ` 1 I ❑ �� W f w N � U fltl� � W W ❑ m U Qtit vatn Trv.n.n I t • Mltl-Te n MW@d ru \ G I \ Lcc U n I I ED PE i1 ti IIII^VIII V'on"to I IY.g YnNfl / 9 / I o I � m co /'J \ •enp Iivwtl I w m ti A�5..awury I � I LI a II I \ m L z 93m ON NNX IMM \EME t7 N i I C / l O en 4 .we nd&.. y w IM y 7 y x In m _ 1.paN..n I I ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS a Ili 100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Santa Barbara, CA 93110 • FAX (805) 682-8509 • (8051687-4418 Maynard Keith Franklin,P.E. E D Robert L.Faris,P.E. RE C E t V Richard L Pool,P.E. Scott A.Schell FEB 19 1993 :NGikEe�lr.l,Jr1 iSUr: "y pF Si.r,;.U:i OMSK' February 18, 1993 ATE #930151-01.1-TR Mr. John Rawles City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR THE MARSH STREET RESTRIPING PROJECT, CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA The following letter presents the results of Associated Transportation Engineers' (ATE) level of service analysis on the Marsh Street Restriping Project. BACKGROUND The Marsh Street Restriping Project proposes to restripe the downtown one-way section of Marsh Street from the existing configuration of three through lanes to two lanes with bike lanes on each side of the street. The existing geometrics at the Marsh Street intersection approaches would also be modified. ATE analyzed the effects of the restriping project at the following three intersections identified by the City. 1. Santa Rosa Street/Marsh Street 2. Chorro Street/Marsh Street 3. Broad Street/Marsh Street INTERSECTION CONDITIONS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY City staff provided ATE with 1992 Noon and P.M. peak hour turning movement volumes, signal timing data, existing geometrics and lane widths, as well as the proposed geometrics and lane widths for each of the three study intersections. /- 78 Engineering 9 Planning . Parking . Signal Systems • Impact Reports . Bikeways . Transit EXHIBIT I Mr. John Rawles Page 2 February 18, 1993 Levels of service for the three signalized intersections were calculated using a computer software program published by the Federal Highway Administration. This software program emulates the signalized intersection level of service methodology outlined in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)'. Worksheets illustrating the level of service calculations are attached to this report. For the existing geometric scenario,the following lane configurations were assumed for the Marsh Street approaches at Chorro Street and Broad Street:a through-plus left-tum lane,a through lane, and a through-plus-right-tum lane. The existing geometric configuration assumed at the Santa Rosa Street intersection included a left-tum lane,a through-plus-left-tum lane and a through-plus- right-tum lane. The proposed lane configurations assumed for the Marsh Street approaches at Chorro and Broad Streets included a separate left-turn lane, two through lanes, and a separate right-tum lane. At Santa Rosa Street, the proposed Marsh Street lane configuration included dual left-tum lanes, a through lane, and a through-plus-right-tum lane. The existing intersection signal timing data provided by the City was used in calculating levels of service for both the existing and future geometric scenarios. Table 1 lists the average vehicle delay and corresponding level of service for the three study intersections assuming the existing and proposed geometrics. TABLE 1 Existing and Proposed Delay And Level of Service Data Intersection Noon Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Marsh StJSanta Rosa St. 8.7 SecJLOS B 7.8 SecJLOS B 9.3 SecJLOS B 8.2 SecJLOS B Marsh SUChorro St. 7.6 SecJLOS B 7.4 SecJLOS B 7.5 SecJLOS B 7.6 Sec./LOS B Marsh St./Broad St. 6.6 SecJLOS B 7.5 SecJLOS B 6.4 SecJLOS B 7.0 SecJLOS B The data presented in Table 1 Indicate that overall intersection operations would not be adversely affected by the proposed striping project. Vehicle delays and Intersection levels of service would remain well within the LOS B range with the proposed striping modifications. In fact, the operation of several intersections would actually improve with the revised geometric configurations. ' Highway Capacity Manual. Highway Research Board Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1985. 1 - 79 Mr. John Rawles Page 3 February 18, 1993 ADEQUACY OF TURN POCKET LENGTHS At the request of City staff, ATE also analyzed the adequacy of the left- and right-tum pocket lengths proposed under the new striping plan. The following text discusses the storage lengths proposed at each of the three intersections. Marsh Street/Santa Rosa Street: According to preliminary City plans,the curb-adjacent left-tum lane and through-plus-right-tum lane would be approximately 65 feet in length. These short lengths would greatly reduce the capacity of these lanes as vehicles queuing in the center two lanes would effectively preclude their use. Given the heavy left-tum volum _s approach (686), it is recommended that the left-tum lane be lengthened to ' and that the through-plus-right-turn lane be lengthened to :test:` Marsh StreeUChorra Street: According to preliminary City plans, the left-tum lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 70 feet in length and the right-tum Ian would be 125 feet long. It is recommended that the left-tum lane be extended toa _ gfii00 given the pre peak hour left-tum volume of 90 vehicles. Marsh Street/Broad Street:According to preliminary City plans,the left-tum lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 100 feet in length and the right-tum lane would be 55 feet long. Given the current peak vehicles, it is recommended that the left-tum lane W xtended to a4 The right-tum lane should also be extended to a in o er o e more functional. $Jill '11111 discuss e are found to be ineffective after implementation, _.� e cost of on-street parking spaces. It should be not a minimum lengths have been recommended in order to provide more effective capacity for the lanes, as their use will be influenced by vehicles queuing in the adjacent through lanes. This concludes our analysis and report on the Marsh Street Restriping Project. Please call me if you have any question regarding our findings. Associated Transportation Engineers "'oe 4'pf'eece Scott A. Schell, AICP Principal Transportation Planner SAS/JAH/MKF/wp Attachments: LOS Worksheets 1- Sa Mr. John Rawles Page 3 February 18, 1993 ADEQUACY OF TURN POCKET LENGTHS At the request of City staff, ATE also analyzed the adequacy of the left- and right -turn pocket lengths proposed under the new striping plan. The following text discusses the storage lengths proposed at each of the three intersections. Marsh Street/Santa Rosa Street: According to preliminary City plans, the curb -adjacent left -turn lane and through -plus -right -turn lane would be approximately 65 feet in length. These short lengths would greatly reduce the capacity of these lanes as vehicles queuing in the center two lanes would effectively preclude their use. Given the heavy left -turn volumes experienced on this approach (686), it is recommended that the left -turn lane be lengthened to a minimum of 150 feet and that the through -plus -right -turn lane be lengthened to a minimum of 100 feet. Marsh Street/Chorro Street: According to preliminary City plans, the left -turn lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 70 feet in length and the right -turn lane would be 125 feet long. it is recommended that the left -turn lane be extended to a minimum length of 100 feet, given the peak hour left -turn volume of 90 vehicles. Marsh Street/Broad Street: According to preliminary City plans, the left -turn lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 100 feet In length and the right -turn lane would be 55 feet long. Given the current peak hour left -turn volume of 179 vehicles, it is recommended that the left -turn lane be extended to a minimum length of 150 feet. The right -turn lane should also be extended to a minimum length of 100 feet in order to be more functional. If the lengths discussed above are found to be ineffective after implementation, they may be increased in the future, at the cost of on -street parking spaces. It should be noted that these minimum lengths have been recommended in order to provide more effective capacity for the lanes, as their use will be influenced by vehicles queuing in the adjacent through lanes. This concludes our analysis and report on the Marsh Street Restriping Project. Please call me if you have any question regarding our findings. Associated Transportation Engineers Scott A. Schell, AICP Principal Transportation Planner SAS/JAH/MKF/wp Attachments: LOS Worksheets Exhibit #g EVALUATION OF BICYCLE BOULEVARD OPTIONS FOR PACIFIC STREET (See End Notes for Further Comment) Option 1: Designate Pacific Street as a Class III Bike Route (1) • Install signs on Pacific Street and adjoining streets identifying Pacific as a "bicycle boulevard." Pros Cons • Lowest cost • No more attractive for bikes than existing • Retains current traffic patterns • Dangerous street crossings at Higuera, Broad, • Retains existing access points to Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets adjacent development • No parking removed Option 2: Stop Controls only • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Retain two-way circulation with parking on both sides. • Provide bike route signage. Pros Cons • Improves safety at sig. intersections • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause • Retains current traffic orientation congestion on Higuera (2) • Retains existing access points to • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad adjacent development Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • No parking removed • High cost of implementation because of • Provides desirable bicycle route signalization (3) • Increased congestion and delays on Osos, Broad Streets and Santa Rosa Streets. • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential frontages • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 3: Preclude Through Traffic: (4) • Place barricades on Pacific Street precluding through-vehicle traffic but allowing through-bicycle traffic. Barricades could be placed at mid-block, at the end of blocks, or in intersections to divert cross street traffic. • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Retain two-way circulation with parking on both sides. • Provide bicycle boulevard signage. Y _ y e • o • n - N e C CIL S 1 CO as _ S CL s aYs0', it,�s 3 ' H 0 0 Duo ❑OEI❑ rIOE W � CO to 7 CLO H � o 0 F- I 0 1 Q °04 ❑ Z O O LL N 0od 0001 Cott ooz ooct CO.t Z O c CL CO) i N C LL a 0 r o o H N � C CL c4 °- 0 1Nv5 O 3 0 00 ❑eE .0 DEI❑ ❑ ❑ 0 oaCO OL H^ L OC d� o ❑ � _ 6. O LL O cc � dl x aos owloott oa¢ Dost Dort W _ 0 a CO =nom ZO LL m a O - D 1-83 Pros Cons • Discourages through vehicle traffic • Awkward turn around movements at mid-block/ and increases comfort for bicyclists block ends depending on barricade location • Improves safety at intersections • May require parking removal at barricades • Provides desirable bike route • Reduced access to adjacent land uses with increased around-the-block traffic • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause congestion on Higuera • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, Osos and Santa Rosa Streets • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on Osos, Broad and Santa Rosa Streets • Reduces emergency access options by creating multiple cul-de-sacs • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 4: Parking Removal • Remove parking on both sides of Pacific Street between Nipomo and Santa Rosa and install 6-foot wide Class II-B bike lanes. Increase travel lane widths from 9 to 11 feet. B T T B 6' 11' 11' 6' • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Retain two-way circulation with parking on both sides. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Smooth traffic flow because • Eliminates roughly 400 curb spaces. of wider travel lanes • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause • Comfortable bike lanes with no congestion on Higuera conflict with parking cars • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, • Retains current traffic orientation Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • Retains existing access to adjacent • High cost of implementation because of development signalization • Improves safety at intersections • Increased congestion and delays on Santa Rosa, • Provides desirable bike route Osos and Broad Streets • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential frontages • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 5: One way Traffic/One Way Bike Lanes (Can also be combined with Pismo Street as a one-way south-bound bike route. ) (5) (6) • Eliminate the west bound travel lane, restripe the street to include two 8-foot parking bays, a single east-bound 12-foot travel lane and a single east-bound 6-foot Class II-A bicycle lane. P T B P I 8' 12' 6' 8' a � f _ N e e ' n ,H ' rn e C ra ODD �! LiJE10 S N s A °- VS08 3 H o F ❑ a YMi3W N n 0 7 O H C/) a F 11S a29 ' � d� ° .. oat oea ❑ O m J U- � e � C e SLY Q Y L ry dl W a Dos Door Gott ooz Dost Gert 0 Z � U o a e L lvZ+dJ z LL 0 OE � a 0 1- $S o o • a - N o C U s O C a ' I o. e El ❑ El F LU m = ow Q � e e JfA ui DE] 4 W G Y H m Cl) F1 0 1 !shG a cv d p o oCRa W O LL LL OT El e � ry dl Q Cos 000a Call aatl Q 66 S ~ C - . .. .--_ -- - ---- _.. .... 3 W 0 I .. L Z LL O P 4)O � - D • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Stree' traffic. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Smooth traffic flow • Comfortable bike lane • Increased around-the-block travel • Improves safety at intersections distances and increase traffic on side streets • Provides desirable bike route • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on Osos, Broad and Santa Rosa Streets. Broad Streets • Reduced access to limited number of adjoining land uses • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential frontages • Poor sight distances at some intersections (Brief Critique of Couplet Concept: Option 5 could be combined with the use of Pismo Street as a bicycle route heading south. The principal disadvantages to the use of Pismo Street is that it is distant from the CBD -- from the origins and destinations of bicycle trips. Motor vehicle speeds on Pismo Street are significantly different than bicycle speeds which could raise safety concerns unless a Class II-B bike lane were installed which would require the removal of curb parking in residential areas. As an alternative to parking removal, one travel lane could be removed from Pismo Street and a south bound Class II-A lane installed on the outside of parking bay. This strategy might slightly increase congestion on croe streets as vehicles moving in opposing directions attempt turns onto Pismo Street. ) Option 6: One Way Traffic/Two Way Hike Lanes (7) • Eliminate the west bound travel lane, restripe the street to include two 8-foot parking bays, a single east-bound 10-foot travel lane and two 4-foot Class II-A bicycle lanes. P B T BP 8' 4' 10' 4' 8' • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Two-way bicycle traffic • Retains existing access to adjacent • Increased around-the-block travel development distances and increase traffic on side streets • Improved safety at signalized • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause intersections congestion on Higuera • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on Osos and Broad Streets f - N • o • o . H e N CL A e CO O • 3 p. Y o e e i ❑ ❑ rEl❑ ❑ c � N _ Ow W _a CL = g a Y fn .H a FRI 1-1 aoa L V ° LL o LL e 1, rt di i ooa owt Dolt oaz oxs oars o Q G W fn - �b� 0 00 L -„ O U- p ILO D / -8 � • Increased auto-bicycle conflicts at unsignalized intersections • Potential auto-bicycle conflicts because of minimal travel lane and bike lane widths • Introduces serious liability issues because design is not supported by State standards (bikes going in opposite direction of cars) (7) • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential frontages • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 7: One Way Traffic/A Single Two-Way Bike Lane • Eliminate the west bound travel lane, restripe the street to include an 8-foot parking bay on each side of the street, a single east-bound 10-foot travel lane, and a single two-way 8-foot Class II-A bicycle lane. P ' T ' B_ ' P 8' 10' 8' 8' • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Two-way bicycle traffic • Retains existing access to adjacent • Increased around-the-block travel development distances and increase traffic on side streets • Improved safety.-`at signalized • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause intersections congestion on Higuera • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on Osos and Broad Streets • Increased auto-bicycle conflicts at unsignalized intersections. • Increased bicycle-bicycle conflicts on two-way bike lane • Introduces serious liability issues because of conflicts with State design standards (bikes going opposite direction of cars) (8) • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential frontages • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 8: Partial Parking Removal/one-Way Traffic/Two-Way Bike Lane • Eliminate the west bound travel lane, eliminate parking on one side of Pacific between Nipomo and Santa Rosa, restripe the street with one 7-foot Class II-A bike lane, one 12-Foot east bound travel lane, and one 7-foot Class II-B lane. B T B P 7' 12' 7' 8' • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. / -89 f e 0 e N O s a o 1rro W O w ❑ F-I gEl ❑ FF a Q N ol~ El El El e Ho W CD LS a tot OCR F y Q O e LL e V ONO dl a 006 OOOt oa{t 0= oo[{ oc►L o Co -- $� W C _O LL a � � D y , c o H W . " Z `. W 8 Q U s _ U LL -- r S F Duoa ❑ ❑ � N W � N o S C/) LU a ❑ H 0 f!) Ells. ti o J P o Q > SOw�' • i � W W O Q LL Coe OOL Cott ooz Dori oo+t ¢ ��sill/ c0 a ZL a c C L O Z LL O P 1 p D • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific and Higuera Street. , • Reve=se stop controls at`Npomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific.Street traffic. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Two-way bicycle traffic • Potential traffic increase in residential area • Retains existing access to adjacent • Increased around-the-block travel development distances and increase traffic on side streets • Improved safety at signalized • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause intersections congestion on Higuera • Smooth traffic flow • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, • Comfortable bike lanes Osos, and Santa Rosa Streets • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on Osos and Broad Streets T • Increased auto=bicycle conflicts at unsignalized intersections. • Eliminates about 200 curb spaces • Introduces serious liability issues because of conflicts with State design standards (bikes going in opposite direction of cars) (8) • Attracts trips from Marsh, increasing traffic on a narrow street with residential uses • Poor sight distances at some intersections Option 9: Partial Parking Removal/Two-Way Traffic/Two-Way Bike Lane Eliminate the west bound travel lane, restripe the street to include two 9-foot travel lanes, one 8-foot parking bay, and one two-way 8-foot bicycle lane. P T T 8• 91 91 81 -- • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets.' ' • Establish three-way stop control at Pacific andH;Ji�vera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference tg Pacific Street traffic. • Provide signage. .iaoe. Pros Cons 3 • Improved safety at signalized • Stop controls at Pacific/Higuera cause intersections congestion on'Higudt&' • Two-way bicycle traffic • Traffic signals may be warranted at $road, • Retains existing access to adjacent Osos, and Santa Rosa Street„ development • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on 0503 and Broad Streets • Increased auto-bicycle conflicts at unsignalized intersections. • • Increased bicycle-bicycle conflicts on.two-way bike lane • Introduces serious liability issues because of conflicts with State design standards " (bikes going opposite direction of cars) (8) � -9a • Poor eight distances at some intersections • Minimal traffic lanes retained with minimal bike lanes Option 10: Diagonal Parking One Side/One Way Traffic/Two-Way Hike Lane • Eliminate the east bound travel lane, restripe the street to include 45 degree parking on one side with an 8 foot two-way bicycle lane against the opposite curb. Traffic would flow in a westward direction B B *� i i k k e e E' T D r G Ne a E v e 1 F * L P a A n R e R N G B B i i k k e e B B ! Travel Parking 4' 4' 10' 16' • Establish four-way stop controls at Santa Rosa, Osos and Broad Streets. • Install signs to direct west bound bicyclists to use Walker and Pismo Streets to Access Higuera Street. • Reverse stop controls at Nipomo and Garden Streets to give preference to Pacific Street traffic. • Provide signage. Pros Cons • Improved safety at signalized intersections • Two-way bicycle traffic • Traffic signals may be warranted at Broad, • Retains existing access to adjacent osos, and Santa Rosa Streets development • High cost of implementation because of signalization • Increased congestion and delays on osos and Broad Streets • Increased auto-bicycle conflicts at unsignalized intersections. • Increased bicycle-bicycle conflicts on two-way bike lane • Increased auto-bicycle conflicts caused by backing up vehicles /- 93 • Introduces serious liability issues because of conflicts with State design standards (bikes going opposite direction of cars) (8) • Does not meet City engineering standards for diagonal parking (insufficient back up area) (11) • Poor sight distances at some intersections • "Parking lot" appearance perceived as less safe by some cyclists • Estimated 27% loss of curb parking (12) • Increased pedestrian conflicts with bikes and vehicles Option 11: Bike Lanes on Marsh Street Between Higuera and Johnson (Recommended by the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan) • Eliminate one north bound traffic lane, and restripe street to include two 12-foot travel lanes, two 5-foot Class II-A bicycle lanes, and two 8-foot parking bays. I P BT T ' B P 8' 5' 12' 12' 5' 8' • Selectively remove parking and create left and right turn pockets at intersections. Pros Cons • Provides direct access to the • Requires the removal of 34 parking spaces; downtown 24 at intersections in the CC Zone area (8) • Directly connects with north city bike routes and destinations • Can improve intersection capacity and traffic flow • Improves sight distances on cross streets • Retains current traffic patterns for vehicles and bicycles • Retains existing access points to adjacent development • Is inexpensive to implement (7) • Requires no changes to signal systems END NOTES 1. In combination with all alternatives, some form of pavement markings could be used to give notice to motorists that Pacific Street is a bicycle route. These markings could be the.standard stenciled markings or could be stenciled markings in combination with full or partial lane zebra striping. L + + + + + + + + ----------------------------- -------------Pacific Street--- Zebra Striping w/Stenciled Markings -94 Additional markings may be confusing to some motorists and bicyclists and would add maintenance costs to the project. 2. As part of Options 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9, southbound bike traffic would access Higuer: Street at an unsignalized intersection. Some form of stop control is warranted t, enable safe bicycle access at this point. Additional stop controls on Higuera, given the current volume of traffic will cause congestion. 3. As part of Options 2 through 8, the cost of a traffic signals would be between $150,000 and $200,000. 4. As part of Option 3, barricades would be placed at mid-block locations or at one end of each block bounded by Nipomo/Broad, Broad/Garden, Morro/Osos, and Osos/Santa Rosa. Barricades were not placed between Chorro and Morro Street to maintain circulation and access from the Parking Structure and Post Office. Blocks without barricades could experience significant around-the-block traffic. Barricades placed at mid-block or at the ends of blocks will create cul-de-sacs with awkward turn around movements. As an alternative, diverters might be placed in selected cross street intersections that block trough traffic on Pacific Street but allow for free flowing access from side streets. This option would eliminate cul-de- sacs but would also reduce through traffic on side streets and increase round the block trip distances. P a c `f L E:1 c --------=----------- ------------------------ Diverte � Morro Street Sample Intersection \1 5. Options 5 through 8 propose that Pacific Street be modified to be a east bound one-way street from Higuera to Santa Rosa Streets. This would facilitate easy connections with Higuera at the west end of the corridor. Pacific Street could be changed to be a west bound one way street. This orientation would enable people using Marsh Street to backtrack in a westward direction. It could also encourage vehicles and bicycles to access Higuera Street through a residential area at an unsignalized intersection. Stop controls would be warranted on Higuera at Pacific which would congest traffic. As an Alternative, bicycles and vehicles could be directed via signage to use Walker and Pismo Street to access Higuera. This diversion increases trip distances and has questionable effectiveness. Pacific Street could be established as a west bound one-way street between Santa Rosa and Nipomo Street but retained as a two way street north and south of this segment. This sub-option would facilitate around-the-block back. tracking traffic from Marsh Street but would increase turning movements and potential confusion at the Pacific/Nipomo Street intersection. All other pros and cons identified for options 5 through 8 would apply. 6. As part of Options 5 through 8, access to Ben Franklin's Lunch Shop at the intersectio- of Higuera and Pismo would be impacted if Pacific became a one-way street. I-95 7. As part of Option 6, parking bays could be reduced to 7.5 feet to add slightly to the width of the four-foot Class II-A bike lanes. However, wide vehicles such as trucks, campers and motor homes would extend into the bike lane. Hots dots or other raised pavement markers might better define bicycle lanes and travel lanes but are not permitted by the Highway Design Manual: "Raised barriers or raised pavement markers shall not be used to delineate bike lanes. " "Raised pavement markers increase the difficulty for bicyclists when entering or exiting bike lanes, and discourage motorists from merging into bike lanes before making right turns" (reference Section 1003.2 (2), Highway Design Manual, fourth edition) . 8. With regards to options 7 and 10, the only section of the Highway Design Manual that supports the use of bicycle lanes moving in the opposite direction of traffic is on highway bridges where . .a physical separation, such as a chain link fence or railing, shall be provided to offset the adverse effects of having bicycles traveling against motor vehicle traffic." (Reference Section 1003.6(1) (b) , Highway Design Manual. ) 9. Estimated cost of restriping Marsh Street is $10,000 to $15,000. 10. For additional information about parking removal, refer to the Staff Report prepared for the June 21, 1993 Bicycle Committee meeting. 10 of the 34 spaces are outside the CC Zone and Business Improvement Area. 11. To meet City engineering standards, the back up area for diagonal 45 degree parking spaces would be 1412" or a combined parking "bay width" of 30'2". With two-way bicycle lanes, the bay width would only be 26' . Bay width standards and compliance with Highway Design Manual standards could be achieved if this option was changed to include only one bicycle lane moving with the flow of traffic. 12. Staff evaluated a prototypical 300-foot block to determine its relative parking capacity. Without evaluating each and every driveway location, it appears that the standard block can accommodate about 22 parallel parking spaces and about 16 45 degree diagonal parking spaces. Diagonal spaces require 11.7 feet of curb length for each space and must be set back from corners so that vehicles do not back into intersections 278 reduction in line with previous studies done in the past by the Engineering Division. 13. With the exception of option 11, none of the above options addresses the need for improvements on Marsh Street which will continue to be used by many cyclists wishing to access destinations in the downtown. /- 96 ,l d ro ae 3 IN 0 T y �= F M^� CL 3 N 0 m ,t„ U t9 C c a m � m C � CD « a a N N C w n C m C j N U 1 m 'o m m 1 m T _ 0 ._co U > n CV) L ., N ._ ., ® m V m w m CD �. 03 Y U w M U (D U U U O w rL N n w t(a y CL to (Cil U y ? L OON � Ot0O Oto CL f7 N N � CV) .M C4 (a F' o M F n 1 b cCLo y W O J 00 0 Im r Q (Up Z C Y c to y y U t Q CMo c a Z c Y W d i N CO U o O — m e C U Q J M N O C C�i 7 y N 3 N 0 a � . CL CL m aQcc V m CL Y oy int - 9 m e c W _O ` 0 Y . ou'c ma ° 3 0U CL a �o V C m CL LLo L c N c c m ® m Vo 0 0 Q p C « CL did° CL CL /- g7 Exhibit *9: Bicycle Committee Meeting Minutes June 21 July 7 July 12 July 19 July 26 x-98 MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE COMMITTEE Public Hearing - City/County Library June 21, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Craig Anderson, Ron Brown, Wes Conner (arrived 7:10 PM), Linda Fitzgerald, Jim Lopes, Dave Pierce (arrived 7:07 PM), Terry Sanville, Gary Sims, Wayne Williams, and Chair Richard Marshall Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. ACTION ITEM: 1. Committee considered approval of the Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP). Terry Sanville reviewed the staff report with the recommendation that the committee review and consider the Negative Declaration for the Bicycle Transportation Plan and forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Plan. He indicated tonight's meeting was being held to invite public input for all parts of the proposed plan and that the target date for presenting the plan to Council was tentatively scheduled for August 10, 1993. He gave a brief synopsis of the Bike Plan including the various interconnecting routes and the four types of bike paths: 1) Class I-Bike Path Parallel to sidewalks;primarily for recreational use;involves substantial design and is a long-term goal to achieve 2) Class H-A-Bike Path Established bike lanes outside parking lanes (striped) Class II-B-Bike Lane Established bike lanes where there is no curb parking; requires limited removal of parking spaces 3) Class III-Bike Routes Routes which provide signage only 4) Class IV-Bike Boulevards Traffic controlled streets which encourage bike traffic; requires removal of stop signs, speed bumps, etc. /-99 Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 2 June 21, 1993 - 7:00 PM The plan is to include specific standards for bike routes (including traffic patterns), parking for bicyclists encouraging downtown City workers to utilize alternative transportation, and sponsor bicycle educational and promotional programs to enhance awareness as an alternative to motorized vehicles. He stated the improvements costs for implementation of this plan would be funded by grants from the State, Federal and City and that no new local funding was scheduled to be used for this plan. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Matt Kokkonen, 1103 Johnson, spoke in opposition of the bicycle lane proposals. He discussed parking shortages already existing in the City, the number of bicyclists in the downtown area, property owner rights, the use of the bikes for shopping, and indicated he felt that bike paths should be included around Cal Poly. Paula Davidson, 595 Marsh and owner of Pampered Pets, spoke in opposition to the bicycle lanes and removal of more parking spaces. Michelle Montoya. 579 Marsh and representing Becker's Draperies, spoke in opposition to the removal of parking spaces. Mike Montoya, Jr., 879 Monterey, spoke in opposition to the proposed lanes. Steve Winterberg, 1440 Johnson, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Johnson near Buchon for safety reasons. He felt this area was too dangerous due to the cars and buses which travel on this route. Michael Crine, 1405 Johnson and property owner of 1267 Pismo, requested the City provide authorized off-site parking for his vehicles if they approved removal of existing parking. William Pierce, 380 Marsh and owner of San Luis Auto Parts, spoke in opposition to parking removal on Marsh. Terry Sanville clarified the proposed removal of parking would be on the opposite side of the street from Mr. Pierce's business. Craig Anderson. Bike Coordinator, reviewed each proposed parking spaces to be removed on Marsh Street. Linda Pierce, 380 Marsh, questioned the need for two bike lanes on Marsh and requested clarification of the varying widths of the bike lanes. Stan Payne, 1420 Johnson, agreed with the comments of Mr. Pierce and spoke in opposition to the proposed bike lanes on Johnson. He discussed several accidents which have occurred /-/V(7 Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 3 June 21, 1993 - 7:00 PM including a recent fatality and the problems of backing out of the driveways due to safety hazards on Johnson. John Ewan,2121 Santa Barbara and representing the Chamber of Commerce Clean Air and Circulation Plan, reviewed the bicycle plan being presented by the Chamber of Commerce, Business Improvement Association(BIA),and the Sierra Club. He stated the plan promotes bike boulevards on Pacific and Mono (rather than Chorro) and gave several reasons for the joint support of this plan. He indicated the plan had been presented to the Bicycle Committee for their consideration as part of the Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. Bill Portzel, 1012 Pacific, spoke in opposition to the Bicycle Plan. Kelli Silzer. 144 Mesa Rd. and manager of Ross Dress for Less located on Monterey Street, spoke in opposition to parking removal in the downtown area. She discussed the use of the parking structure, customer comments regarding the parking situation, and felt bicyclists should park and walk like motorists. Dave Morrow, 608 Mission Lane, complimented the committee on the draft proposal and spoke in support of the proposal presented by the Sierra Club, BIA, and Chamber of Commerce for the bike boulevards. He suggested the committee address the types of users the plan.is targeting (students, downtown commuters, bicycle dependent people, etc.), encourage more biking which would ultimately free-up parking, close Johnson Ave. to through traffic, and review regional aspects and traffic congestion. Dr. Robert Daniels, 1123 Johnson, spoke in opposition to the proposed bike lanes. He indicated many of his patients are elderly or handicapped and loss of parking would have a great impact on their ability to access his office. Tom Brown. 823 Higuera, supported the Sierra Club, BIA and Chamber of Commerce proposal for bike boulevards and felt it addressed many issues discussed by bicyclists, residents and business owners . He expressed concern regarding the parking for the retail businesses and questioned whether the City would refund the "in-lieu parking fees" if removal of parking was approved. He felt the Marsh Street study was conducted when the downtown center was empty and, therefore, was not accurate. He requested the study be conducted again upon the completion of the Copeland property. Gini Griffen 1436 Johnson,thanked the committee for addressing the issues supporting bike lanes. She opposed the bike lanes being proposed for Johnson Ave for safety reasons due to the traffic flow and and was concerned about property values. Tom Fulks, 241 Cerra Romauldo and Regional Rideshare Program Coordinator, thanked the committee for improving the value of property by implementing a bike plan on Foothill Blvd. He supported the promotional and educational program, and he encouraged the Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 4 June 21, 1993 - 7:00 PM committee to coordinate their efforts with the Regional Rideshare Program. He felt the plan was addressing the needs of bicyclists and motorists accommodating everyone's needs. Evelyn Talmadge, 1408 Johnson, supported the committee working on environmental issues but was concerned with the studies which were taken to approve the bike lanes. She felt the studies were conducted when the high school was out for the summer and the old Von's shopping center was closed. She strongly urged the committee to promote education for bikers and motorists and suggested installing a traffic light be installed at the corner of Pismo and Johnson. Pat VeesaM 1570 Hansen and representing the Sierra Club, thanked the committee for a fantastic document. He briefly reviewed the bike boulevard concept agreed upon by the Sierra Club, BIA, and the Chamber of Commerce and felt the concept should be implemented on a trial basis for a period of six months. After such time, the Bicycle Committee should review and make changes as necessary: He encouraged the committee to consider this alternative plan. Upon question, he indicated the plan was being presented in concept only to the Bicycle Committee for their appropriate design. jaM Meek 899 Pacific and representing First American Title Company,expressed concerns regarding the removal of parking and the effects it would have on 'his business. He encouraged the Bicycle Committee to endorse a law mandating helmets for all bicyclists. Mike Spangler, 664 Marsh, was concerned with spending funds;`for the bike lanes and not alleviating the traffic problems. He spoke in support of Class'I-Bike Path lanes. Paul Ryle, property owner at Marsh and Johnson, questioned parking removal on Johnson and felt the report should mention neighbor and business impacts. He spoke in opposition to implementing bike lanes as he had already given five feet of his property for the widening of Johnson Avenue. Richard Truman, Patricia Drive, was concerned bikers were not obeying vehicular laws and recommended the committee promote education for bicyclists. Martha Houston 1444 Laurel Lane, was concerned with parking removal and suggested developing bike lanes on either side of the parking lanes. Ray Houston, 1444 Laurel Lane, supported bike lanes on one side of the street but was concerned for parking removal and property values. Jack McKean, property owner at Laurel and Orcutt, presented a letter from Rosemary McKean indicating her previous donation of 15 feet toward street improvements. He was concerned for the safety of bicyclists, children using bikes, and supported bicycle education. / -/VoZ Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 5 June 21, 1993 - 7:00 PM Mike Multari, 83 La Entrada, complimented the committee for the draft plan and encouraged it's presentation to the City Council as soon as possible. He recommended Class I and the bike boulevards to encourage drivers to consider biking as an alternative. Rick Griswald, Pacific Street, spoke in support of the bike lanes. Mike Hessler, San Luis Obispo, requested clarification of the surveys taken and the costs involved with educating bikers and motorists. Ken Porsche,resident on Johnson and property owner in the downtown area,was concerned with the funds received by the City for each of the parking spaces scheduled for removal. John Hollister, 1042 Pacific, requested further clarification of the project and felt that the majority of shoppers in the downtown area were from out of the area and, therefore, could not ride bikes. Pat Dempsey property owner at Osos and Buchon, expressed concern for parking removal and requested the City lower property taxes as a compromise to the hardship of renting the property with no parking allowed. Kelli Silzer, manager of Ross Dress for Less, suggested the committee solicit the businesses regarding changing from vehicles to biking. Q=hia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, complimented the committee on.the plan and hoped all of the proposals were implemented. She encouraged the committee's planning for the future, addressing congestion issues, cost effectiveness and improving tourism as well as maintaining the air quality of this area. Tom Fulks. Regional Rideshare Coordinator, felt that by contacting the BIA and the Chamber of Commerce, the City had done a good job of notifying everyone who might be effected by this plan. Upon question, Terry Sanville reviewed the legal requirements for noticing of public meetings being held concerning this issue. He indicated the notices mailed to surrounding neighborhoods is not a legal requirement. Suzanne Yost. Chamber of Commerce, spoke in appreciation for the collaboration of the Sierra Club, BIA, and the Chamber of Commerce. She supported the bicycle lane concept and encouraged the community to welcome the change. Steve Winterberg, 1440 Johnson, suggested the possibility of one-way traffic on Johnson and San Luis. / -/V3 Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 6 June 21, 1993 - 7:00 PM Chair Richard Marshall closed the public hearing. Chair Richard Marshall suggested additional meetings be held to schedule this issue due to the lateness of the hour. After discussion and upon general consensus, this item was continued to the following meeting dates to be held in the Council Chambers located at City Hall: Wednesday, July 7, 1993 at 7:00 PM; Monday, July 12, 1993 at 7:00 PM; and Monday, July 19, 1993 at 7:00 PM Chair Richard Marshall adjourned the meeting to Wednesday July 7, 1993 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Munshaur Recording Secretary /-/a4 MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE COMMITTEE MEETING Council Chambers - City Hall July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. In the absence of Chair Richard Marshall, Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald call the meeting to order. ROLL CALL: Present: Craig Anderson, Ron Brown, Wes Conner, Jim Lopes,Dave Pierce,Terry Sanville, Gary Sims,Wayne Williams, and Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald Absent: Chair Richard Marshall PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. MINUTES: Approval of draft minutes for meetings of March 22, March 29, and June 21, 1993 Moved by Terry Sanville, seconded by Wes Conner to approve the minutes; motion carried (9-1, Chair Richard Marshall absent). ACTION ITEM: 1. Committee considered the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan which include: Craig Anderson. Bicycle Coordinator, stated that to provide efficiency in obtaining public input for the draft document, staff had divided the plan into four sections: Laurel Lane, Pacific Street, Morro Street and Johnson Avenue. A. Bicycle Lanes on Laurel Lane Craig, Anderson indicated that, based on expressed concerns of residents for parking removal, staff had developed an alternative plan to retain curb parking on both sides of Laurel Lane (near Southwood) by eliminating a traffic lane and installing a turning lane. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing open. Martha Houston, 1444 Laurel Lane, urged the committee to retain parking in front of her home. Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 2 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Ra Houston, 1444 Laurel Lane,urged the committee to retain parking in front of his home. Larry Meek, First American Title, spoke in support of bicycle lanes on Southwood Drive. Pat VeesaM representing the Sierra Club, spoke in favor of staff's recommendation for Laurel Lane. James Merkel, 392 Pismo, questioned the width of the bicycle lanes. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing closed. Moved byim e , seconded by Dave Pierce to approve staff's recommendation of retaining curb parking on both sides of Laurel Lane, installing Class H-A bicycle lanes on the outside of parking bays and a center turn lane; motion carried (9-1, Chair Richard Marshall absent). B. Pacific Street Bicycle Boulevard Craig Anderson reviewed several options considered for implementation of the proposal received from the coalition of the Chamber of Commerce, Business Improvement Association (BIA), and the Sierra Club including: 1. Designating Pacific as a Class III Bike Route 2. Install stop controls only (signals and signs) 3. Preclude through traffic (placing barricades) 4. Parking removal on one or both sides 5. One-way traffic/One-way bike lane (retaining parking) 6. One-way traffic/Two-way bike lanes 7. One-way traffic/One single two-way bike lane 8. Partial parking removal/One-way traffic/two-way bike lane 9. Partial parking removal/Two-way traffic/two-way bike lane 10. Diagonal parking/One-way traffic/two-way bike lane 11. Install bike lanes on Marsh Street He indicated staff's recommendation for the Bicycle Transportation Plan was Option 11. Jim Lopes questioned whether staff had considered the 18-month trial period for Parc as recommended by the coalition. Terry Sanville stated that it was staff's responsibility to recommend the best option to be implemented through the draft plan and that it was staff's recommendation that the Marsh Street proposal was the best option. Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 3 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Jim Lo es suggested the possibility of including text to allow for further study of Pacific Street. Wes Conner commended staff for the various options presented and questioned whether a proposal presented by Rob Rossi had been investigated. Craig Anderson indicated that Mr. Rossi's proposal had been included when developing the options; however, due to problems concerning turning movements, access to driveways and concrete sidewalk, this project would not have met engineering standards and, therefore, his proposal was rejected. Wes Conner requested a more in-depth study be done of Mr. Rossi's proposal. Terry Sanville stated he felt the main problem was using the concrete sidewalk as a barrier. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing open. Morris Butler, 1394 Andrews Street, spoke in support of bike lanes on Marsh. He felt the Pacific was too narrow and was concerned with the limited access to property. Larry Meek.First American Title, expressed concern for the economic impact on businesses. Todd Pounder, 9055 San Rafael, Atascadero and property owner at Carmel and Pacific, expressed concern for the economic effects on business owners and spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Pacific. Cathy Faturos, 393 Pacific, stated her concerns regarding the effects the bike lanes would have on truck deliveries and asked the committee to consider the difference in businesses on Pacific and Marsh. Bob Vessel X, 743 Pacific, commended the coalition for developing their proposed plan and spoke in support of bike lanes on Pacific. He requested the committee considere the concerns of the property owners and retain parking on Pacific. Joe DeLucia. 1194 Pacific and representing over 100 employees, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Pacific due to the impact on delivery trucks and the potential loss of tenants. He suggested the committee consider other outside streets. Pat Veesart, representing the Sierra Club, spoke in support of Option 10 along with the BIA. He felt the two-way would not be a problem and urged the committee to consider trying this option prior to implementing lanes on Marsh. Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 4 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Jim Merkel, 392 Pismo, spoke in support of both streets and urged the committee to install lanes as quickly as possible. He spoke regarding Option 3 and Option 6 and was in favor of the diagonal parking. John Ewan. Chair of the Clean Air Task Force for Chamber of Commerce, encouraged the committee to give consideration to the proposal from the coalition. He felt this was an innovative idea inviting bikers into the downtown area,would maintain the ambiance of the community, and slow traffic. John Miller, resident on the 400 block of Pacific, spoke in support of the bike lanes on Pacific and was opposed to bike lanes on Marsh. He felt that slower traffic on Pacific would attract more business to the area. Margaret Cooper, 367 Tolusa and an employee at 1043 Pacific, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Pacific as she felt it was important to keep the current traffic flow. She suggested the committee look carefully at the Marsh Street proposal before committing funds for the project. John Oleiczak, 1910 Aspen St. and representing the Bike Committee for the County of San Luis Obispo, briefly reviewed information previously submitted to the committee. He reviewed-the different options between Pacific and Marsh. He recommended restriping on Marsh Street which could be revised at a later date if necessary. Mike Cannon, property owner on Pacific, spoke on engineering standards, parking studies, and zoning requirements below Carmel Street. He stated that Option 10 would be ruled out by Engineering due to the lack of back-up space and ability to access property. He strongly objected to the proposed "trial period" and encouraged the committee to consider economic impacts. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing closed. Gary Sims was concerned with the cost of the project (i.e. traffic signals) and the funds available. He felt that the committee should consider a bike boulevard in a residential area due to the economic impacts in a commercial area. He spoke in support of bike lanes on Marsh Street. Dave Pierce spoke in support of Option 8 which included one-way traffic/two-way bike lane on Pacific and removal of approximately 200 parking spaces. Wes Conner expressed concerns for Option 10 regarding number of parking spaces, engineering standards, and liability issues. He felt that the origin of destination was an important factor in the number of bikers and motorists, and supported the Marsh Street routing. /lob Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 5 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Jim Lopes spoke in support of bike lanes on Marsh Street. He felt that Pacific was too narrow and modifications (including stop signs) would make this project too costly. Wayne Williams stated that he felt bike boulevards are most effective on residential streets; though he felt Pacific was adequate for a bike boulevard, he supported the bike lanes on Marsh St. Ron Brown stated that he could not support Pacific Street due to cost factors and was concerned with the psychological impacts on the downtown business area with the installation of the bike lanes on Marsh Street. He felt if bike lanes were to be installed, then Marsh was the better option but was not convinced it was necessary for safety factors. He felt the bikers would be encouraged to the use the downtown area if bike lanes were installed and it would become much more attractive. Terry Sanville spoke in support of the bike lanes on Marsh and indicated that staff had developed this plan as the safest and most convenient route. Linda Fitzgerald expressed concern for the arterial areas and felt Pacific Street was too narrow. She stated that the loss of parking on Marsh Street could be compensated by the parking structures and supported the Marsh Street bike lanes. Moved by Jim Lopes, seconded by Wayne Williams to recommend the Marsh Street bike lanes for the Bicycle Transportation Plan and requested staff to include minimal turning pockets (parking removal), monitor operations, and take additional corrective steps as necessary; motion passed (9-1, Chair Richard Marshall absent). 8:40 P.M. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared a recess. 8:54 P.m. committee reconvened; Chair Richard Marshall absent. C. Morro Street Bicycle Boulevard Craig Anderson reviewed the staff recommendations including two options: 1) two-way bicycle boulevard and bicycle lanes (presented by the coalition); and 2) bicycle boulevard couplets (southbound bicycle boulevard on Morro and northbound bicycle lane on Osos with some improvements and restrictions). Wayne Williams questioned the design of the stop signs. Gary Sims discussed Option 2 concerning the four-way stop at Pismo and Morro. Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 6 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Jim Lopes confirmed staffs recommendation for continuing a lane on Osos from Santa Barbara to the downtown area. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald rald declared the public hearing open. Leslie Taylor, 3080 Santa Rosa Creek, Cambria, and property owner on Morro Street, expressed concern for the loss of parking for his tenants. Larry Meek. First American Title Company, spoke in opposition to the bike boulevard on Morro. Allen Weipert. 675 Rancho Oaks Drive and property owner on Morro Street, clarified that no parking would be effected on Morro. He indicated his support of the project if property owners were able to access homes and cars. Pat V&.5AM San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of lanes on Morro and Osos. He felt this proposal showed tremendous potential with no loss of parking, reduction in traffic flow cost effectiveness and would encourage bikers to ride. Jim Merkel, 392 Pismo, felt the 4-foot bike lanes on Osos Street were too narrow and parking should be removed to facilitate the project. He encouraged the committee to consider Osos Street as a bike boulevard also. John Ewan, business on Santa Barbara, spoke in support of the bike lanes on Morro Street. Charles Blair, property owner on Morro between Buchon and Islay, stated he received inadequate information regarding the plan and was concerned with the loss of parking; however, after hearing testimonies from tonight's meeting, he supported the bike boulevard on Morro Street. He suggested the committee consider a stop light at Santa Barbara and Morro. Matt Kokkenen, 1103 Johnson, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Morro and Osos. He was concerned with the parking impacts for the businesses and church usage on Sundays. He did not feel that parking should be taken away for bike lanes. Stew Jenkins. 1336 Morro, spoke in support of Option 2 and expressed concern for the loss of parking on Thursday night and Sunday morning. He encouraged the committee to study this project more thoroughly. Dave Morrow,608 Mission Lane, expressed his appreciation to the committee for the Morro and Osos Streets proposal. He felt that a bike boulevard on Chorro would improve safety conditions. He spoke regarding the availability of the parking structure and the possibility of reserving parking for Thursday night activities and Sunday morning church usage. 1AD Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 7 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing closed. Ron Brown was concerned with the parking removal for the businesses and residents on Osos Street between Buchon and Islay. Tera Sanville clarified that parking would be removed only on the east side of Osos. Wayne Williams spoke in support of Option 2 indicating that the couplet included no parking removal. Wes Conner spoke in support of Option 2 and discussed the Chorro Street alternative with the exception of origin of destination. Galy Sims spoke in support of Option 2 due to no parking removal. He questioned the need for a stop sign at Pacific and Morro. He stated that he was not in favor of a bike boulevard on Chorro due to the steep hill at Pismo. Jim Loves discussed turning pocket options at Santa Barbara onto Morro. He indicated his support for implementing the bike boulevard with couplet (Option 2) as a second priority. Dave Pierce stated he did not feel the committee should recommend a stop light at Santa Barbara due to cost factors and agreed with the comments of Jim Lopes. Moved by Wayne Williams, seconded by Gary Simsto approve Option 2 bicycle boulevard couplet as recommended; motion passed (9-1, Chair Richard Marshall absent). D. Bicycle Lanes on Johnson Avenue (Lizzie to Monteft Craig Anderson reviewed the many concerns regarding Johnson Avenue and indicated that staff had divided this portion of the plan into four segments for approval: 1. Lizzie to Buchon (includes eliminating one traffic lane and establishing 6-foot bike lanes. 2. Buchon to Pismo (includes parking removal on both sides and installation of 6-foot bike lanes. 3. Pismo to Marsh (includes retaining parking on the east side and eliminating some parking on the west side). 4. Marsh to Monterey(includes elimination of parking on east side and retaining parking on the west side with the possibility of striping). Bicycle Committee Meeting " _ Page 8 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. ' ' `-i1 f Vice Chair Linda Fitz eg rald declared the public hearing open. Jean Forsythe,property owner at Pacific and Johnson, questioned when the traffic flow study was conducted for Johnson Avenue and expressed concern regarding safety through th(F.-- underpass. She stated that she could not support this project due to the safety issues and heavy traffic flow on this street. Matt Kokkenen, 1103 Johnson, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes on Johnson Avenue. He expressed concerns for the parking removal and overall impacts on the neighborhood. He felt Johnson was not safe for biking. �e Jean Kokkenen, property owner at Johnson and Higuera, stated that many of the employees of local businesses park on Johnson and Higuera and that a total of five businesses would be effected by the parking removal. If parking spaces were removed, employees (specifically women) would have to walk 'in unlit areas to their parked cars and strongly urged the committee to consider this safety issue. Steve Winterberg, 1440 Johnson, questioned the need for bike lanes on Johnson. He felt that the traffic flow was much too fast to even consider bike lanes. He was strongly opposed to installing any bike lanes throughout the City. . Paul Ryse, property owner at Marsh and Johnson, distributed his proposal for Johnson Avenue between Marsh and Monterey for the committee's consideration. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald declared the public hearing closed. Upon general consensus, the committee agreed to continue this item to Monday July 12, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. DISCUSSION ITEMS Wayne Williams reviewed items to be presented at the July 12, 1993 meeting: 1. Class I bicycle path's profile 2. Railroad bike path past Foothill 3. Bicycle path west of Highway 101 to Madonna Road 4. Class I bicycle path in Laguna Lake area 5. Bridge route 6. Connections to Sinsheimer Park Ga1y Sims requested discussion for requirements for showers and mitigation issues for the Broad Street bike boulevard. Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 9 Wednesday, July 7, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Dave Pierce requested discussion of Southwood due to the school and recreation area. 10:23 P.M. Vice Chair Linda Fitzgerald adjourned the meeting to Monday, July 12, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Munshaur Recording Secretary cm /r//V MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE COMMITTEE MEETING Council Chambers - City Hall July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Craig Anderson, Wes Conner (arrived 7:07 PM), Linda Fitzgerald, Jim Lopes, Dave Pierce, Terry Sanville, Gary Sims, Wayne Williams, and Chair Richard Marshall Absent: Ron Brown PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. ACTION ITEM: 1. Bicycle Lanes on Johnson Avenue -- Lizzie to Monterey Streets (continued from the meeting of July 7, 1993). Craig Anderson, Bicycle Coordinator, briefly reviewed the proposal for Johnson Avenue,. . indicating a change in staff's recommendation for the segment between Marsh and Monterey. He stated the change was a proposal submitted by Paul Rys, property owner at Marsh and Johnson,which included implementing 10-foot traffic lanes and 4-foot bike lanes. Jim Lopes discussed striping conditions between Pismo and Marsh and implementing 4-foot bike lanes which was the minimum requirement. Tem Sanville reviewed staff's recommendation and options available for the segment between Marsh and Monterey. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Bill Jackson, retired resident, verified the cost of implementation of the Bike Plan would primarily be funded by grants. He felt that bikes should have a registration requirement the same as motorized vehicles. Pat Acken. 1303 Higuera, spoke in support of combined parking and bike lane on Johnson. She expressed concerns for impacts on businesses, loss of parking, and women walking long distances in unlit areas to the parking structures. Bike Committee Meeting Page 2 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Joe Hubbard, Cal Poly student, was opposed to removal of parking and the impacts on sororities, local businesses and their clients. He also was concerned for the safety issues at Johnson and Higuera. Qmthia Bosch,representing the Sierra Club,spoke in support of staffs recommendation and encouraged those who could not ride bikes to utilize the transit systerh as an alternative means of transportation. Shirley Payne, 1420 Johnson, spoke in opposition to bike lanes due to safety factors and expressed concerns regarding not meeting the site distance requirement, "painted lines" for bikers, liability issues, volume of traffic and overall problems implementation of bike lanes could create. Stay PaPayne. 1420 Johnson, presented photographs of Johnson Avenue indicating site distances and discussed the state requirements. He discussed concerns for traffic speed, parking removal impacts, access to property driveways and felt the traffic study being used in this proposal was not accurate. Evelyn Talmadge, property owner at 1412 and 1408 Johnson, spoke in opposition to the bike lanes due to safety factors and loss of parking. She commended Mr. and Mrs. Payne for their research on this project. Richard Potter, 1840 Johnson, spoke in support of bike lanes connecting through the City but could not support bike lanes on Johnson. Paul Rvs, property owner at Marsh and Johnson, reviewed his proposal for the bike lanes between Marsh and Monterey. He discussed concerns for the loss of parking, safety issues, business and property owner rights and encouraged the committee to approve the draft plan as soon as possible. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Dave Pierce stated that he could not support the Johnson Avenue proposal due to traffic/safety issues and cost factors. Wayne Williams suggested the committee approve Johnson Avenue in four segments: 1) Lizzie to Buchon; 2) Buchon to Pismo; 3) Pismo to Marsh; and 4) Marsh to Monterey. Segment 1 - Lizzie to Buchon: Moved by Wayne Williams, seconded by Terry Sanville to approve staff recommendation for bike lanes on Johnson Avenue between Lizzie and Buchon. -115 Bike Committee Meeting Page 3 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Jim Lopes discussed widths of bike lanes, accident possibilities, and retention of parking on the east side of Johnson. Wes Conner was concerned whether the committee had considered all options including proposed long range projects (i.e. railroad undercrossing). Terry Sanville stated he would refrain for voting on Segment 2 (Buchon to Pismo) due to a conflict of interest. He indicated that the undercrossing for the railroad, while there was space available, was not cost effective at this time. Chair Richard Marshall stated that he did not support the proposed bike lanes on Johnson Avenue and did not feel this proposal would make the street safe enough for bikers. Jim Lopes felt that the committee should consider adjusting the bike lanes to more than the minimum requirement. He supported the installation of bike lanes on Johnson to create a safe environment for bikers. Wes Conner amended the motion to include implementation of the bike lanes to occur upon receipt of a traffic study taken after the Scolari's shopping center is completed and speed reduction is enforced. Terry Sanville indicated that the traffic study used for the proposed bike lanes was also used for implementing the Payless/Scolari shopping center. Motion passed (5-4-1, Commissioners Fitzgerald, Pierce, Sims, and Chair Marshall voting no, Commissioner Brown absent). Segment 2 - Buchon to Pismo Craig Anderson reviewed the configuration and proposed parking removal (10 spaces from both sides of Johnson). Upon question, he stated that parking removal was warranted on both sides due to traffic volume and turning movements. Moved by im e , seconded by Wes Conner to approve staff's recommendation for the bike lanes between Buchon and Pismo. Committee discussed speed control issues and parking removal impacts. Motion failed (3-5-2, Commissioners Fitzgerald, Pierce, Sims, Williams and Chair Marshall voting no, Commissioner Brown absent, and Commissioner Sanville abstained). Moved by W=e Williams, seconded by Jim Lopes to amend staffs recommendation to include retention of parking spaces on the east side of Johnson. Motion failed (4-4-2, Bike Committee Meeting Page 4 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Commissioners Fitzgerald,Pierce,Sims,and Chair Marshall voting no,Commissioner Brown absent and Commissioner Sanville abstained). Committee discussed safety factors for streets with and without bike lanes. Segment 3 - Pismo to Marsh and Segment 4 - Marsh to Monterey Moved by Terry Sanville, seconded by Wes Conner to 1) approve staff's recommendation for Segment 3 amended to include 14 foot bike/travel lane and 4 foot bike lane; and 2) approve staffs recommendation for Segment 4 of the proposal submitted by Paul Rys. Motion passed (5-4-1, Commissioner Fitzgerald, Pierce, Sims, and Chair Marshall voting no, and Commissioner Brown absent). 9:03 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall declared a recess. 9:21 P.M. committee reconvened; Commission Brown absent. 2. Class. I Bicycle Paths A. The Railroad Bicycle Path (north of Hathway Street) Wayne Williams reviewed the proposed bike paths for nearing the Railroad which included ending the path at Hathway. Jim Lopes discussed extension of the bike path to Cal Poly. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the proposal. Gaa Felsman, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the proposal. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public bearing closed. Moved by Jim L qZea, seconded by Terry Sanville to approve the bike path proposal as recommended ending the path at Hathway in the initial phase of implementation and considering a Cal Poly connection at a later phase. Motion passed by general consent. Terry Sanville discussed future linkages beyond the City limits included the regional bike plan. Bike Committee Meeting Page 5 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. B. The West Freeway Bike Path (Broad Street to Madonna Road) Wayne Williams the proposed bike path west of Highway 101. He discussed concerns for bicyclists travelling the wrong way on Madonna Road and proposed adding a bike lane following the southbound offramp. Tey Sanville indicated that Cal Trans is planning to implement auxiliary lanes though this is a long range design. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Gary Felsman, San Luis Obispo, encouraged the committee to include this proposal in the Bike Transportation Plan to ensure Cal Trans consideration of the issue. QMthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the freeway bike path. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the bike path. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. C. The Laguna Lake Bicycle Path Committee discussed proposals for the Laguna Lake area. 3. Bikeway Connections to Sinsheimer Park and Vicinity Wayne Williams discussed the connection from Sinsheimer Park to Southwood to El Campo including extending the path from Broad to Augusta and changing the bike lanes on August to Class III. Dave Pierce felt that restrictions should be in place before implementation was approved. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Qmthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the bike path on Southwood connecting with Laurel. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Dave Pierce, seconded by Linda Fitzgerald to direct staff to propose Class II B bike lane on Southwood Drive from Sinsheimer Park to Laurel including notification to effected residents. Bike Committee Meeting Page 6 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Terry Sanville amended the motion to include supporting Class III on El Campo through Sinsheimer Park, Class I lanes between Southwood and Augusta and direct staff to propose Class II B bike lanes from Southwood to Laurel Lanes. Motion passed by general consent. 4. Selection of a Mitigation Strategy for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Jim Lopes reviewed the recommendation of Options 1 and 3 of the mitigation strategies. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, questioned the requirement of notification to residents on Chorro Street. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Tem Sanville discussed the Circulation Element and mitigation strategies in moving traffic from Chorro to Broad. After discussion and upon general consent, this item was continued to July 19, 1993. 5. Bicycle Lane Marking/Paving Methods Wes Conner suggested including methods of marking the bike lanes with a color other than white, i.e. paving, texturizing, colored methods, striping, etc. He felt that colored pavement would easily identify the bike lanes. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Cynthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the bike lanes and the colored pavement. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of colored bike lanes or markings. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Linda Fitzgerald directing staff to include wording in the plan accepting the concept of colored marking for lanes. Craig Anderson discussed marking standards for Cal Trans. Chair Richard Marshall discussed striping requirements and felt that the proposed colored Bike Committee Meeting Page 7 Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. lanes would be an addition and replacing the standard striping and, therefore, would be approved by Cal Trans. Terry Sanville amended the motion to include lanes to be repaved or maintained could include colored textures identifying bike lanes. Motion passed by general consent. 6. Shower Requirements Upon general consensus, this item was continued to July 19, 1993. 7. Review of Other Parts of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Upon general consensus, this item was continued to July 19, 1993. 10:00 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall adjourned to meeting to Monday, July 19, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Munshaur DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE COMMITTEE Council Chambers - City Hall July 19, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Craig Anderson, Ron Brown, Wes Conner, Jim Lopes, Dave Pierce, Terry Sanville, Gary Sims, Wayne Williams, and Chair Richard Marshall Absent: Linda Fitzgerald PUBLIC COMMENTS: Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, expressed his disappointment in the City's approval of bike lanes for Johnson Avenue. He felt the committee should have proposed an alternative to staff's recommendation. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of July 7, 1993 Moved by Terry Sanville, seconded by Wes Conner to approve the minutes of July '7, 1993 as amended (general consent) ACTION ITEMS: 1. Bicycle Lanes on Southwood Drive (Laurel Lane to Sinsheimer Park) Terry Sanville reviewed staff's recommendation for bicycle lanes linking Sinsheimer Park with the railroad bike path and Sinsheimer School, including elimination of parking on both sides of Southwood Drive (between Laurel Lane and Sinsheimer Park) and installation of Class II bike lanes. He discussed possibilities for alternate parking for those most effected by the parking removal. Upon question, he clarified that the purpose of the bike paths was not just to connect to the railroad but primarily was to connect the Sinsheimer School with Southwood Drive. Dave Pierce felt that the proposal would improve an already existing path from the school to Southwood. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Virginia Youngman, 1045 Southwood Drive and Manager of Parkwood Village Apartments, distributed a letter expressing her concerns for the installation of bike lanes and the impacts regarding the loss of parking. She questioned the traffic study and cost implications. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the proposal. He indicated he rides this route and felt the park, school and YMCA were major destinations for the majority of riders. He encouraged implementation as soon as possible. tvo( Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 2 July 19, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Cynthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the bike lanes due to safety issues. Gary Felsman, 2234 Santa Ynez, suggested signage for additional parking at the parks, encouraged trip reduction plans and supported Class II lanes. Beth Youne, San Luis Obispo, felt bike lanes would be a reminder to vehicles of bicycle traffic. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Wayne Williams clarified that timely notifications had been sent to YMCA of the proposed bike lanes. He requested comments from the Recreation Department regarding this project. Jim Lopes stated his concerns regarding the time the traffic study was conducted. He felt the peak hours in this vicinity were 12:00 noon and 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. He discussed parking issues for the apartments and the YMCA, and supported retaining the parking allowed for the YMCA. Dave Pierce felt the City should accommodate for the required parking along with the bike lanes due to the YMCA being a City-owned facility. Craig Anderson requested that if the committee approved to retain the parking that parking removal be considered for the corners due to site distance for bikers. Wes Conner felt this was an opportunity to encourage YMCA participants to utilize alternative transportation. Moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Dave Pierce to approve staff's recommendation for bike lanes on Southwood Drive. Wayne Williams recommended an amendment to the motion retaining the parking on one side of the street for the YMCA; amendment failed due to lack of second. Motion carried (7-2-1, Commissioners Brown and Lopes voting no, Commissioner Fitzgerald absent) . 2. Selection of a Mitigation Strategy for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard (continued from 7/12/93) Terry Sanville discussed City's zoning regulations and environmental issues for Broad Street between Murray and Lincoln. He stated that Chorro currently already exceeds the traffic standards. He outlined four strategies in which to mitigate the traffic diversion impacts: 1) amend the Bicycle Transportation Plan designating Broad Street as a Class III bike route; 2) establish Class II bike lanes on Chorro and maintain Broad Street as through traffic; 3) installation of bulbouts and additional signage on Chorro and Broad to discourage traffic use and encourage traffic to remain on Foothill; and 4) amend the standards within the -1aa Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 3 July 19, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Circulation Element to create higher limits for local residential and arterial streets. He felt the committee's options were: 1. Identify one out of the four strategies presented. 2. Identify other mitigation strategies to reduce diversion impacts. 3. Suggest that traffic diversion is not a significant impact and forward to the City Council. 4. Take no action but let the record show that consideration of the negative declaration was given by the Committee prior to forwarding to Council (CEQA requires only that the Committee review for the record and does not require action to be taken) . Gary Sims questioned the need for mitigation if Chorro already exceeds the current standards and the strategy of presenting Broad Street as a mitigation for Chorro. Terry Sanville indicated that the City has an obligation to protect streets and take all precautions to meet current standards. He suggested dividing traffic between the two streets as an option for mitigation. Jim Lopes discussed bulbouts and shifting traffic to Santa Rosa rather than to Chorro. Terry Sanville stated that changes have been proposed for Santa Rosa: 1) turn pockets to be positioned at key places; and 2) increased capacity by adding travel lanes. Jim Lopes questioned the public's response to the proposed changes on Chorro. Chair Richard Marshall stated the response from local residents was very significant. Craig Anderson felt the primary concern of residents was not parking removal but the speed of traffic and exiting out of driveways. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Charlie Boatright, resident at Benton and Meinecke, expressed concern for property owner rights, impacts of designated use, increased traffic due to prior changes and strongly felt that the main concern was not speed but rather the traffic level. He discussed safety issues along the arterial streets. Bob Roundtree, 843 Murray, identified the arterial streets defined in the Circulation Element and questioned the consideration of this project. He verified notification to the residents on Chorro and arterial streets. He felt that Option 3 was not affordable and requested the Committee consider Option 2 along with the City providing paved on-site parking to the residents on Murray and Rougeot. i- �a3 Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 4 July 19, 1993 — 7:00 P.M. Beth Young, San Luis Obispo, requested the Committee reconsider the lanes on Chorro and expressed concern with the increased ridership. Chris Zema, President of the Cal Poly Wheelmen, spoke in support of the lanes on Chorro. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the Broad Street plan but did not agree with environmental findings. He felt that residents had a valid concern for the traffic on Chorro and that Broad Street had potential for connecting to Cal Poly thus encouraging new riders. He urged the Committee to try something new and be creative with the lanes to increase ridership. Greg Macedo, resident on Murray Street, requested that the speed bumps proposed to be removed from Broad Street be installed on Murray Street. He expressed concern for neighborhood rights, traffic speed, and increased traffic to the arterial streets if this proposal is implemented. Gary Felsman, San Luis Obispo, discussed his suggestions for the Broad Street route including the possibility of closing an onramp from Highway 101 and impacts of diverting traffic onto arterial streets. He encouraged the Committee to try this proposal. Cynthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of the Broad Street proposal and encouraged the Committee to divert the traffic to Santa Rosa. She felt the bulbouts would encourage biking and suggested extending the bike boulevard to Ramona. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Jim Lopes discussed concern for diverting traffic and felt that the Committee could not be sure that traffic would be discouraged, but rather could have significant additional impacts. He spoke in favor of Chorro though was concerned with traffic level. Wayne Williams discussed a possible light sequence at the corner of Foothill and Chorro, loss of parking and speed control, safety issues for bikers, and was concerned for the rights of the residents. He did not support the removal of parking on Chorro but was in favor of Option 3 and Broad Street proposal. Gary Sims spoke in support of Broad Street though he preferred to recommend quieter streets. He discussed increasing ridership by utilizing a linkage to the underpass. Ron Brown felt the Committee should implement the Broad Street proposal and see the response. Dave Pierce agreed with Commissioner Brown's comments and felt that there was a need for a street that gave priority to bikers and simultaneously discouraged vehicles. He spoke in support of Option 3. Wes Conner proposed not removing the speed bumps but reduce the size of speed Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 5 July 19, 1993 — 7:00 P.M. bumps allowing bikers to go around and slowing speed of traffic. He was concerned with accommodating bikers from the northwest connection of the City and felt the City should also be accommodating bikers from the northeast by possibly using Lincoln. He suggested a connection southbound to Broad Street from the freeway to a parallel street connecting with Madonna and Marsh. Failing these suggestions, he could support Option 3 as a temporary solution. Chair Richard Marshall addressed the concerns of Mr. Roundtree regarding the reasons for proposing this project by stating that this proposal provides routes throughout the City and many alternatives. He questioned if the bulbouts for this area were removed from the Circulation Element. Terry Sanville clarified that the bulbouts were removed due to budget constraints and are not currently included. Chair Richard Marshall discussed the possibility of closing the Broad Street freeway ramps. Terry Sanville stated that this possibility has been considered due to impacts on neighborhood streets. After reviewing the consultant's recommendation, the Circulation Element has recommended a partial closure (one offramp) . Chair Richard Marshall stated his support for Broad Street bike boulevard and Option 3. Terry Sanville indicated the cost of mitigating Option 3 was significant and could exceed $300,000 including property acquisitions. He stated that the City currently has an application with Council of Governments (COG) for funds. He discussed the pilot project on Morro Street and speed bumps on Broad Street. He recommended the Chorro Street bike lanes with Broad Street as a Class III. Wes Conner discussed a possible bridge across Montalban. Moved by Wayne Williams, seconded by Gary Sims to approve mitigation measure #3. Jim Loves indicated concern for significant traffic impact and exceeding the Circulation Element standards. The Committee discussed various alternative routes and connections, study results, and impacts from freeway offramps. Motion carried (5-4-1, Commissioners Anderson, Lopes, Sanville and Chair Marshall voting no, Commissioner Fitzgerald absent) . 9:04 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall declared a recess. 9:10 P.M. Committee reconvened; Commission Fitzgerald absent. Bicycle Committee Meeting 'te= Page 6 July 19, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. - 3. Shower Requirements am_ . Gary Sims questioned the benefit of showers for bikers and City requirements for same. 1r: . Terry Sanville indicated the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) recommended all employers with 50 or more employees should have sh&6ers''available. :a-- Dave arDave Pierce discussed concerns regarding drought shortages, water consumption, and fees involved for employers meeting this requirement. Chair Richard Marshall requested verification of the Xiiquired number of showers per number of employees and the enforcement of this requirement. IMF Gary Sims felt that the increase of population into the community would not be done by bicyclists and did not feel there was a need�for a shower requirement. Terry Sanville stated that there are currently a number of bikers who are loading their bikes onto buses coming into town and biking around town. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Pat Veesart spoke in support of the showers. = Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Wayne Williams suggested arrangements be made with local .h lth clubs to assist with meeting the shower requirement. Moved by Gary Sims, seconded by Ron Brown to eliminate Ithe shower requirements from the Bicycle Plan; motion carried by general consent. 4. Review of other parts of the Bicycle Transportation Plan. as needed Terry Sanville discussed a letter received from the ATTF regarding the extension of Sacramento Drive to Orcutt Road. He indicated that -shw1d the extension be approved by Council, a bike route could be includedcdb ;an option'in the Bicycle Plan. He discussed four options for Sacramento Drive: 1) no change to the draft plan; 2) suggested a Class II facility along Orcutt Road to Industrial Way; 3) proposed bike lanes on Sacramento between Orcutt and Capitolo Way with linkage; and 4) acknowledge Planning Commission suggestion for -this.project but do not extend to Orcutt. He indicated bike lanes wouldiassist in accommodating parking problems and encourage bikers to travel this road thus eliminating the need for parking. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing open. Pat Veesart, San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of the lanes on Sacramento to Industrial Way. He suggested the Committee recomma.nd to the City Council encouraging the. extension of Sacramento Drive, bicycling to work, improving P /01 Bicycle Committee Meeting Page 7 July 19, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. circulation, and possibly using this as a visionary project to encourage and reward alternative transportation. Cynthia Bosche, San Luis Obispo, agreed with Mr. Veesart's comments and spoke in favor of bike lanes on Sacramento Drive. Bob Roundtree, 843 Murray Street, discussed improvements at the Williams Brothers Market area near Industrial Way and encouraged implementation of the bike lanes. Chair Richard Marshall declared the public hearing closed. Wes Conner spoke in support of Class I bike lane concept. Wayne Williams spoke in support of Class I at one end or the other. Chair Richard Marshall indicated support for the Class I in the connection but Class III on the existing route. Terry Sanville clarified impacted areas between Capitolo and Orcutt and encouraged Class II bike lanes to Capitolo Way and Class III for the remainder. Moved by Terry Sanville, seconded by Jim Lopes to propose Class II lanes on Sacramento Drive from the UPS office to Orcutt Road if extension approved; if extension is not approved, then the proposal should be Class I lanes for the cul- de-sac; motion withdrawn. Moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Terry Sanville to proposed Class I lanes on Sacramento with the possibility of developing lanes along Acacia Creek from Broad over to Duncan; and include Class II lanes from Orcutt Road to the UPS office; motion carried by general consent. The Committee considered various ways of discussing the overall Bike Transportation Plan before its presentation to Council, including page by page or subject by subject. Moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Wayne Williams to continue this item for discussion on July 26, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. ; motion carried by general consent. Ron Brown questioned the need for public input at this meeting. Terry Sanville indicated that the meeting would be open to the public, however, no notification is necessary. 10:15 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall adjourned the meeting to July 26, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Munshaur RAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE COMMITTEE Council Chambers - City Hall July 26, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Craig Anderson, Ron Brown, Wes Conner, Linda Fitzgerald, Jim Lopes, Dave Pierce, Terry Sanville, Gary Sims, Wayne Williams, and Chair Richard Marshall Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of July 12, 1993. Moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Linda Fitzgerald to approve the minutes of July 12, 1993 as amended (general consent) . ACTION ITEM: 1. Review of Other Parts of the Bicycle Transportation Plan as Needed The Committee discussed various segments of the Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan and the following recommended changes were approved by general consent: Obiectives - ve. 3 Jim Lopes amended bullet 6 to read "Provide technical assistance to property owners and developers s as'€G'a ':`6 in the design and location of facilities that encourage and accommodate bicycling." Wes Conner felt that Class I bike lanes should be included in Objectives and '.C*;;;»;:..;,.:::;':':: %"'':i;':s:r:_>;>:»::>:..'7 i%':..!);:;;r••,c!. ..�....<.;.t ........e t .. .......:: "': recommended adding bullet 7 to readxxstrtsc a netwtsY lass ..:path X. -.1 In x A. „ . CtY.'.,s wci' sexu� �atsc „ �irnrezicnoewnal patois Bicycle Paths_ Lanes and Routes - Figure #1 Wayne Williams felt that a revised illustration should be designed by removing the vehicles and trees for the Class I Bike Path. He felt the current design implied a hazardous situation. Terry Sanville indicated the current illustration represented the current CalTrans standards and is what the generic Class I path looks like. After discussion, moved by Wes Conner, seconded by Linda Fitzgerald to eliminate "sidewalk area” from Figure #1 (general consent) . /-/�8 Bike Committee Meeting Page 2 July 26, 1993 — 7:00 P.M. The Committee discussed route proposals on quieter streets as an alternative to Marsh Street. Gary Sims felt that the map presented too many bike routes. He recommended that the maps to be handed out to interested bikers show existing routes only. Dave Pierce felt that the streets not to be used as priority bike routes should be removed from the illustration. Ron Brown questioned the need to have all of the lanes on this illustration. He felt that if the objective of this map was to sell cycling then the illustration should remain as is, otherwise the excess routes should be removed. Terry Sanville felt it was important to illustrate the various route connections. The Committee discussed various alternatives to the illustration including elimination of non—priority routes, creating an additional map to be used as a handout to the public, and maintaining the existing illustration as a management/planning map. After discussion, moved by Terry Sanville, seconded by Wes Conner to review the following routes included in Figure #1 and approve/disapprove (in/out) their inclusion in the illustration: Highland/Patricia In No. Chorro (btwn Foothill & Highland) Out Boysen (btwn Santa Rosa & Chorro) Out Ramona (btwn Tassajara & No. Broad) In Broad (btwn Foothill & bike blvd) In Chorro (btwn Foothill & Lincoln) Out Lincoln loop connect to Santa Rosa In Santa Rosa east thru park to RR link In Casa/Murray dogleg In Hathway/Slack link to Cal Poly In Murray (btwn Broad & Stenner) In Loomis (btwn Grand & park) In Mill (btwn Chorro & Grand) In Higuera (btwn Nipomo & Johnson) In Monterey (north & south terminus) Out Chorro (btwn Mill & Pismo) In Johnson (btwn Monterey & Mill) In Peach (btwn Nipomo & Broad) In Pismo (entire) In Santa Rosa (btwn Pismo & train station) In Ella (btwn Johnson & Jennifer) In Ella/Sinsheimer Park connection In Augusta (btwn school & Laurel) Out Flora (btwn high school & No. Flora) In Southwood (east of Laurel) In San Luis Dr. (Calif. to Grand overcrossing) Out Bike Committee Meeting Page 3 July 26, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. San Luis Dr. (Calif. to Andrews) In Lizzie Out Sidney & Laurel Out Poinsettia (south of. Tank Farm Road) Out Santa Fe Rd. (btwn Buckley & Tank Farm) In Bridge (btwn Higuera & Meadow) In Beebee to South In Elks Lane after overpass in Out Francis (Broad to RR) & 2 arterial streets In Hopkins In Perfuma Canyon Road In Oceannaire In Laguna Lake Park: In 1. existing service road 2. old road by lake to proposed signal at Prado 3. link of Class I facility Calle Juaquin In Vachell Road (south of Buckley) In So. Higuera In 9:30 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall declared a recess. 9:35 P.M. Committee reconvened; all members present. C. Policies and Standards for Bicycle Paths (Class I) - vg. 5 Dave Pierce felt that C-1, C-2, C-3, and C-5 should be included in Section D and E or should be removed. The Committee discussed various strategies, long term goals and proposed amendments to the Policies and Standards. Upon general consensus, the Committee approved to remove C-5; repeat C-2 in Section D worded appropriately; and amend C-3 to read "The City should secure rXe+ti: rights-of-way in developing. . ." D. Policies and Standards for Bicycle Lanes (Class II) - pg. 7 Upon general consensus, the committee approved to remove D-2. Terry Sanville recommended amending D-3. Dave Pierce questioned D-4 and the standards for signs to be used on bike lanes. Craig Anderson indicated that the intent is not the content of the signs but rather the visual impact of the physical sign. Terry Sanville reviewed six standards for signage (page 9, #9) . / 13C Bike Committee Meeting Page 4 July 26, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. Wayne Williams questioned changing the sign to two separate signs - "No Parking" and "Bike Lane" . The Committee discussed various possibilities for the bicycle signs. Dave Pierce discussed D-5 and the City's coordination to provide a connected network of bike lanes. Jim Lopes discussed D-7 and felt the wording "double striped" was attempting to design the lines. Terry Sanville indicated that "double striped" means it would be painted over twice to ensure maintaining the visual line. Bicycle Path and Lane Additions (Figure #2) Dave Pierce requested County and CalTrans plans be separated from the City and questioned whether these were active projects or future projects. Terry Sanville stated that the Bike Plan is intended to be an advocate document to ensure that these projects will be done. He suggested possibly listing the streets alphabetically or categorically as to who is responsible. Segments To Be Considered For Further Study - pg. 8 Jim Lopes suggested listing additional bike trails/paths or include them on the map. Chair Richard Marshall discussed the open space trails being included. D. Policies and Standards for Bicycle Lanes (Class II) - i)e. 9 After discussion, the Committee approved to amend D-8, bullet 2 to read "Where right-hand turn lanes are not present but right turning traffic movements are heavy, all bicycle lane delineation should end 'e aaE`'10 prior to the :.:....::.:::..::....:.:.....:. intersection to engage 4pl CT through-moving bicyclists to merge with hrreeg Beving s # stiFg traffic. E. Policies and Standards for Bicycle Routes - i)g. 10 Wayne Williams proposed amending E-2 to read "Traffic levels and 858 vehicle speeds along streets designated as Class III bicycle routes and bke'lbuear 's .......:..:.....:..:..,............::.......:. should not exceed. . ." F. Policies and Standards for Bicycle Boulevards - vg. 10 Wayne Williams suggested amending F-1 to read "Bicycle boulevards should be /-/3/ Bike Committee Meeting Page 5 July 26, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. considered where changes to the flow of traffic caused by «'--°r In-Stall-st-A-enwill net -_._____J _•-r__t •• c lahery+vx—vt—C�c srrec�i� :::::....:.:::.:..:............ _-_______moo _____ __ _ G Policies and Standards for Path. Lane and Route Maintenance - ng. 10 Wayne Williams suggested amending G-1 to read "Bicycle—td2 Daae demarcation. . .." Dave Pierce discussed G-4 and removing "inspected" as the City does not currently have an inspection program. After discussion, the Committee approved amending G-4 to read "Bicycle lanes and paths should be routinely inspected for potential hazards and needed improvements such. as.,tTia fo.��owing �o 'be earirect,ad as isit n. and bullet 2 tode read "Improvements to grates, manholes, longitudinal and ' t3SYers cracks or ................:..::.......... joints, . . ." B. Definitions - vg. 12 The Committee approved removing "Showers. . . " from this segment. D. Programs - vg. 13 Jim Lopes recommended amending D-6 to read "The Public Works Department will maintain a library of vendor information on bicycle racks and lockers and will assist ael".56"rS with the selection. . ." B. Promotional Programs - pg. 16 Dave Pierce recommended working closely with the Police Department in promoting bike programs. Dave Pierce discussed B-4 and its importance to bikers. Ron Brown discussed "Operation ID" , a program previously used by the Police Department in identifying a biker through his driver license. He also felt that there should be more promotional programs through the school system. The Committee amended B-4, bullet 2 to read "Periodically ='_'__-ing the encouraga .:...:..:..:....:...... free licensing of bicycles in school and at promotional events." Dave Pierce discussed B-6 and questioned whether employees would be covered by their employer if injured while riding their bike to work. Bike Committee Meeting Page 6 July 26, 1993 — 7:00 P.M. B. Program Finding — Pg. 19 Dave Pierce discussed funding structures. Terry Sanville clarified requests from the General Fund monies for striping of lanes. Dave Pierce was concerned with the maintenance of the lanes. ........................ Linda Fitzgerald suggested amending B-4 to read "The City will set aside at; l'east 108 of its street reconstruction and maintenance funds for bicycle lane and path maintenance and installation. " 11:00 P.M. Chair Richard Marshall adjourned the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Munshaur /-/33 EXHIBIT #10_ Committee Recommended Changes to Bicycle Routes Add the following Street Segments to Figure #5: Designated Bicycle Routes Street From To Comments Highland Route 1 Patricia Patricia Highland Foothill Tassajara Foothill Ramona Ramona Tassajara Broad Montalban Route 1 Lincoln Sign when bridge over creek installed Lincoln Montalban Chorro Sign when bridge over creek installed Montalban Route 1 Stenner Hathway California Slack Slack Hathway Grand Murray Broad Railroad Casa Murray Foothill Loomis Grand Cuesta Park Mill Chorro Grand Chorro Mill Pismo Johnson Mill Monterey High Nipomo Broad Pismo Johnson Higuera Santa Rosa Pismo Railroad Sign when Jennifer St. Bridge installed Ella Johnson Jennifer Jennifer Railroad Rachel Rachel Jennifer Florence Florence Rachel Bushnell Buchnell Florence San Carlos San Carlos Bushnell Del Campo Del Campo San Carlos Sinsheimer Park Park Route Del Campo Southwood Augusta Bishop Sinsheimer School Flora High School norther terminus Sign when County access secured Southwood Laurel Johnson San Luis California Andrews San Luis Andrews Route 101 Sign when connection to freeway or to Cuesta Park under Route 101 made Hopkins Broad Acatia Creek Sign when hillside path installed Sante Fe Buckley Tank Farm Farm Rd. Vachell Creek Sign when creek trail installed Bridge Higuera Exposition Exposition Bridge Corrida Corrida Exposition Woodbridge Woodbridge Corrida Broad King South Corrida 1-13q Beebee South Bridge Margarita Higuera east Sign when South Hill path installed Lawrence Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Francis Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Alphonso Broad Railroad Sign when railroad bike path installed Prefumo LOVR West City Limits Oceanaire LOVR Madonna Laguna Lake Park routes Sign when bike paths connect w/Foothill or LOVR Calle Joaquin LOVR north/ ft. Sign when Dalidio path installed Delete the following street segments from Figure #1: Bicycle Transportation Map Street From To Chorro Highland Lincoln Boysen Chorro Route 1 Monterey Route 101 Chorro Buena Vista Monterey Loomis Flora North End Southwood Pointsettia Tank Farm Fuller Fuller Broad Pointsettia Elks Higuera Prado Southwood Johnson east Exhibit * 11 : Correspondence TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESSADDRESS PHONE :;,✓;;j.r Lr - : _ PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ' �-� u�- 7G� ADDRESS PHONE 6 66I NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS -73 t PHONE L Lf 3 - � C— NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS z 1(-LPHONE ' n i NAMEIBUSINESS ADDRESS 4- PHONE NAMEBUSINESS��rn; ADDRESS-2 1,22 bipY7.�� i�TPHONE_7 ? NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE a N NAMEBUSINESs ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS 4,_ 4,t,6-u_ PHONE f, k u;ti NAME/BUSINESS - ADDRESS `f /'/ 1 HONE .�Z/ NAME/BUSINESS �- ADDRESS / PHONE__5 y? NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS I TSs (,-/ _54) L. c v • PHONE S 2'L� (:ee';1 x-/37 NAME/BUSINESS, { ADDRESS ', I 1•-''P , �. �T- PHONE_''`., NAME/BUSINESS � AA;Al 40,11,4 nd ADDRESS i fes : L S PHONE NAME/BUSINESS �i4clif7ilf[c�l�i9cinc ,(,C' rtiY� ��Gf�` ADDRESS Z. a z / _PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS 4t `I'� .�� ,a i ;a�1 _PHONE S2-{ 3- 5";-2 7_ NAME/BUSINESS.;i' ADDRESS -,3[' G �c2�,t -zc�. lam/ PHONE .. ,.^ �. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS L!-14 y c:.E.la.c 7 [,. L.T >L U PHONE ' i Zl C 7 LI NAMEBUS,V SW t; J7 ADDRESS %` �^ %I PHONE NAME/BUSINES -.1 G - (� E e�r ✓ �!� ADDRESS PHON r NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS —PHONE l ' NAME/BUSINESS OL ADDRESS i j .Fy 1-.E- PHONE ' 1T NAMEBUSIINESS ADDRESS_a5 1, 7 s ins C �2 �.v � PHONE E t/ 3 :3 /0 NAME/BUSINESS �• :. ADDRESS 2_1-- ("Arn .. ''lPHONE s 4z .. i 5_10 NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS i3 r9 A=C- - '� v �L' �' PHONE -4/ NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS 7) PHONE—)-L/ / Z NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS ::L t'- PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS - PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS _ PHONE _ TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. Thk elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESS Z�us7e-� `zrTr�=•� 1�s���v L- ADDRESS Z32 AAQciri4f -STe, .o PHONE -f> NAME/BUSINESS - ADDRESS PHON tSYY-y744 NAMEBUSINES ADDRES ' PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NA fE/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE V TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAMEBUSINESS C- L' ADDRESS �G S e� PHONE --;;z NAME/BU I�iFSS ADDRESS L' C <`' PHONE NAME/BUS12 ADDRESS P ONE _MMS' NAMFJBUSINESS � �� �RESS �\ PHONE NAMEBUSINE,SS ADDRESS z / PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS /_ PHONE - W NAMFJBUSINESS �] ��' '� � /` ^h' (� ADDRESS i >' PHONE NANIEIBUSIN_ESS ADDRESS PHONE ''-F NAME/BUSINESS ...` • . ADDRESS n. PHONE--I NAME/BUSINESS FYI c ADDRESS—i 0=2 PHONE 432(IP 42L NAMMEBUSINESS. ADDRESS 'i %� L �' PHONE NAME/BUSINESS = C ADDRESS �LN i; c i PHONE NAME/BUSINESS r 6.. ADDRESS r" NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS /23 G PHONE " NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE - _ _. H41 TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS NAMEIBUSINESS t IOf ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS i I r• i !' :-i J }r' / PHONE -r ADDRESS /j - NAMEMUSINESS e ADDRESS 24 PHONE NAME/BUSINESS � ` " - ADDRESS PHONE —L NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS S ' PHONE-5-=l 1-11 NAME/BUSINESS SAN LUIS FLOOR DESIGN ADDRESS PHONE • Y-�� NAMEMUSINESS •' �..i. . t'lArJ c[ v� ADDRESS �'� [. r �. 9 PHONE NAMEMUSINESS ;c .� . . `•`��;.. . , ADDRESS ' PHONE �+ SAN LUIS FLOOR DESIGN NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS � 93 �� f c �f C C. PHONE Ly - NAME/BUSINESS c..� lw �10 '�= C, ADDRESS _PHONE -G 3 NAMEBUSINESS ' <.c� ADDRESS NAME/BUSINESS PHONE ,� C '�y�• f >� ' ' ' ADDRESS ! art PHON :. -•�... 7I NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS !' PHONEy NAME/BUSINESS : o c � ADDRESS r -PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ` , C�rir i5 ADDRESS S 6c- / PHONE NAMEBUS S ' ` ADDRESS ? 3 PHONE Sri" NAME/BUSINESS _14� c J f! CA, PS a'rQi ADDRESS /j /^ 5 �a 11 - PHONE =S1 —kii 2- NAME/BUSINESS NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESSC - �`""�' It S S Z &e, Uo�-�c�,+-t t S ADDRESS 3 G(&0 / Guc�/ill' J PHONE 5 I- zzz/ 33 NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESSPHONE- /_9L / NAMEBUSINE,,S,,��� - ��% � YZI -� ADDRESS 5;; .� ci�sc �f�c� PHONE �3'3 �yo NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE /-!q3 W- fs 47 # IV f#V O: W' Obis4poicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESS S RE Rr'1 ADDRESS 15%b PHONE NAME/BUSIN S ADDRESS /.5�(n. PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ,�� �cuc��.v► ►s L�1� ioa�ors C_l4ss ADDRESS�'�I S CA c•ctaa S�O PHONE _tel 2,.I l`t NAME/BUSINES AVs ADDRESS RIAVZO-0111 6 7W.A APHONE NAME/BUSINESS 1 OKl it ADDRESSPHONE -5-� J� NAME/BUSINESS V I C n.c.Q u«- ADDRESS o -)6 ^' /` ;00'TPHO-4U2 C�3 cf(�fa7e NAME/BUSINESS � -a 2a, Z ADDRESS // /)16 d-10 cr.. o:; C- y PHONE 44 7 NAME/BUSINESS ZQ6.✓ A t4 Z,6 C IL ADDRESS l ys s f S yageLy G NWIF SQL. e!. eg"(i TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE r- NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS. : <. . : __,: _ PHONE NAME/BUSINESS -: ADDRESS :. ; - PHONE ' NAME/BUSINESS- ADDRESS AME/BUSINESS ADDRESS = C. :; _ / ) " - PHONE NAME/BUSINESS E / ADDRESS HONES 7.3 NAMEIBUSINESS SGL f'I. ✓�- ADDRESS 3 © R v PHONE S L NAME/BUSINESS A m ADDRESS ' r PHONE 77,x---43 NAME/BUSINESS JO ADDRESS i PHONE T NAME/BUSINESS /-tZQ_3 I =`r �✓ 'C3� - . �r�h,. t: �.i<�; ADDRESS J- r'n t�� �� •,' �' , _:, ! �� PHONE NAME/BUSINES `-`- ADDRESS �' ' �` PHONE t3t-7 NAME/BUSINESS `- ADDRESS - PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS ;, `'. . _ PHONE — �. ��A150 NAME/BUSINESS c '` ADDRESS PHONE -. .. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS %C l f!'l'�t;= f, • r� !j,;'i PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS 17�,L, r— (c`C°l r AG F(C- PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEIBUSINESS ADDRESS - PHONE NAME/BUSINESS'"�' .w ADDRESS ` _� 'ii ► : .',�_` PHONE - NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS '����✓j?' /=!-;i ,= ADDRESS PHONE - /1 i7;�/f�C/j ; y� G, - NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS �' PHONE NAME/BUSINESS(_ c ADDRESS / - C 0 LJ C NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE -` NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE. NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE HY& TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS 3:,4 C�; PH NE a _ NAME/BUSINES_ S ADDRESS -PHONE, . NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEIBUSINFS_S r /, ADDRESS ! .' L i. . / 'i' l PHONE NAN EBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEIBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE /_/Y7 NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE i NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS 42 PH NE — NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS rci PHO �j 1-1 i 7-32 NAME/BUSINESS A2 ,'N h 61ofu f �� ',✓f,�c> ADDRESS c) Era,,, a Ls PHONE SHY .. `I J 31 NAME/BUSINESS AU�U pp\, I\4 ADDRESS %?y. / ax 15y L/I PHONE ArJ&-3315 NAMEBUS ESS - C /1 ADDRESS Z S HONE 3�— NAMEBUSINES ADDRESS S NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE - NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE /To TO: San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee We, the undersigned property owners/tenants and concerned citizens, hereby strongly object to the proposed "Bicycle Boulevard" being planned for Pacific Street. Pacific Street is currently a narrow thoroughfare and, as such, adding a bike lane would considerably reduce the flow of traffic on Pacific. The elimination of all through traffic on Pacific Street would greatly inhibit the flow of business transactions, deliveries, access to apartment dwellings and housing, and fire and police accessibility. NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS 4t)3�5 so. thL-•UE 7� �5' PHONE .54/ NAME/BUSINESS A2e�_' ADDRESS yo3S So 141 L�n� Seo PHONES y/-23A3 "�,Qtm NAME/BUSINESS0_f ` ADDRESS t�� yuck:;i, PHONE -fr NAMFJBUSINESS ADDRESS 235 PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS ' PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS ' PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAMEIBUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE NAME/BUSINESS ADDRESS PHONE /-149 FARMER & READY A LAW CORPORATION 1254 MARSH STREET P.O. BOX 1443 DAVID Y. FARMER SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406 PAUL F. READY Telephone (805)541.1626 SAI\'DRA K.FAM FAX Number(805)541.0769 August 3 , 1993 The Honorable Peg Pinard Councilmember Penny Rappa Mayor of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Councilmember Bill Roalman Councilmember Dave Romero City of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo .990 Palm Street 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Councilmember Allen Settle City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Marsh Street bicycle lane project Dear Mayor Pinard and City Councilmembers: I applaud the recommendation of the Bicycle Committee to recommend designation of bike lanes on Marsh Street. For the more than twenty years that I have lived and worked in San Luis Obispo, I have been a bicycle commuter. . I have noticed within the last few years that both the City and County of San Luis Obispo have made a marked effort at enlarging the possibilities for safe bicycle commuting. I appreciate that effort. It seems a reasonable goal to try to remove twenty percent of the single-passenger vehicle commuters from the city core within the next five years. That will cause some inconvenience to those how are married to a single-occupant vehicle. At the same time, adding the proposed bike lanes might just provide an additional safety margin as incentive to remove some of those cars from our city core. Preservation of life and the quality of life seems to be more than a fair trade off for the inconvenience imposed by the loss of 27 parking spaces. hull Counal has I hope the Council seizes this opportunity. received thisdw=ent Sincere4rm �i Yer s 1-01a DYF•dkr !AN LU!S O'M;SFO, CA /-/,5a Tom and Marion J(gy 369 Chaplin Lane • San Leis Obispo, California B 7L 4i n -.(.ltd-�' /�C ./��� c� -�lv �.c�..,-✓�.�.� L4�-C ck T .c.c�-rCn�Dp,G.,,cs�/ iYYI,�,•6�1� .�'t-�.c'` .C..-e�2 ,[,,,, �Gc� �4 Ivlt[Lr ov CA HARRIS INVESTMENTS 1 .,Sl) 1110 1..Inti, L:11.11i June 29, 1993 Bicycle Committee City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Attention: Craig Anderson Gentlemen: I appreciate your concern for the safety and convenience of the bicycling public. However, I do not believe that you have give sufficient thought to the economic ramifications of your proposed actions specifically concerning Pacific Street. An example: I own the budding at 265 Pacific. It is occupied by Coastal Pool and Liz Murray Distributors. Coastal Poops main business is selling plants andswimming pool supplies--Liz Murray sells Vitamin and Health supplies. These are both small businesses struggling to survive despite a six year drought and a recession that borders on a depression for California. If your plan makes it more difficult to reach these businesses by automobk or more difficult to find them by forcing a circuitous route to get there (even though they have adequate off-street parking)you will surely destroy their businesses. As you know all businesses(especially shopping centers)have two requirements for their location. First is vistb'&y and second is easy access. We do not have much visibility to begin with, so please don't make access any more difficult. Both Coastal Pool and Liz Murray were in business at this address before I purchased the budding in 1976. They have been good tenants and good business people, but these last four years have been a real struggle for thea, and for me. Now, to have this additional burden thrust upon all of us, by what must be described as relatively narrow W=06 is unconscionable. Ifyou persist in this ill-advised plan,you well destroy more businesses than these two, and with it,you will lose sales tax revenues and employment. From what I have heard and read,you will find the City in a series of law suits, or class actions, for damaging property values and businesses affected by your acts. Bicycle Cottee June 29, 1993 Page 2 If memory serves me correctly, I think that most businesses located southwest of Broad Sftd are automobile oriented. Newer properties such as mine were required to furnish off-street parking. In any case, none of these business are pedestrian oriented, and if you limit automobile traffic you will severely limit the customer base of these businesses, and consequently, their ability to survive. An added observation: Some years ago the City made Buchon a one-way street northeast. It is primarily a residential street, but there were so many objections by the residents that it soon reverted to two-way traffic. If you try to add any more one-way streets in this area where you already have Higuerr, Marsh and Pismo, I think that project will also fail. My son has lived in San Luis for ten years. He and his wife are now in their thirties and they will not ride their bikes on the streets of San Luis. You may make a couple of streets for bicyclists only, but the rest of the City's streets are still too narrow and filled with too marry rude and careless drivers(and bicyclists too!)to ever be safe. Yours very truly, Kenneth G. Harris cc: City Council of San Luis Obispo SIERRA CLUB SANTA LUCIA CHAPTER revraeo n tYgs 21 June, 1993 Richard Marshall Chairman, San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee San Luis Obispo City Hall 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93403-8100 Dear Richard, The Sierra Club Alternative Transportation Task Force is writing to you and the Bicycle Committee to suggest some changes to the Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. The ATTF joins the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Business Improvement Association in supporting the Bicycle Transportation Plan with the following changes: 1. We would like the plan to include a bicycle boulevard on Morro Street between Santa Barbara Street and Pacific Street with stop signs or signalization at the intersection of Morro and Santa Barbara to facilitate turning movements by cyclists. 2. We would like a bicycle boulevard on Pacific Street between Higuera and Santa Rosa included in the plan. The idea would be to delay implementation of the bike lanes on Marsh Street for 18 months and to try out the bike boulevard on Pacific. This would give staff and the Bicycle Committee one year to come up with a safe design for Pacific Street and to get it built. It could then be tried for 6 months to see if it was serving the needs of the cycling community. The Bicycle Committee would then review the Pacific Street bicycle boulevard and make a recommendation to the City Council as to whether it should be made permanent or not. If the committee and the City Council determine that the plan is not working, the Marsh Street plan would be implemented instead. The Sierra Club, the Chamber of Commerce, and the BIA have all agreed to support the recommendation of the Bicycle Committee at that time. The three groups have also agreed to support retaining the Bicycle Committee, reorganized to include a representative from the business community and to preclude staff from voting. We also agreed to support the city having a half- time Bicycle Coordinator to be hired from existing staff. To rrplarr. color. and protect the noon's tunic mourn•% . The ATTF would like to thank you and the Bicycle Committee for all the hard work you have done in creating the Bicycle Transportation Plan. We support it completely and urge implementation as soon as possible. Sincerely, Nt/V�eesart I Sierra Club Alternative Transportation Task Force 1570 Hansen Lane. San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93101 cc: City Council Chamber of Commerce Business Improvement Association 2761 Crockett Circle Los Osos, CA 93402 June 18, 1993 Mr. Terry Sanville, Bicycle Program Planner San Luis Department of Public forks 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo , CA 93401 RE: The proposed bike lanes on east Broad Street between High and Marsh Streets Dear Mr . Sanville; The route for the proposed bike lane on east Broad Street between High and Marsh Streets has recently come to my ,attention. It may not be possible for me to attend the meeting of the Bicycle Advisory Committee on Monday, June 21st ; consequently, I will write my concerns in this letter . My sister and I are the owners of the building that for many years has been occupied by Borah' s Awards . Borah' s Awards is a successful business in the downtown area and a tenant that we have been fortunate enough to keep for many years . But its survival does depend upon the existence of some parking at the store location. If Borah' s Awards leaves this location for another location that does provide parking for its customers, my sister and I will have a very difficult time finding a replacement tenant . The City of San Luis Obispo, in its efforts to maintain the safe and charming environment of the town, has consistently placed requirements and . restrictions on property owners in town. We are doing our best to abide by the seismic and fire safety standards you set, to pay for the business license you require, to pay the taxes and insurance, and to maintain the building so that we may keep a tenant . But the removal of the parking spaces around the building will mean the loss of business for any tenant we may have . It seems that the City and the property owners should be trying to find a compromise in this situation. Ideally, it would be wonderful if we could have both bike lanes and parking spaces on Broad Street . The narrowness of Broad Street seems to make that an impossibility. Obviously, providing bike lanes in town is a good thing, but is it worth more erosion of business to the downtown area? Twis would seem to be a "robbing Peter to __gay Paul" type of action . Please take this question into consideration when reviewing the present bicycle lane proposal . Thank you. S ncerely, Darlene V. Krouse / /�� Memorandum June 17, 1993 To: Terry Sanville,,�Trraansportation Planner From: Keith Opalewsld, Parking Manager Subject: Pacific Street Bike Project As you know, the BIA, Chamber, and Sierra Club have joined in an unusual alliance to support bike lanes/boulevards on a major portion of Pacific Street. This alternative location for bikes evolved from the strong opposition by the BIA of creating bike lanes on Marsh Street because of the loss of precious curbside parking spaces. Although the Pacific Street location is certainly an option, there is a major problem with installing boulevards, and even bike lanes, on Pacific Street because of the Marsh Street Parking Structure. Creating a one-way street and/or installing center lane delineators would have a serious impact on the egress traffic from the Pacific Street exit of the Marsh Structure. Creating a right turn only situation would have a severe impact on processing vehicles out of the structure. This..would be even more acute on Thursday nights, weekends, and other special events or seasoal influx for parking demand. The short queuing lane to the intersection of Pacific and`Chorro Streets would cause a serious back-up for egress traffic. It would also mean that parking customers and passcard users would have to merge into one traffic lane. This too would just exasperate the problem. Hopefully, we would learn from the exit problems that exist at the Palm Structure due to the close proximity to Chorro Street. Be certain that the Thursday night and special event operations nightmare that is present at Palm Street would be paralleled at the Marsh Structure if we restrict exit traffic on Pacific Street. Therefore, from an operations and safety perspective, any kind.-of bike project that would impede the egress traffic onto Pacific Street should not be pursed and other alternatives, such as Marsh Street, should be supported. /-/57 � 1 r- San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce 1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278 (805) 781.2777 • FAX (805) 543-1255 David E. Garth, Executive Director June 16, 1993 Richard Marshall, Chair Bicycle Advisory Committee JUN 2-i 199 D: City of San Luis Obispo COUNTY ENGINEERING 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 DEPARTMENT Attention Richard and Bicycle Advisory Committee: On behalf of the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce, I would like to present a recommendation on bicycle circulation for downtown San Luis Obispo. This recommendation stems from a precedent setting alliance between the Sierra Club's Alternative Transportation Task Force and the Chamber's Clean Air/Circulation Task Force. Both groups agree that bicycles are a viable means of alternative transportation for the future of San Luis Obispo, and therefore favor the continued implementation of a bicycle master plan. In your planning process, we would like your support for the following ideas. We believe that bike boulevards along Pacific and Morro streets will serve the community well. In particular, we believe that bike boulevards along Pacific Street would work better than the Marsh Street proposal. The Chamber-prefers that Marsh Street be.narrowed to Slow traffic down, as is consistent with the Downtown Design Plan. This bicycle circulation plan represents the efforts of the Chamber of Commerce, the Sierra Club, the downtown Business Improvement Association, and ECOSLO. Along with the Chamber, these groups agree that placement of a bike boulevard along Pacific Street would promote bicycling, attract new bicycle commuters, and most definitely provide a safer and more enjoyable bike ride. Such a bicycle circulation plan would serve as a tourist attraction that fits the "eco-tourism" concept. This plan would also revitalize the old-town "neighborhood" feeling while providing little, to no loss in parking. Finally, such a bikeway would provide an integral link to bicycle routes across the City. The Chamber of Commerce believes that these recommendations will serve the community well. Preliminary business and residential surveys already indicate tremendous support for this innovative form of bicycle circulation. We are pleased to demonstrate a strong alliance between the environmental groups and the business community. Together, with your support, we can make bicycle ACCREDITED CXAYBfM OF COMMERCE circulation work for everyone in downtown San Luis Obispo, and the community at large. On behalf of the Chamber, we look forward to your staff expertise in analyzing and expediting this innovative concept. Sincerely, John Ewan, Chair Clean Air/Circulation Task Force /-/5g We need your support for our innovative bicycle circulation plans Q l 4_ Question: What is a bicycle boulevard, and how does it affect me? Answer: A bicycle boulevard is a city street designed for optimal bicycle usage and local vehicular traffic. This concept results in many positive effects for the community. D '"n x • Promotes bicycling and attracts new bicycle u commuters • Provides a safer and more enjoyable bike ride ti • A tourist attraction that fits the "eco-tourism" A concept N • Revitalizes old-town "neighborhood" feelingL,a�N • Will cause little to no loss in parking m [RRe • An integral link to bicycle routes across the City m ..... �>ua • Eases vehicular congestion around individual o �:�: work sites r • As effective as the Marsh Street bike lane proposal A • Enhances bicyclist right-of-way and provides o for two-way bicycle traffic '7 The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce, along with other community groups including the Sierra Club, have worked together on this proposal. We need your support of this important circulation plan. San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce ti_ , 11 1 June 17, 1993 Richard Marshall Bike Committee Chair City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Richard: The Business Improvement Association Board of Directors would like to state its support for the Pacific Street Bike Boulevard. The BIA, Chamber of Commerce and Sierra Club have developed a consensus on the appropriateness of bike transportation on this street due to the safe cross town access it would provide. Both the Pacific Street and Marsh Street merchants have voiced their support of this concept to the BIA. The plan would increase the overall usage of bikes by commuters and tourists due to the dedication of the street to bikes. The BIA feels that this plan is superior to the Marsh Street proposal due to the increased right of way for the bicyclist and provision for two way bike traffic. An important partnership has developed centering around this proposal. The next crucial element will focus on the City Staff commitment to analyzing the feasibility and engineering configuration, should the Bike Committee recommend the Pacific Street alternative. The BIA Board would ask that the Bike Committee approve the Pacific Street Bike Boulevard concept and direct the Public Works department to begin analyzing the proposal. - Please feel free to contact Lynn Block at 541-0286 or myself at 543-1141 should you have any questions. sincerely, Dick Cleeves President Business Improvement Association 7 Wo F SAN LUIS OBISPO 111 P.O.Bar 1402•San Lir 0h*•C4.93406.80SIT41-0286 VMC WORKSRMLITIES i � J I / / Ct a �` y � dNO 7� o eC4 � f � o -�" r+u � s � Ate `' Jtid �a. ; iu17�i / / 7 ,"s �- r 1 /s a C C X. JUN 8 1993 D . 1 ORKSS/�UTIILff ESS H&A � t �.j June 29, 1993 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO �. 955 MORRO ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA TRANSPORTATION DEPT CRAIG ANDERSON MR. ANDERSON, This letter is in reference to our lenathv phone conversation todav Plan.about the Citv's Bicvcle Transportation an. Once again I want to voice my dissentient about proposed bicycle lanes on both sides of Marsh St. To business's, that rely totally on automobile traffic such as my business, shall be hurt considerably by allowing a bicycle lane to shut out customers. I do not feel much consideration has been given to one of the Citv's greatest source of revenue ( sales and transient occupancy taxes ) . By nutting restraints on customer access to local business, I feel you are going to drive down a sagging economy by allowing bicycle lanes to Se established in certain, areas of business. Business establishments can not readily be moved but bicycle lanes can. I feel your committee should further studv alternate Bicvcle routes. I am very much in favor of a "bicycle boulevard" as proposed for Pacific and Morro Streets. This would be an excellent plan for all parties. Once again, please consider my objection to bicycle lanes in front of business and my complete agreement to bicycle boulevards" on alternate streets. Respectfully, Budget Motel 345 Marsh St. San Luis Obispo 1 � f Jo Figone (owner) 3393 Geneva Dr. Santa Clara, Ca. 95051 002-508-0019/FILE I1:D.8.P. BUDGET MOTEL A CA LTD PTP % JOHN F FIGONE & FALKO FORBRICH 3393 GENEVA DR SANTA CLARA, CA 95051 H&3 I • _ 1 • � • ' i I I � A i FA -� ��' 07/87/93 10886 S 8055419268 641 HIBUERA 5T. 82 July 6, 1993 Bicycle Committee City of San Luis Obispo Attn: Terry Sanville by fax: 781.7198 Dear Committee Members, I support the idea of a bike boulevard parallel to Marsh Street as recommended by the Chamber of Commerce, Sierra Club and BIA. I hope you will incorporate their recommendation into the bicycle plan. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the plan. Let me first congratulate you on the production of the draft. Please complete your work as soon as possible and pass it onto the other reviewing commissions and to the City Council. I spoke at your last public hearing and would like to reiterate some ideas. I believe the committee has focused on the concerns of people who already ride bikes. While better accommodating bike riders Is important, a critical goal of the plan is to encourage others to start using bicycles in lieu of cars. In order to effect that change, you must consider the needs of people who do not currently use their bikes for transportation. Let me suggest that most of us would ride our bikes more frequently but for two factors: hills and the lack of safe, quiet paths. There is little you can do about hilts (and I would point out that many of the examples of towns where bicycle riding has become a significant part of the transportation mix--Davis, Eugene, Isla Vista come to mind--are relatively flat). There is something you can do about the latter issue. I know that a good system of Class 2 paths makes sense and will certainly be appreciated by bike riders today. However, most of the rest of us need Class 1 paths or bike boulevards to be comfortable riding our bikes. Please include more of these facilities in your plan and increase their priority for Implementation. Riding a bike on a narrow lane along Foothill (or Marsh for that matter) is not very appealing. On the other hand, riding on a parallel street (like Ramona or Pacific) with reduced auto traffic might be attractive. Losing an auto lane on Foothill to accommodate a Class 2 path, for example, had some deleterious side effects. First, it encouraged people to drive their cars on the parallel streets, increasing traffic on those residential streets, and away from the arterial. More traffic on the side street makes bike riding on Ramona somewhat less enjoyable. Second, It still puts the principal bike route right next to a lot of car traffic, along an even more crowded travel lane. I appreciate the idea, but if the goal is to increase bike ridership, I don't think it is working very well. 07107z93 10106 S 8054419260 641 HIGUERA 5T. 03 If the goal is to get more of us to ride bikes, an accessible, enjoyable Class 1 recreational path should be higher priority, If we use the path for pleasure riding, I think we will get comfortable with the idea of using our bikes elsewhere. My hope is that someday there will be a path that loops around the lower shoulders of San Luis Mountain, connecting Laguna Lake Park to the downtown (the long way) with some radial °spokes" at various locations to the town below. I'd rather we use our transportation funds on something like that than for widening roads (or for more Class 2 paths, for that matter). Thanks for the opportunity for commenting. Sincerely, Michael Multari 83 La Entrada San Luis Obispo cc: Chamber of Commerce (by fax: 543-1255) Full Council has received this document July 14, 1993 Honorable Mayor Pinard 01 % City of San Luis Obispo li n n PO Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Dear Mayor Pinard: As a twenty-one year resident of San Luis Obispo,I have seen many changes in this city. The population has increased approximately 8,000 to 10,000 in the years I have made my home here. The increase in population and general growth in business and industry has caused a strain on the existing streets and highways in the area I am writing to express my strong opinion against any additional bike lanes in the City of San Luis Obispo. As I drove down Higuera Street the other day I was shocked to see the. changes already made on Higuera between Marsh Street and Smart and Final. To take out a lane of traffic both ways in order to add bicycle lanes is ridiculous. The proposal to takeout a traffic lane on Marsh in order to accomodate bicycle lanes is beyond comprehension. There are many reasons why I am against providing additional bicycle lanes. First,as I mentioned above the streets of San Luis Obispo are already overcrowded and removing traffic lanes will only make the situation worse. Second,the bicycle lanes will service a very small percentage of the population of this community. Consider how many elderly and retired persons five in the city. I doubt very much whether more than just a few of them will take advantage of bicycle lanes. Probably the largest number of people to use bike lanes would be Cal Poly students. As a graduate of Cal Poly, I am well aware of the importance of the revenue received in the city because of the students at the University. However,a very small percentage of them are permanent city residents who pay property taxes and contribute to the city .. in that way. Third,as tourism is a major industry in San Luis Obispo It would be well to consider the impact bike lanes will have on tourists. I believe the impact will be negative as they arrive in San Luis, mostly by private car and try to get around a town that has catered to the minority and provided bicycle lanes which penalize the vast majority by further overcrowding the existing streets. Perhaps you believe that bike lanes will encourage more people to ride bikes to work. Well, in theory that. is not a bad idea but in reality it is highly improbable. Providing bike lanes is not going to make people ride bikes and quit using their cars. It would be nearly impossible for North and South County commuters to use bike lanes. I work at a company with approximately 66 full-time employees. Two- thirds of the employees live out of the City of San Luis Obispo while only one-third live in the city. Many live as far away as Paso Robles,Pozo and Santa Maria. If you want to cut down on automobile traffic is the city perhaps money would be better spent on public transportation. In conclusion, I would strongly encourage you to vote against any further additions of bike lanes which cause lane closures or loss of parking spaces in the City of San Luis Obispo. Thank you for your time and concern to represent the majority and not just the vocal minority. Sincerely, C Jean E. Reno JUL 10 1993 Y COUNCIL k)SGM CA 1-16 July 12, 1993 TO: THE BICYCLE COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: SHIRLEY AND STAN PAYNE, 1420 JOHNSON AVENUE, SAN LUIS OBISPO SUBJECT: STRIPPED BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE (UNDER RAILROAD BRIDGE AND DOWN TO MARSH STREET) BEFORE I SPEAK ON THE AGENDA ITEM THIS EVENING CONCERNING A BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT. THE ARTICLE IN THE TELEGRAM TRIBUNE MISQUOTED WHAT I SAID ABOUT THE DAMAGE TO MY CAR WINDSHIELD AFTER THE LAST BICYCLE COMMITTEE MEETING. I SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT I DID NOT SUSPECT ANYONE ON THE BIKE COMMITTEE OR ANYONE COMING TO THE MEETING REPRESENTING BICYCLISTS AS THE PARTY THAT DAMAGED MY WINDSHIELD. THE WINDSHIELD WAS BROKEN ON PURPOSE THE REST IS SPECULATION AND THE REWARD IS $200 FOR THE ARREST AND CONVICTION. NOW REGARDING THE BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO BIKE LANES. I WORK FOR THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND I AM A SECRETARY TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION THAT HAS AS ONE OF ITS DUTIES THE PLANNING OF BIKE LANES FOR THE CITY. I HAVE WORKED FOR THE CITY GOING ON 17 YEARS. I AM OPPOSED TO THE BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE FOR SAFETY REASONS. FIRST, THE SIGHT DISTANCE FROM BUCHON ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET IS NOT ADEQUATE. IT DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SIGHT DISTANCE AND THE CITY WILL READILY ADMIT TO THIS. TWO, I AM SUBMITTING A COPY OF A REPORT FROM THE CITY THAT STATES THAT THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN THIS AREA ARE TWICE THE CITY AVERAGE. TWICE THE CITY AVERAGE! THREE, A TRAFFIC INFORMATION PROGRAM SERIES FROM THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS ON CROSSWALKS STATES THAT PEDESTRIANS FEEL A FALSE SECURITY WITH A MARKED CROSSWALK. PAINTED LINES DO NOT PROVIDE PROTECTION. THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM SERIES 2 ON BIKE LANES STATES THAT BIKE LANES AND SIGNS ALONE CANNOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF BICYCLE ACCIDENTS; IN SOME PLACES THEY HAVE INCREASED THE PROBLEM BY GIVING RIDERS A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY. A PAINTED LINE IS NOT A BARRIER. A CAR MAY OR MAY NOT PAY ATTENTION TO A PAINTED LINE. WHEN TRAFFIC IS HEAVY, WHEN SOMEONE CUTS YOU OFF OR WHEN YOU WANT TO GO STRAIGHT AHEAD INSTEAD OF TURN AND THERE IS ROOM ON THE ROAD, PAINTED OR NOT YOU ARE NOT PHYSICALLY PREVENTED FROM USING THAT BIKE LANE SPACE. THREE, LIABILITY, YOU CAN POO POO THE IDEA OF LIABILITY BUT IT IS A FACT TO BE FACED. THE CITY RIGHT NOW HAS A CLAIM AGAINST IT FOR THE DEATH OF MIKE ANDROWSKY WHO IS THE BICYCLIST WHO DIED UNDER THE BRIDGE, THE CASE MAY NOT BE AS STRONG AS IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IF THERE WAS A PAINTED BIKE LANE. ACCORDING TO THE BICYCLE FEDERATION OF AMERICA, LIABILITY ASPECTS OF BIKEWAY DESIGNATION, A SPECIAL REPORT, PAGE 51, "IN SEVERAL CASES THE COURTS HAVE NOTED IN THEIR DECISIONS THAT THE ROADWAY ON WHICH THE BICYCLIST WAS INJURED WAS NOT DESIGNATED AS A BIKEWAY. THE FACT WAS UNIMPORTANT IN THE RESOLUTION OF EACH CASE, BUT SUCH COMMENTS COULD BE INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT THE JUDGES WOULD HAVE CONSIDERED SUCH A DESIGNATION SIGNIFICANT HAD THERE BEEN ONE. THE REPORT GOES ON TO STATE THAT WHERE THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FAILS TO PROVIDE FOR THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT PERSONAL MOBILITY OPTIONS, INCLUDING BICYCLES AND AUTOMOBILES, AMONG OTHERS AND A USER IS INJURED AS A RESULT, COMPENSATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED. REFORM IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN THE PAST FEW DECADES HAS MOVED IN THE DIRECTION OF BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE INJURED. ONE RESULT OF THAT REFORM IS THAT GOVERNMENT ENTITIES ARE ENCOUNTERING AN EVER INCREASING PROBLEM WITH LIABILITY. ALL OF YOU HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN FOR THE SAFETY OF BIKERS. SO IF YOU PUT A STRIPED BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE YOUR MESSAGE IS ASSUMED TO BE THAT THIS IS A SAFE PLACE FOR A NEW BICYCLIST TO RIDE. YOU HAVE ALREADY TOLD ME SEVERAL TIMES THAT THE GOAL OF THIS COMMITTEE IS TO GET MORE PEOPLE ON BICYCLES NOT NECESSARILY ACCOMMODATE THOSE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY RIDE. DO YOU REALLY WANT NEW PEOPLE TO CHOOSE TO RIDE A STRIPED BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE DOWN HILL UNDER THE NARROW RAILROAD BRIDGE INTO TOWN THROUGH HEAVY TRAFFIC? PERSONALLY, I THINK A NEW RIDER WILL ONLY RIDE IT ONE TIME AND IF THEY SURVIVE THEY WILL PROBABLY CHOOSE NOT TO DO IT TWICE. HO 3 IF YOU THINK A PAINTED LINE ON A STREET MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN HAVING A SAFE AREA TO RIDE JUST TRY STANDING INSIDE THE STRIPED SPACE IN THE RED ZONE TO THE LEFT OF MY DRIVEWAY BETWEEN 7:40 A.M. AND 8:30 A.M. AND SEE HOW COMFORTABLE YOU FEEL. THIS MATTER OF MAKING A STRIPPED BIKE LANE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET AND TAKING PARKING OFF BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET HAS BEEN BEFORE YOU BEFORE AND VOTED ON BEFORE AND DEFEATED BEFORE ON MARCH THE 29TH. TERRY HAS BROUGHT THIS MATTER BACK BEFORE YOU BECAUSE HE CHANGED THE LANE PATTERN UNDER THE BRIDGE AND SUPPOSEDLY THIS MAKES IT A NEW ISSUE. IN MY OPINION, THE ISSUE HAS NOT CHANGED. IT IS NOT LIKELY THAT THE CITY WILL REDUCE TWO LANES OF TRAFFIC TO ONE LANE OF TRAFFIC COMING UNDER THE BRIDGE BECAUSE OF THE VISIBILITY PROBLEMS AND THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC AND THE BACK UP THIS WOULD CREATE. A REDUCTION IN LANES WOULD SLOW TRAFFIC TO A CRAWL AT CRITICAL PEAK TIMES AND WOULD NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WILL STILL SPEED THROUGH THERE. I HAVE BEEN ASKED BY SEVERAL PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY AT WORK, WHY I BOTHER TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS. WHAT IS THE POINT? WHY BE FRUSTRATED JUST LEAVE IT ALONE. WHY? BECAUSE I HAVE TO. I HAVE LIVED HERE ALL MY LIFE. THIS IS MY COMMUNITY - MY HOME TOWN. I CHOSE TO STAY HERE WHEN OTHERS LEFT. LIVING ON JOHNSON AVENUE MAKES ME AWARE OF THE PROBLEMS THERE. MY HUSBAND AND I CAME AND OPPOSED THE BIKE LANE BECAUSE WE DID NOT FEEL JOHNSON AVENUE WAS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR A STRIPED BIKE LANE. WE WENT TO TWO MEETINGS AND THE SECOND MEETING WAS MARCH 29TH WHERE THE COMMITTEE'S MOTION WAS DEFEATED AND WE THOUGHT THE MATTER WAS SETTLED. A FEW DAYS LATER MICHAEL ANDROWSKY, THE BICYCLIST, DIED UNDER THE BRIDGE. ONLY A FEW DAYS LATER! MY HUSBAND CALLED ME AT WORK, RIGHT AFTER IT HAPPENED HIS VOICE WAS BROKEN AS HE TOLD ME ABOUT THE ACCIDENT AND DESCRIBED HOW BAD IT WAS. I CRIED AND ALL I COULD SAY WAS OH MY GOD - OH MY GOD - WHAT IF WE HADN'T COME AND OPPOSED THE BIKE LANE. AT THAT TIME I ASSUMED THAT THE MATTER WAS FINISHED. WE HAVE TO OPPOSE THIS BIKE LANE BECAUSE WE REALLY BELIEVE IT ISN'T SAFE. IF YOU VOTE FOR IT AND THE MATTER PASSES ON TO THE CITY 4 COUNCIL YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE RESULTS. WE WILL THEN GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND SPEAK AGAINST THE BIKE LANE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO. IF THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDES TO PUT A BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE THEN THEY SHARE THE RESULTS WITH YOU. WE WILL HAVE DONE WHAT WE FEEL WE HAD TO DO. IF SOMEONE GETS HURT OR DIES WE WILL FEEL VERY BAD BUT WE WILL KNOW THAT WE TRIED TO STOP AN UNSAFE CONDITION. YOU WILL HAVE TO LIVE WITH YOUR DECISION. WE CAN LIVE WITH OURS. THE MATTER IS BEFORE YOU AGAIN, THE SAME CONSIDERATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED AGAIN AND HOPEFULLY YOU WILL COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION AGAIN - JOHNSON AVENUR IS NOT A SAFE PLACE FOR A BIKE LANE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. it - - ------ - - ----- - - mad -- - 4 HI aZa _ _ r� - t:. O } (D.7C U) ? En � cD w w C ' q., i ey O rj 0) 'ty 0, ct a O CD w FJ. N w• CL tia w y C s1 F. cG U I 0 a, 1 1 ct 'C rn 0 c+ I O� (A (D ti j � • O crt j h ✓� I i (D� ct Itn � In ,D �. �r m it I ! I �• � 0 ti ct CD (G G 0 0 �' tR 0 0 r < o mc0o r y C 0 .+ O Q t0 7 w c ww on Cl) w G (D0n D(1)2�' ww(:tC 7 C) o ` N 0 4) (D N��a D , W m xhibit 12 BUILDING A SYSTEM OF BIKEWAYS: BEYOND BIKE ROUTES Traditionally, planning for ' ' ' ' ' signs, so bicyclists %011 know bikeways has revolved around the where to ride." Try following concept of "designated bike Why does a "bike route"-based these signs, see if they take you routes." Planners, engineers, plan not meet the needs of cyclists? from where you are to where you citizen advisory committee Here are six reasons: want to go. members and others look at a map of the local area, and start drawing 1. The best routes are nqt chosen. 6. Planners will often focus only colored lines: here are the bike If the route is not direct, doese t on the bike routes, but bikeways routes. serve origin and destination points, are usually constructed on an and is inconvenient or unimproved, "opportunity" basis, as part of Does this mean that these are the current riders will ignore it, and construction projects. Every road best routes for cycling? Or the only potential riders won't see any project is a bikeway project!!! By routes for cycling? Will these incentive to use it. concentrating on bike routes, or routes take cyclists to every trying to complete "corridors", destination point in the area? 2. Other potential routes are many opportunities are missed as Unfortunately, the answer to these ignored, including future roads, or modifications are being made to questions has often been "no." reclassified roads. This is a crucial other roads. All road work affects point, especially for growing conditions for bicyclists: it is Bike Routes that shunt bicyclists communities. Roads that are not imperative that these changes are onto low-volume, quiet streets yet built or even planned should an improvement. This does not perceived a "safe and desirable" accommodate bicyclists. Roads mean that a full-fledged "bikeway" will not serve those who wish to that are now classified as local, and needs to be incorporated into every use bicycles for transportation. that function fine as a shared project. What is important is that roadway, will need a different level bicyclists are accommodated, or at Bicyclists need access to all of treatment if they get rebuilt to a least not precluded! destinations served by the roadway - collector or arterial standard. system, is a manner that is direct Some may object that this last and convenient. There is no over- 3. Plans are adopted, (sometimes approach will lead to a scattered riding, compelling reason why even modified) to avoid providing system of unconnected bikeway bicyclists should follow routing bikeways along thoroughfares. segments. That's where a good that is different from that provided "We don't want those bikes on bikeway policy comes in. Most for automobile users. Main Street, so we won't designate bikeways will be built in it as a bike route". We should be conjunction with roadway The key to successful bicycle working at including: not excluding construction projects. There has to transportation is in reclaiming the bicyclists: be a commitment to retrofit the existing roadway network and missing links with bikeways. redesigning it to accommodate 4. This perpetuates the notion that people riding bicycles. Or better there are certain roads where • • ' ' • yet, people who would ride a bicyclists "belong", or "dont bicycle if the roads accommodated belong"_ AQ roads are bikeways. So where should the bikeways go? them. _ They simply need different levels The answer is ridiculously simple: of treatment, depending on the follow the arterial and collector In my years working as Bikeway functional classification (more street system. By their very Specialist for ODOT, nothing was about this later). nature, these roads link up the more disheartening to me than the various neighborhoods of the answer. "But it's not on a bike 5. Bike route signs placed along community, provide access to all route!" This was usually said in the designated routes are not deg-,'nation pcins, a_*td fac litzte response to a request for bicycle enough to develop a bikeway cross-to,�xm traffl.c. VVe oft en :;ear improvements that I felt .Fere system. T'uis :s the easy xvay out. L`._-t "1b;CyC!i5'S '..ant :0 20 +'ieY needed on a 2ardc,21ar -c:dv.ay r,c;em C1 :nvC7*E-S n0"? Or project tze -ap; now let's put up some need rates that are diract"? Well, motor vehicle traffic circulates on volumes are greater. some excerpts from local arterial and collector streets. documents pertaining to bicycle If there is resistance to providing transportation: But wait! "Main Street in my that much space on the road, here home town carries 25,000 cats a is justification found on page 531 From the 1992 Transportation Plan: day! Surely you dont want to put of the AASHTO Green Book "In the early 1970's, about 18 bicyclists there! That's "Shoulders are desirable on any miles of low-volume streets were irresponsible and dangerous. No highway, and urban arterials are no designated as bike routes. Inter in one's going to want to ride there." exception.. shoulder width should the 1970's, it became apparent that be at least six feet.". these routes were neither safe nor Here are some good reasons to direct enough; clearly marked bike emphasize the arterial and collector Is there an ADT cut-off point for lanes on well-travelled routes were system: minor collectors? Based on purely needed."- empirical observations, 3000 seems 1. If then: are 25,000 cars a day to be a reasonable number. This is From the minutes of the April 2, using a road, that's a good based on two cities in Oregon that 1993 Bicycle Advisory Committee indication that it is the best way to have done a good job of providing meeting (following a prioritized list go: 25,000 drivers cant be wrong. bike lanes on their streets: Eugene of recommended bikeway and Corvallis. This does not mean improvements): "It was noted that 2. Accident data show that most no bike lanes at an ADT of 2999, windows of opportunity to fiend bicycle!car accidents occur at and bike lanes at an ADT of some projects through grants, intersections, or at mid-block 3001"! Good judgement must be coordination with State projects, or locations. "Quiet side streets" are used, considering such factors as other resources that significantly often perceived as safer, but roadway width,parking, continuity, reduce the cost to the City should usually present more conflict linkage, and proximity of traffic not be passed up on the basis of points. By riding with traffic, generators that attract children the above priorities. Because of bicyclists are visible, and their (schools, parks and pools). windows of opportunity, some movements are predictable. projects of lower priority may be In more."Waal setting; onroads funded before some of higher 3. For bicycle transportation to be leading into the urban areas,simple priority." taken seriously, we are going to unmarked shoulders are have to shed the notion that all appropriate. Again, traffic and use riding must be like a pleasant conditions will dictate warrants for Sunday scall in a park. Frankly, shoulder width. To sum.things up, a truly efficient once traffic on a road is past the network of urban bikeways needs 10,000 'ADT mark, it's bury and Alatever type of facility.is chosen, to serve users in a manner that is can be unpleasant But with proper one general principal will apply. at least as good as that provided facility design, it is not unsafe for more room on the roads for for motorists. By putting bicycle cyclists. Riding a brlce simply bicyclists will. often mean Iess facilities on major thoroughfares, makes good sense: it is room for ars. This can lead to a cyclists become a visible presence economical, environmental, political mine field, but it's worth in the urban traffic flow. healthy, efficient and sensible the struggle, if it brings about a transportation - --- transportation system that an be Bicyclists as enjoy passing aline — - - used by non-motorized travellers of ars stalled at a traffic signal; ' • • • • too. maybe one of those disgruntled drivers will envy the riders, then So what kind of facility to provide? • • ' • ' emulate them. In a previous article, I wrote about the advantages of bike lanes on Since Ive been using my home busy streets. Shared roadways to•,xm of Corvallis as an example of !Michael Res'° . �irydc?a�-:a work fine on low-volume zndlor a bicycle-fWendy community with P:oz-i !,:znzscr o.r�n D-xn-not of r mrspc avian I ow speed local streets. Bike !anes pro-active trrsponation policies, ;•�� z io;; are appropr•'�te on arterial and let :rte i:i;:st.—ate these points with . .aior collectors, where s?eedc and /_/74 July 22 , 1993 Craig Anderson, Bicycle coordinator City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject : North Broad Bicycle Patterns Dear Craig: At the hearing there was a great concern for additional traffic on Murray and Meinecke as a result of the Bicycle Blvd. on Broad Street . And potential impact on Chorro Street . As a result of this I would like some investigation changing the length of the Bicycle Boulevard. Current considerations were from Murray Street to Lincoln. this caused a potential increase of traffic on Meinecke and Murray as well as Chorro. Below is a new idea which might satisfy this neighborhood. I broke the traffic pattern into three section please evaluate each section. 1. Place a barrier on Broad Street at the intersection of Ramona and Broad. This barrier will block south bound traffic to the Freeway only. Apparently 60% of Broad Street Traffic is through traffic. a. Allows all of Broad Street residents to access the Freeway on Ramp. b. Prevents through traffic from turning left to Chorro on Murray and Meinecke. C . Allows Foothill Shopping Center Traffic to continue accessing Foothill Blvd. d. Ramona Street residents could access Broad Street Ramp to Freeway by changing their route to use Serrano Ave. This drops the increase of traffic on Chorro by 40% d.l Alternative allow Ramona Street to turn right or left onto Broad Street, then block south bound through traffic at this intersection. This prevents any increase traffic on Serrano. e . Allows Broad Street neighborhood continued access to Foothill Blvd without using Chorro. H75 f . Helps neighbors reclaim the neighborhood. 2 . Close Southbound Off-Ramp on Highway 101 at Broad Street as indicated by DKS study. a. Eliminates through traffic from freeway to Foothill Blvd on both Broad and Chorro. b. Eliminates need to put barrier on north bound Broad streets . C. Makes it safer of cyclists d. Help neighbors reclaim the neighborhood. e. May encourage more residents of Broad and Ramona Ave to ride bicycles. 3 . Change signaling pattern on Foothill Blvd. To control traffic turning onto Chorro Street . Attempt to encourage southbound traffic to use Santa Rosa Streets . (ideas, Right turn on arrow only, turn pocket, make the corner harder to negotiate. a. Lowers traffic on Chorro Street . Makes it safer for Cyclists and neighbors . b. Allows residents to get in and out of driveways more easily. At the end of this evaluation I will try to contact the Broad Street neighborhood to come up with a target plan for wide acceptance at the August 31 hearing. Unfortunately this does not address cycling north on Chorro to Cal Poly. Except that it could potentially reduce the traffic on Chorro Street . Sin rely, S Gary Felsman 541-0488, Days 549-0532, Eves. ����►�►��IIIIII�Ip ,11 city Of San L"IS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT EXHIBIT #13: STREET SEGMENTS REVIEWED FOR BICYCLE LANE INSTALLATION Between June, 1992 and March, 1993, the Bicycle Committee held 17 public meetings to discuss various parts of the updating process. Most of the meetings focused on options for installing bicycle lanes along existing City streets. Street corridors that were discussed in detail include: Street From To Broad Street High Marsh Broad/Chorro Streets Foothill Lincoln California San Luis Dr. Higuera Chorro Street Monterey Walnut Grand Avenue Monterey Slack Johnson Avenue San Luis Dr. Marsh Marsh Street Higuera Johnson Monterey Street Santa Rosa Grand Santa Rosa Marsh Pismo In March, 1993, the Committee completed its initial study sessions and staff began to assemble the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. On June 4, the Public Works Department published and distributed the draft Bicycle Transportation Plan. On June 21, July 7, 12, 19 and 26 the Bicycle Committee held public hearings to consider the draft plan and formulate recommendations for the City Council's consideration (reference Section 11 above). Bicycle projects and programs that were discussed in some detail included: Street From To Laurel Lane Johnson Orcutt Marsh Street Higuera Johnson Pacific Street Higuera Santa Rosa Osos Street Leff Marsh Morro Street Santa Barbara Marsh Johnson Avenue Lizzie Monterey Southwood Drive Laurel Sinsheimer Park Broad Street Lincoln Murray Chorro Street Lincoln Foothill Sacramento 0rcutt Industrial Capitolio Sacramento Broad Railroad Bike Path Route 101 Cal Poly West Freeway Bike Path Marsh Madonna All Streets proposed as "Bike Routes" From the listings shown above, it is clear that the public's and Bicycle Committee's focus was on proposals to establish bikeways. For additional background on these discussions, refer to attached Bicycle Committee minutes (Exhibit 9). / —/77 MEETING AGENDA DATE ITEM # September 1 , 1993 1 Attached are copies of letters and articles of information delivered during the meeting last night (8/31/93) concerning the Bike Plan. or F UPICIL ❑ CDD DIR ❑ FIN DIR O ❑ FIRE CHIEF ORNEYRWORIG ❑ POLICE CHF T TFJ M ❑ REC DIR FILA L7 UTIL GIR ❑ PERS DIR The Marsh Street improvements are ready to be implemented The Pacific has numerous apparent f! is that must be resolved before it is presented to the community. 01 Pacific St. does not need modifications to make it safer for bicycling, Marsh Street's present condition is a major hazard to bicycle commuting. ti -� OWS top lights are required by the B.I.A.'s proposal 4, for Pacific St. at a minimum of $ Ic 0 each. This not required for Marsh St. Marsh St. has received extensive safety review by knowledgeable professionals, Pacific St.'s plan has none. Marsh St. needs traffic and safe Vements Pacific j does not. 14 !S asc�c�� `�i�4) AZ Pacific St. is two blocks from the downtown core, Marsh St.'s plan permits the bicycle and car equal access to retailers. The Marsh Street improvements lessen traffic congestion, M A the B.I.A.'s plan creates barriers to autos and delivery trucks. Reducing the traffic flow on Pacific St. will cause a spill -over to Marsh Street increasing auto congestion on Marsh Street and in the city core. My recommendation, as a member of the County's Bike Advisory Committee is to go ahead with the simple restriping of Marsh St. that could easily be reversed after a trial period. In the meantime consult the residents and professionals on their support of B.I.A.'s plan then thoroughly study it's cost and benefits. O�� SAN FRANCISCO"E. MINER • . Vii+ �. - .mak ;,'`'^ f �f j•l. r , X . c He used to ride the IS miles,but it Exe►ofanor Kareia bwmree a hassle,so he stopped IghlY the same number. hes rains he said, stopped e number of bicycle commut- d, Peed him Palo Alto dnoPPed to 1,793 cfiom d pedaling Hopper workto on his Spe- 3.166 during the decade. In bike modified for sreet use.mountain 1Y Area,the number of bicy Putnam,a furniture builder who' mmuters climbed to 32,081 lives in Palo Alto and commutes! 11,210. about 41h miles across town to QI at to diversltyt shop he owns, admits his job is' Cown believes the 25-year- perfect for bicycling. He sets his'; lgineer who used to pedal ° w hours,doesn't have to dress up: ... town to Hewlett-Packard is or even shower or shave for work in 35-Year-old with children to the morning. ff at the day care center.The But what really makes it greata-olds are now living in Sun_ is that this area is fabulous for she suspects. biking, said Putnam, 44. "There hink the real problem is that are great flatlands variations ls there are all ck of affordable housing is 19 people out of our commu- the things the city has.done and McCown said."It's affecting there are some of the best bike shops Ive ever versity,and the(drop in bike than m Paris."seen—even better f that ui lust another symp- Some commuters have given up be think Palo Alto's remark- their bicycles against their will noel of bicycle commuting is Among them is Steve Carlson, a . was simply unsustainable. Palo Alto resident who used to then, the gas crisis was still have a pleasant,Avenue ride nples'minds,and the city was down California Avenue to his job Len i at Intevac. suddenly an influx n workers But six months ago he switched a suddenly booming Silicon jobs, and now he's faced with a S In that Year, one of every 19-mile commute by car to his new commuters in Palo Alto frau_ g, Y office at Trend Plastica in San still betterthe figure is one Jose.He spends his commute time g,than anywhere 1 the Bay Area but Stanford creeping along jammed U.S. 101 ac d there's always the possibili- with thousands of other grumpy bi me of the numbers are drivers.The car radio,he said,is a nd The census shows 10 peo Poor substitute for the relaxing fo. mmuting all the way to Rich- rhythm of pedals and spokes. by bike—and averaging just It used to be Brest, relaxing," nutes for the trip, said Carlson, 32. "I'd ride to work :k at D Fornaio, Leahy nes early in the mornmg;�n$ there M would be no one out on the street tri g with his friend,David Put- who still commutes on his.. except me,the paper boys and the .JW Lnd wouldn't have it any oth_ delivery trucks at the Palo Alto }y. Not even last winter's Baking C9.What a great way to get lot to work. RQBt5 . T A. DANIELB, RE: Proposed Bicycle committee Plan- August 311 1993 30050tV AVENUE Dear Council Members: I I own the building at 1133 Johnson Avenue and have been practicing as a Doctor of Podiatric Medicine in this location for the last 17 years, I was born and raised in San Luis Obispo following it's development for 43 years. I am opposed to the bike plan on two major points. First, the loss of parking in the already stressed downtown area. Second, the reported 2.5 million dollar price tag. I attended three bike committee hearings and quickly realized, as did many others, that our overwhelming majority opinions and ideas were falling on deaf ears. The voting was predictable and went according to personal gain and interest, not logic or reason. On a personal note, I treat mostly the elderly, people.with foot . injuries, and patients who are post surgery of the feet. Many of these people are from outlying communities. None of them are capable of riding a bike into town and all of them are in need of parking. our employees fill my off-street lot only leaving the small amount of street parking now available for patient parking. This is inadequate as it is. It is my understanding that previous written testimony has been screened by the bicycle committee for the council meeting. Knowing the committee bias, I find this to be unacceptable and not in keeping with the democratic process. There is room enough for all of us, autcmobiles and bicycles alike, but not at the many costs of the proposed plan. As an active, concerned native of San Luis Obispo, I plead with you to vote down this proposal. Thank you for your attention. Si erely, , Robert A. Daniels, D.P.M. 1139 JOHNSON AVENUE SAN LUIS OBISPO. CALIFORNIA OZ401 TCLtPHONII (905) 6441289 21(5 TENTH STREET. SUITE F LOS 0508, CALIFORNIA 163402 TcLcrHCNB(805) 5.441299 , To: San Luis Obispo City Council Members Re: Petition regarding Bike Lanes as Proposed by the San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee The following signatories are residents or business people of the Johnson Avenue and Marsh Street areas which would be directly affected by the proposed bike lane along Johnson Avenue, particularly between Pismo and Marsh. In establishing bike lanes, we request that the Council consider the current character of our neighborhood. Parking is already at a premium during the business day. While the employees of the businesses in the area make every effort to cooperate with the residents, the elimination of parking on Johnson will further push the business parking into the residential areas. We cannot expect employees of businesses in the area to ride their bicycles to work from their homes in Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, Morro Bay and Los Osos. Neither can they be expected to utilize public transportation as it is not currently a practical means of commuting to an 8 to 5 job. In addition, we would like to remind the Council that when the Planning Commission approved the PayLess/Scolari's shopping center with fewer than the required number of parking spaces, it cited the abundance of on-street parking on Johnson Avenue and Marsh Street as a primary basis for allowing the parking variance. Now you are being asked to replace many of those spaces with bike lanes. We support and encourage bicycle riders and their right to have access to safe travel conditions. We question whether the proposal before you meets the safety criteria as well as the needs of the larger community. We urge you to consider alternate routes or a combination of bike and parking lanes, where no parking spaces are sacrificed. Thank you for your consideration. Signature (Please print your name below your signature) Street Address Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. tz 2. ��aY _Tal e 1�z�o �� , �� . 3. I I O.� K. S a I rr,O '�, .^-., ' �i7rL::C�«�li• 4. Wzda- r 3c Lf r%a �"tc�� 5.. 13 0 Pam �y P �q��N� �SGsl �. /Ac1Juc.L+-. . 6. Kim E. Mrf}li s4e,r- 1304 Pt- _ a 7. o� Pio Avwi6s PkIj.5o 130{ K ✓ h M. F 1304 A' S;-, P.w 9. - o� B a U. Lt.L AC lo. c, jr i UW 11. Signature (Please print your na.ML- .low your signature) Street Add: Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 12. E2t 13. CI�R�Jt�1C.EY C—, DEA-L� 13�6 t3c.�c.� SL,O •��G D E'nIT` 14. /KI �?R,,as� � PI C n \ ,L• Vic t'1c i �`C 16.��CLrrX��LL ``cF1YXX�� 1 -2, t C kI� C Sf. U 17. S rr— L 18. l9gi /a L Swett , V'7✓ffC S L v.� 'P&C'JQ i 19. 20 24a ?-#wc)ho bW.s 21. r nn t c d r e.vJ `� . Gd•� S . L•O � eco 23. o►'w �j o.+w.++J \3 g Y�l�a�s h S 24. E �r- 2 �C /�/� S 25.:'' �1 .1'7 ��? z e: el C Lti l y;�ti` L c n�G e'tl m� 26. �/t� fr C iJ CfV & 27. ®i 1339 �lA 28. a ti r e r SL.D ci 31/01 29. LAw -- " '_"� Lo Signature (Please print your nan -low your signature) Street Add. _, Please indicate ` whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 3 -t' azo ��\� MAtzea 31. F /,31 �e 32. y,a 2 J l 33. D iQL�'S Sfti 34. �C "✓ 0 13 19 M,4rS14 /}t 35. 36. T" T �ics�Q-�(�r /3CX Jok c5o,. Ave- 6 w 37. SAAa' S a. drown.v 1339 7hcwSlti, -. 38. c., C /y12� . ���`' 39. C p_ S �30lo 40. S 4t-, pyo clic--2-l- 41. d vo ,y% v W -Z-�-%G d e-)r ti'I G - z� 13 43. -S CL o rve,5v 61 (3 "]l 1�`LGlscti1ti�1i�Z`l 44. aYit t p• l-RFt c 1�7( I--)fCi('{L 45. � ,'?� P P"K I p LLA- Cees) 3 /nn /I F/C. Fh7O'L 0ED 46. 197/ n-�A . .,Dpm//i 47. "�� I&F t/ Signature (Please print your nam._ .-low your signature) Street Add Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 12. -� 1331e r U < 4i, S' t��2 �, ,moo5 r n 13. UU 0 cT e 77e F. M; Il eY 14. � � 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Signature (Please print your nar, elow your signature) Street Adc. a Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 30. 6 i��oJo�rKs..vd6 /- � I r 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. August 31, 1993 Honorable Mayor Pinard, City Council, and Bicycle Advisory Committee: Re: draft BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN of June, 1993 Dear Mayor,Council and Bicycle Committee Members: We would like to commend you for an excellent Bicycle Transportation Plan. The Plan goes a long way towards meeting the overdue needs of bicyclists in San Luis Obispo. As both bicyclists and motorists who have lived in San Luis Obispo for 20 years, we are finally encouraged that the city is planning to make significant strides towards accommodating bicyclists fairly in our community. With the fulfillment of this plan we will feel encouraged and delighted to use our bicycles even more than we do now. We do,however,have some suggestions that we think will improve the plan. They are as follows: 1. South Street Hills area- Bike routes should not be established in and about the upper ridge and hillside areas. These routes should be kept for hikers/walkers only. This is a spectacular setting,especially for winter and spring walks overlooking the city. It should not be disturbed by bicyclists. The area consists of a unique serpentine landscape filled with birds and bugs, wildflowers,rare endemic species- and is best enjoyed close up at a walking pace-- taking in the natural sights and sounds, without the intrusion of any mechanical locomotion. The proposed bicycle route over the low saddle, connecting Woodbridge and Margarita Drive, and extending on to Broad Street, should be the only bicycle routes within the South Street Hills. 2. Bishop Street Commuter Route-Eastbound Bishop Street, beyond Florence Ave. to the top at Terrace Hill,is a 15% gradient--difficult for most to either walk or bicycle! A clear eastbound alternative should be established for commuters here. Also, should the route map show an underpass/overpass at Bishop Street and the S. P. railroad tracks. How will bicyclists cross the railroad and connect with South Street? 3. SPRR (within SLO City Limits) -If the railroad bicycle route is accomplished it will most likely become a primary commuter route for bicyclists. (The proposed designation is primarily recreational.) Change the designation for equal commuting and recreation use. 4. Southwood Drive-This Recreation/Alternative Commute Route designation should extend through Sinsheimer Park to Helena and Sydney Streets, connecting with Augusta and Bishop Streets. A high number of bicyclists already use this extension through the park, and the use will increase in the future. Sinsheimer Park and its facilities are prime destinations for many bicyclists. 5. Orcutt Road Creek Routes - Reduce from two to one route. One route,connecting Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road through this property is sufficient. The remaining route should be for walkers only. 6. Laguna Lake Park Bicycle Routes -The route shown extending over and around the hills near the northeast park boundary should be eliminated. This route should be kept for hikers only. Same reasons as in No.1, above, apply. 7. Poly Canyon - Since bicycle trails extending beyond the city limits are shown elsewhere on the Plan, the route up Poly Canyon should likewise be included. 8. BTP.n. 7. item D4- 'Bike Lane- No Parking" signs should be clearly visible, yet attractively designed, and well located. 9. BTP, 12.11. item G -Add: At "T" or other intersections occur, and where through- riding of bicycles will not interfere with normal traffic flow, green light signal for bicycles should be installed,or appropriate signing placed to permit continuous bicycle flow without stopping. Example: at the intersection of San Luis Drive and Johnson Avenue, uphill side. 10. BTP.p. 17. item B5- add: a.) Establish one or more bicycle campsites in or near the city within existing or proposed parks. Work with the County of San Luis Obispo to accomplish this aim. b.) Show the location of transit stations and bicycle shops on Bicycle Route Maps. c.) Along with Bicycle Clubs and others, sponsor an annual bicycle event, e.g., short to long rides originating from SLO; perhaps couple with the annual SLO Criterium events. We hope that these suggestions are helpful to you in finalizing the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Sincerely, Dale and Sharon Sutliff 1227 Sydney Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ph.: 544-4034 vocational cauaaL ! Maria marrows, M.D. Vocational Training 13194iiguera Street General Practice RE ; �242ava( O� San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Central Rehabifltation Cinic TEL: (805).541-6983 1330 Marsh St. �f'Xf{'19 pyi San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 543.272412728 7d S h �/pn Ue To Bicycle Committee of San Luis Obispo L � . July 9th 1993. The proposed bicycle lane will severely curtail parking in our neighborhooi where I . have . practiced and lived for the past 15 years. Our residence is 1319 Higuera and we are anxious to preserve the residential parking for owners and renters alike. Please take Mr. Paul Rys 's proposal under serious advisement; it promises a much needed solution. 1 . Ce tv 01 -- - - - -r it - - - - -- ---- --- --�9��- - _ - - -- LI �3f -- - - - MEETING �'•DO�i`I T/rut`7/a,P,�e u �� i p CDD DIR DATE - /- AGENDA O FIN DIR '�� p ACAO 0 FRE CHIEF -- �] G�prr )I; �iv DIr "SINCE 1922" CLEP.KlOHIG ❑ POLICE CHF d tdGtdlT TEhS� ❑ REG DIR August 30, 19 9 3 d 0RE4D �I.E ❑ UTILDIR Mayor Peg Pinard ❑ PERS DIR RECEIVED P.O. Box 8100 - C @� San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 AUG 3 1993 CITY qLEF.41< Dear Mayor Pinard, O.AN�U13 OBICPO.CA Thank you for the August Sth lunch, and fog includi.ag.. me in your business person discussion. I must admit the topics discussed were of no surprise to me. In all honesty I did not have to attend to be filled in on how the business community feels, I hear it constantly, "Will San Luis Obispos economic future survive its current transition?" . I try to be objective, however the current situation has me forming firm opinions . I do not want San Luis Obispo to turn into a mini L.A. Serious thought, however, must be given to the reality of our situation. Most individuals have a perception of their ideal place in which to live and work. And, for most living here, San Luis Obispo is that place. Unfortunately I am of the definite opinion that idealistic views are not always realistic . I beleive it is very important for the positive future of San Luis Obispo that we all look at issues from a realistic point of view. For the record, I am very much in favor of controlled growth. I can live with or without a COSTCO. Can San Luis Obispo, however, afford to loose the tax base COSTCO would provide to a neighboring community? People are going to shop at COSTCO anyway, why not allow them spend their money at home, in San Luis Obispo? Recently the Las Nomadas Golf resort was left off the general plan. What am I missing? I can not - find one valid reason for this development not to be welcomed with open arms. Tourists would visit, spend their money and go home. It seems to me this type of industry would satisfy the camp opposing population growth. Regarding bicycle lanes,; bicycle lanes would be a tremendous addition. I am, however, very much against where they are planned. The current staff proposals for turn lane pockets on Marsh are not as recommended by Associated Transportation Engineers (copy attached) . Why does the City waste tax payers dollars on engineering recommendations if they are ignored? Or is it what they call "going through the motions"? 784 HIGH STREET • P.O. BOX 1510 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93406 . 805/543-1138 COTTER #8324-6 FAX #805/543-1788 I am concerned the City will eliminate the loading zone adjacent to property I own on the corner of Chorro and Marsh. Associated Transportation Engineers recommends the left turn lane pocket be extended to 100 feet, the current staff proposal is less than 30 feet if you account for the loading zone. According to your staff person, Craig Anderson, the loading zone is hardly ever used and is included as a part of the turn pocket . Is this what he calls planning, or does he have a clue? Can you picture a truck in the loading zone/turn pocket at 4 :30pm? Will the planned traffic lane then become the turn pocket? This scene should be interesting at best . I would also like to point out the Cities map entitled "Marsh Street Bicycle Lane Proposal" (copy attached) is very misleading. The map illustrates 24 shaded areas as alternate or "adjacent parking" . Of the 24 shaded areas 22 are privately owned, although they are recommended as an equal to public parking garages/lots as described by your staff member Craig Anderson. He explained to me that this is to show motorists "alternate" places to park when the current bike lane proposal eliminates current spaces . When was the last time you parked your car in Rexall Drugs parking lot and shopped at another store for three hours? Your car would more than likely be towed, as it would from any of the 22 privately owned parking lots designated by the City as alternate or "adjacent parking" on their Bicycle Lane proposal . I appreciate your time and ask that consideration be given to all and that you not act solely for the benefit of the vocal minority. Sincerely, 7. Matt Qualgino CC : John Dunn Penny Rappa Bill Roalman Allen Settle Dave Romero MAYORPIN.CURLY ASSOCIATED TRAWSPORTATIOM EWINEERS J = 100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Santa Barbara, CA 93110 • FAX (805) 682-8509 • (805) 687-4418 = IIS Maynard Keith Franklin,P.E. E ' v f. p Robert L.Faris,P.E. R E: C Richard L.Pool,P.E. Scott A.Schell FEB 19 1993 ENG;%EEPING OW:YON C.ITy OE S/N LUIS 081SPO February 18, 1993 ATE #93015L01.LTR Mr. John Rawles City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR THE MARSH STREET RESTRIPING PROJECT, CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA The following letter presents the results of Associated Transportation Engineers' (ATE) level of service analysis on the Marsh Street Restriping Project. BACKGROUND The Marsh Street Restriping Project proposes to restripe the downtown one-way section of Marsh Street from the existing configuration of three through lanes to two lanes with bike lanes on each side of the street. The existing geometrics at the Marsh Street intersection approaches would also be modified. ATE analyzed the effects of the restdping project at the following three Intersections identified by the City.' 1. Santa Rosa Street/Marsh Street 2. Chorro Street/Marsh Street 3. Broad Street/Marsh Street INTERSECTION CONDITIONS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY City staff provided ATE with 1992 Noon and P.M. peak hour turning movement volumes, signal timing data, existing geometrics and lane widths, as well as the .proposed geometrics and lane widths for each of the three study intersections. Engineering . Planning . Parking . Signal Systems . Impact Reports . Bikeways . Transit EXHIBIT I Mr. John Rawles Page 2 February 18, 1993 Levels of service for the three signalized intersections were calculated using a computer software program published by the Federal Highway Administration. This software program emulates the signalized intersection level of service methodology outlined in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)'. Worksheets illustrating the level of service calculations are attached to this report. Forthe existing geometric scenario,the following lane configurations were assumed for the Marsh Street approaches at Chorro Street and Broad Street:a through-plus-left-turn lane, a through lane, and a through-plus-right-turn lane. The existing geometric configuration assumed at the Santa Rosa Street intersection included a left-turn lane, a through-plus-left-turn lane and a through-plus- right-turn lane. The proposed lane configurations assumed for the Marsh Street approaches at Chorro and Broad Streets included a separate left-turn lane, two through lanes, and a separate right-turn lane. At Santa Rosa Street, the proposed Marsh Street lane configuration included dual left-turn lanes, a through lane, and a through-plus-right-turn lane. The existing intersection signal timing data provided by the City was used in calculating levels of service for both the existing and future geometric scenarios. Table 1 lists the average vehicle delay and corresponding level of service for the three study intersections assuming the existing and proposed geometrics. TABLE 1 Existing and Proposed Delay And Level of Service Data Intersection Noon Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Marsh St./Santa Rosa St. 8.7 Sec./LOS B 7.8 Sec./LOS B 9.3 Sec./LOS B 8.2 Sec./LOS B Marsh St./Chorro St. 7.6 Sec./LOS B 7.4 Sec./LOS B 7.5 Sec./LOS B 7.6 Sec./LOS B Marsh StdBroad St. 6.6 Sec./LOS B 7.5 Sec./LOS B 6.4 Sec./LOS B 7.0 Sec./LOS B The data presented in Table 1 indicate that overall intersection operations would not be adversely affected by the proposed striping project. Vehicle delays and intersection levels of service would remain well within the LOS B range with the proposed striping modifications. In fact, the operation of several intersections would actually improve with the revised geometric configurations. ' Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1985. 1 Mr. John Rawles Page.3 February 18, 1993 ADEQUACY OF TURN POCKET LENGTHS At the request of City staff, ATE also analyzed the adequacy of the left- and right-turn pocket lengths proposed under the new striping plan. The following text discusses the storage lengths proposed at each of the three intersections. Marsh Street/Santa Rosa Street: According to preliminary City plans, the curb-adjacent left-turn lane and through-plus-right-turn lane would be approximately 65 feet in length. These short lengths would greatly reduce the capacity of these lanes as vehicles queuing In the center two lanes would effectively preclude their use. Given the heavy left-turn volumes experienced on this approach (686), it is recommended that the left-turn lane be lengthened to a minimum of 150 feet and that the through-plus-right-turn lane be lengthened to a minimum of 100 feet. Marsh Street/Chorro Street: According to preliminary City plans, the left-turn lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 70 feet in length and the right-turn lane would be 125 feet long. it is recommended that the left-tum lane be extended to a minimum length of 100 feet, given the peak hour left-turn volume of 90 vehicles. Marsh Street/Broad Street:According to preliminary City plans,the left-turn lane on Marsh Street would be approximately 100 feet in length and the right-turn lane would be 55 feet long. Given the current peak hour left-turn volume of 179 vehicles, it is recommended that the left-turn lane be extended to a minimum length of 150 feet. The right-turn lane should also be extended to a minimum length of 100 feet in order to be more functional. If the lengths discussed above are found to be ineffective after implementation, they may be increased in the future, at the cost of on-street parking spaces. It should be noted that these minimum lengths have been recommended in order to provide more effective capacity for the lanes, as their use will be influenced by vehicles queuing in the adjacent through lanes. This concludes our analysis and report on the Marsh Street Restriping Project. Please call me if you have any question regarding our findings. Associated Transportation Engineers Scott A. Schell, AICP Principal Transportation Planner SAS/JAH/MKF/wp Attachments: LOS Worksheets / C 1 !1 p Er, MARSH STREET I BICYCLE LANE PROPOSA . RN / I 7F IGIIERA STREET ARCHER STREET � CARMEL STREET 6 From 1093 Draft Bicycle Transportation 71en �` city O� Privately Owned Parkin g �L+ san LUIS O131sp( City Parking LEGEND Adjacent Parking _ \ : �] ,[� \� _ \ � \ Area __ - 1 I �� — r T� Parking Removal L F 1 � � \� Location n — _ - BEACH STREET NIPOMO STREET \\ L17 -- 1 __— } \0\00\111 \\ \ § xm \ 1 EN \ ` i \ BROAD STREET GARDEN STREET CHORRO STREET / "- ORRO STREET OSOS STREET –"— SANTA ROSA STREET z MEEi1N Z�PAGENDA , DATE - l-P3 ITEM #=_ August 21, 1993 To the Members of City Council City of San Luis Obispo The undersigned homeowners of Murray, Benton and Meinecke Streets are unhappy with the current volume and speed of traffic on our streets. These concerns were presented at the DKS traffic study in 1990; the consultant concluded that a significant problem existed in the area and made several recommendations to address the problem. Now a new proposal, a bike boulevard on Broad Street, threatens to further aggravate existing traffic problems and increase pedestrian safety issues at a time when many families with young children are living in the neighborhood. We submit the following as solutions to providing bike lanes without jeopardizing the vitality and safety of our neighborhood: 1_ Begin the bicycle boulevard south of Ramona, north of Meinecke. The proposal would reduce traffic in the Meinecke/Murray/Broad neighborhood, while providing bicycle access to Lincoln. 2. Add bulb outs at Murray and Broad, Murray and Chorro, Meinecke and Broad, and Meinecke and Chorro. Construct these bulb outs to discourage an increase in use of Meinecke and Murray Streets as arterial streets. 3. Install a bike lane instead of a bike boulevard on Broad Street. The net effect would be insignificant change in current traffic pattersn. Traffic on Murray and Meinecke would remain a significant problem, but an increase resulting from a bicycle boulevard would not be realized. The undersigned agree that a reduction of traffic is fundamental to the viability and integrity of our neighborhood. Allowing increased traffic will destroy the neighborhood identity. KOUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR AO ❑ FIN DIR CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF ❑ ATTORNEY ePW DIR I�CLERIVORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ M GMT_TEAM _❑ REC DIR_ _ ❑ C READ FILE ❑ UTIL DIR f e � _ 0 PERS DIR S-T. 0 r �vE - NAME ADDRESS �� Y � 1 1 /q� 7/3 c Rl � --Ck RYo7Sz M � ,'I< -e C- kt I&L, -z7- 3a Fl-a r) 1-2- 77 `t3 � ID 9-3;v7 O-S qj -14� J :T-fo 3 S Bell4l.L- Wc-�j jL D 7) 'Si-c )3�42� 1 (./� lie NAME ADDRESS �?7 �. 7zr � MEETING ' ""r AGENDA 9 DATE _._ : M # m � XI r/� V� N c mwO x.10 _im C CO m 0 .2 -9 , O OW y spm ❑ — Y - !a/ W m c`awm T ppm > F- me ° Ei° �Y v �® Ov dl W ° O ° 06. r LLcC rn C Lll ? O ' . .p W 3 Z co LL m O_ //R� m 0 ;:• V z wW` _F' c win ass= 0 P% ®z Y . ;� MEN 04 (D C, � . ■® (M) > _V = O =01J z c 0 >- W = mom U 0[ '00 -c ow F— a)— Y I ~ (q = c m a JOr -,q) o -:g M m c 3 H 0 Q L�, O ` U LLJErG6. . m �z ® AUG 3 T 1993 OCITY COUNCIL : Q � O MRLu1s oslseo,CA a0Mimi 0 Lu ` FE L1.1 :.. ® \ 0 ® m ` I ( Ilesm L T Llow T s r. y �y I N/ O � f0/) cu ® O C r c - c -r' I .6'.'.. g c 1- CC 4 T a) c COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR ® Y Y �AO ❑ FIN DIR *N - i' ��A � co 13 EIRE CHIEFO a = UkATTORNEY VW Din O lla CLERWORIG ❑ POLICE CH - — M (a •V ❑ MGMTTEF.IN ❑ REC DIR r Z CO ❑ C RJADFILE ❑ UTIL DIR { 0 PERS DIR CO) S c O o C CD 0fH'CD 0 _ D- 0 _ =r CD cc ® ® (DD CSD Ccr CD AD :3 S CD j N 7 CD `: Al Z0 fn N ID (CD O OCD 3 O °M CDp CAD COD O .y. `� ¢°� ,� 7 (D N = O -% p. V > '� G' S O -� �• S 3 CD Q' O- O < 0 CD CD co 2 CD 7 c- CD �' S CD ® 0 LQ O O O § CD 5. O CS O ^~ 'p -O�. cc A `� co CSD 7C' S C2 ° y N a CSD � _ Al O a1 q� O O p_ S ¢1 CC Al p CC 7c p O C = 1 3 Q_' ° A• .y_+ CC ^fit y y S U) .� 3• O C7 O 0 ° .C« C ° CSD 7 CD C 'C C r z C y � O a O y ::r N y. ° r. CD W ca COD CD -0 Q S O y CD 'C O 0 r N .* O () S N 1 CD CC A ° CD e y O c l< O r-1. A CL '� 3 _ O O O O O Cl) 1 1 a p O 7° cQ pAj � 0 O CD O �' p O p 2. ® O =rf° ccn 3 CD CD p1 CD S CSD r .pi to c CD ID z0 c N � C•� � '.p A Cl)y y rp*. (�D � oo G1 a .0 O O AL 'fl `G N CCD (A O C ° .« 3 O SD ID P-PO O Q O "' O ca CSD O Q n 0 0 O 0. 0 . n m CD PIP . .O .. _ 0 CD 0Q t••r.'� 1 _ MARSH STREET BICYCLE LANES "MORE" INFORMATION SHEET In an effort to congest traffic and minimize bicycle safety, the city's bicycle committee has presented a very one-sided and misleading information sheet on the Marsh Street bicycle lanes. On August 31, the San Luis Obispo city council will consider adopting this bicycle plan. Please read this fact sheet, and compare it to their information sheet and, if possible, be at the city council meeting to present your views. The installation of bike lanes on Marsh Street would result in the elimination of one of the three lanes of traffic on Marsh Street. Turn pocket lanes would have to be added at selected (if not all) intersections. Massive parking removal will be necessary to accommodate these turn lanes. If the recommended turn lane length, as proposed by the Associated Transportation Engineering report, is used, up to 35 parking spaces out of 95 will be eliminated on Marsh Street between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Streets. Provided seperately is information for some of the more commonly asked questions about the Marsh Street bicycle proposal. Attached is a chart showing: 1) The currently proposed turn pocket lengths as listed on the Marsh Street information sheet handout and parking lost 2) The actual likely parking lost 3) The originally proposed turn pocket lengths and parking lost 4) The recommended turn pocket lengths and parking lost You will notice that on some streets there is a considerable difference between the recommended turn pockets and the turn pocket lengths as provided on the information sheet. WHY ARE BIKE LANES BEING PROPOSED FOR BOTH SIDES OF MARSH STREET? Generally, bicycle lanes are installed on arterial streets whenever no acceptable alternate route can be found. It has been shown, beyond a doubt, that high volume commercial district arterial streets are the most dangerous bike lanes possible. Rather than using Marsh Street, there are ample alternate solutions in the works to help bicyclists better share the road. SHOULDN'T BICYCLISTS RIDE ON A STREET WITH LESS TRAFFIC? With quiet streets such as Pacific and Pismo available, it is surprising to see the Bicycle Committee and advocates among the city staff still trying to push through the Marsh Street project. The Sierra Club, the Downtown Business Improvement Association, and the SLO Chamber of Commerce all favor bike lanes on Pacific, or Pacific and Pismo Streets, because it is safer for the bicyclist, allows for a larger and better bike lane, and will allow a smooth traffic flow on Marsh Street. There are no insurmountable major obstacles in using Pacific and Pismo streets. The necessary modifications are affordable and there are no negative circulation impacts for using the Pacific-Pismo Street bike lane proposal. - The Pacific-Pismo tandem proposal would result in absolutely no parking spaces being lost. Both streets would still have full traffic flow in a one-way direction. The cost of changing the stop signs and adding signals is within the budget of the bicycle committee's funds. Bicycles, like motorists, will always want the most convenient route to their destinations. The Marsh Street proposal is being touted by the bicycle committee as the best, because it is the easiest and most convenient for the bicycle riders. Although bicycle riders constitute a minority of the users of Marsh Street, the bicycle committee feels that the convenience factor for these bicyclists outweigh the safety for the bicyclists and the needs of the community as a whole. WHAT WILL THESE BIKE LANES COST? It is impossible for the bicycle committe to compute the overall cost for the changeover on Marsh Street. The bicycle committee and staff have taken no effort to look into the economic impact of bike lanes on Marsh St. The planning staff feels that higher congestion on Marsh and Higuera Streets will discourage vehicle use and therefore encourage alternate transportation. The effect on patrons using Marsh Street is considered unimportant. HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WILL BE LOST? The bicycle committee states that only 17 spaces would be removed in the entire B.I.A. district. These numbers are distorted in order to make the passage of the Marsh Street bike lanes easier. Accurate figures, that take into account loading zones and realistic turn pocket lengths are much more difficult to figure than the bicycle committe would like to have you believe. In fact,Terry Sanville, a city staff member proposing Marsh Street bike lanes, has said that"if the currently proposed tum pockets do not work, then we will take all the parking spaces needed to make them work." In counting the parking meters and using data from the SLO City staff, 35 out of 95 spaces on Marsh St.reet between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Streets will likely be lost. HOW WILL THE REDUCTION OF LANES AFFECT TRAFFIC FLOW? On Marsh Street, eliminating only 17 parking spaces, traffic would not flow. The information sheet cites ar independent traffic engineering report, done by Associated Transportation Engineers. To compute this report, the city provided A.T.E. with turn pocket lengths and traffic flow statistics. A.T.E.'s recommendation is for turn pocket lengths two to three times longer than the bicycle committee is currently proposing. Traffic flow and existing lane geometrics were either understated or incorrectly conveyed to A.T.E. WHO CAN I CONTACT TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL? You may contact Craig Anderson or Terry Sanville at the Planning Department at San Luis Obispo City Hall. Both of these gentlemen will give you their current views for Marsh Street. If you wish to find out the B.I.A. views contact the B.I.A. at our office. WHAT CAN I DO? Show up at San Luis Obispo City/County Library, Community Room, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday August 31 and talk to your friends and neighbors. Help San Luis Obispo take a step forward rather than a leap back. y A FEW BIKE PLAN OBJECTIONS! The idea should be to make bicycling more attractive, not motoring less attractive. A reduction in motoring use should be through education not manipulation. This plan fails to correctly identify and deal with need for cross town bicycle lanes (High School and Johnson area to and from the Laguna Area) It's seems the bicycle needs of Cal Poly are the primary focus, rather than the city as a whole. The bike committee did not consider aquedately the needs of a parent Irving on the non-poly side of Higuera with kids enrolled in the High School or Middle School? The bike plan doesn't accomodate anyone riding bikes from the Johnson sloe of town to movies in Madonna,or to the highschool and back from Laguna Area. A.T.E. ENGINEERING REPORT ON MARSH STREET DOES NOT SHOW MARSH WILL WORK WITH TWO LANES! Staff chooses to use median traffic (Wed) rather than peak traffic (Thursday or Friday) for ATE reports on traffic flow to show Marsh Street can lose one lane and still not congest. Staff failed to explain that the A.T.E. report ASSUMES the proposed turnpocket lanes are always long enough to hold any and all cars waiting to make a turn (that is two traffic lanes and two infinitely long turn lanes are better than three traffic lanes) Staff is using this A.T.E. report as proof Marsh Street traffic flow will not be hurt by bike lanes. For more details on problems with A.T.E. report ask engineering,public works or B.I.A.for copy of a letter from BIA Parking Committee dated 8/25/93. Staff did not use sufficiently conservative traffic data to allow a reasonable margin of error. Staff chooses not to factor into the data given to A.T.E.for their traffic report; the impact of PEAK LOADS (special events),the new DOWNTOWN CENTER opening, (with a six screen theater, Saturday matinees all day). future use in five or ten years (using planned city growth) or even use figures that would allow a margin of error. All data and geometry was.slanted to help obtain results to support staff concepts Bike Committee and Staff failed to submit bike lane removal to the BIA for parking removal consent. Staff chose to bypass the BIA by using its influence to skip the BIA. SCOPE AND POWER OF BICYCLE COMMITTEE WARRANTS A MORE BALANCED & INDEPENDENT CITIZENS COMMITTEE . Throughout the hearing process the Bicycle Committee and Staff has functioned more as a propaganda machine than an information gathering and evaluating body. The Bicycle committee failed to ccnsider n. ressar%, public input. For a committee to asses public input it must consider many different ideas and needs before arriving at its recommendations and reaching its conclusions. . The Bicycle Committee is IPgendary for not oaying attention to ideas that do not agree with its predisposed phirisophical positions. Current committee members did not find out of the committee via the inconspicious public posting but by knowing the"right"people. Bicycle Committee consists of ONLY Government and Ex-Public Sector employees. In essence the members of this Bicycle Committee were selected on the basis of"correct"opinions on alternate transportation, r.e. bikes,cars and the ecology. Not on the basis representing ALL the bicycling transportation n s an opinionsof the-community. Members were not selected by a truly open process whereby diverse opinions would ensure a more fair and reasonable outcome. STAFF REFUSED TO CONSIDER PISMO OR PISMO/PACIFIC BIKE BOULEVARDS Instead staff created a bogus Pacific Street proposal that eliminated 108 spaces. Staff just before the hearing indirectly notified affected businesses on Pacific saying that their bogus plan #10 was a BIA/Chamber approved plan. BIA had not even seen it! Staff and Bike Committee then shot down its own "bogus plan" #10 using the reaction generated by its stories of 108 lost spaces, bulb-outs and traffic interruption on Pacific Street. This maneuver is NOT what happens when something is actually considered. SPECIAL PERKS FOR STAFF BICYCLING ADVOCATES Agenda item B-7 authorizes bicycle advocates on city staff to engage in competition with other cities to be a top ten cycling city. Competition for this award may easily be contrary to the interests of the general population and tcwn on the whole. City Staff Bicycle Advocates are using San Luis Obispo as their toy by seeking official authorization to compete in a bicycle magazine"coolness"contest with taxpayer's money. They are also seeking to authorize freebee field trips to investigate other successful bike plans in the towns on the taxpayer's time and at the taxpayer's expensel MORE REGULATIONS AND BURDENS This plan imposes a whole new layer of regulations and costs for any new business that would consider S.L.O. and who could provide a significant number of decent jobs in S.L.0. The current bicycle plan mandates changes in both substance and especially additude to all sections of the general plan and all plans in all other areas of local Government regarding zoning issues, right-of-way and other regulations that might affect bike use and alterante transportation. Lots of special items are tossed in; showers for bike riders (even if none work for you), bike lockers(even though the ones in the parking garage are not fully used)and morel The secret politics within this document do far move than just promote bicycle use and alternative transportation. This document was designed as another anti-growth tool for the planning department to use to keep S.L.O. the way it never was. RECCOMENDATIONS: PLEASE, reject THIS bike plan and appoint a new bicycle task force. Direct the NEW committee to actually work with the BIA, Chamber of Commerce and local entites, to develop a LESS INVASIVE and MORE COMPLETE bicycle transportation plan. A bike plan to promote and increase bike use not a bike plan designed to limit and restrict not only autmotive use but further discourage any new jobs or development within our community. -f SUPPORT PACIFIC AND PISMO BOULEVARDS INSTEAD OF MARSH BIKE LANES MANIPULATION AND DECEPTION IN ACTION: Below is the Staff report on Pismo Bike Lanes for tonight's hearing. The bold type is what seemed to actually happen. As a alternative to establishing bike lanes on Marsh Street, the Chamber of Commerce, BIA, and Sierra Club (Alternative Transportation Task Force) requested that the Committee support the concept of establishing Pacific Street as a "Bicycle Boulevard." The,Staff met with Chamber, BIA and Sierra Klub representatives to identify design options for the boulevard. The Staff evaluated ten options and presented this evaluation to the Bicycle Committee (see Exhibit,8). Committee and staff had one meeting with a B.I.A. member on Pacific Street issue. Staff on their own"cooked up" ten bogus options using only the smallest amount of B.I.A. input. The Bicycle Committee and Staff subsequently shot down all options including option#10. The central issue was the removal of parking spaces on Marsh Street needed to establish bicycle lanes and turn pockets at key intersections vs. the feasibility and attractiveness of using Pacific Street as a parallel bicycle route. Option #10,. the preferred option of the Chamber of Commerce, BIA and Sierra Club, would cause the loss of about 108 parking spaces on Pacific None of the Pacific Street options, including Option 410,were ever a B.I.A.endorsed idea. It is unlikely the B.I.A. would reccommend an option that would remove 108 spacesl B.I.A.found out"second hand"of the"Staff"plan for Pacific Street. There was no time before the Committee hearing to evaluate or correct all the false information. At the public hearing on the various options, the Committee heard near-unanimous opposition to.the concept of the bicycle boulevard from residents and businesses along Pacific Street. (Also, refer to petition from Pacific Street property owners included in attached Exhibit 11.) The Committee voted to support the Bicycle Plan's recommendation -- i.e. establish Class II-A bicycle lanes on both sides of Marsh.Street. Objections were based on elimination of parking and restricted access--Pacific/Pismo combination does not remove any parking or limit access. This public response was manipulated by Staff members to justify their refusal to consider options other than Marsh Street. The Staff concurs with the Committee's action and does not support the Pacific Street bicycle boulevard concept because: • Marsh Street provides a more direct .and, convenient route into and through the downtown. This is only true from"Cal Poly(West of Higuera)"point of view-for the rest of San Luis Obispo, ' Pacific and Pismo come before Marsh and Higuera. They are exactly as direct but much nicer, and Pacific and Pismo offer a unique opportunity for SAFE cycling. • Pacific Street is too narrow'(34 foot roadway)•to accommodate bike lanes, travel lanes and parking. Not with Pacific AND Pismol With traffic one way (same as Marsh Street). One lane for bicycles and one lane for cars, no parking Is removed. This would have been more acceptable to all Pacific Street residents and Businesses. • Changes to Pacific Street to..establish a bicycle boulevard would change travel patterns, limit access, eliminate;,significant amounts of parking, and cause congestion on arterial cross streets. Not true with the Pacific AND Pismo Boulevards. NO parking is removed anywhere, no decrease in access, no significant change in travel patterns and would cause no congestion. • The cost of implementation could be significant since key in grsections may need to be signalized. Funds for necessary three signals are well within the funding of the Bicycle Committee. No impact on financial health of downtown and no DANGEROUS bike lanes on Marsh Street. Bike Boulevards are supposed to always be preferrable to bike lanes in heavy traffic. (F-1 in current bike plan) For additional background on this1well:discussM proiect, see Committee minutes attached a$ Exhibit 9. Neither Staff nor Bicycle Committee has seriously evaluated the Pacific and Pismo bike Boulevard concept.. - The staff"cooked up"a bunch of Pacific Street proposals, told merchants on Pacific they would lose parking,then in less than two hours of hearings totally discouraged any interest other than Marsh Street. The Bicycle Committee has never appeared to have actually considered anything other than Marsh Street. PLEASE HELP CREATE SAFE BIKE BOULEVARDS FOR S.L.O. LET THE B . I .A . ®® ITS JOB ! Downtown merchants go unheard on Marsh Street bike lanes BACKGROUND: The B.I.A. is the City Parking District, created by the merchants of S.L.O. to pay for and create parking All merchants in the B.I.A. district must pay business license fees twice! (Once to the city and once to the Business Improvement Association - a city committee) The B.LA. is the entity that has jurisdiction when it comes to parking in the B.I.A. Parking District. The B.I.A. Parking Committee is the portion of the B.I.A. that deals directly with parking. The B.I.A. Parking Committee has never had the issue of the removal of parking on Marsh Street brought before it for its review or approval. The actual number of spaces eliminated was not released by staff until right before this hearing. It is possible that it is illegal for the city to appoint a special interest group and give it the authority to remove parking from the B.I.A. Parking District without going through the B.I.A.!. The City Council should reserve its authority over the removal of parking until after the BJ,, has heard the issues, worked with the Bicycle Committee and actually decided its idea of the best options with its parking spaces and bike lanes within its district. As with other agencies and parts of the City, the City Council is the place of appeal. The council should not allow staff to bypass the normal legitimate procedures. A vital step has been skipped because of Special Interest Groups among Staff who have manipulated the situation to their advantage. RECOMMENDATION: Please remove the bike plan from the agenda, or do not approve it in its current form. Re-appoint a new Bike Committee not dominated by staff and not made exclusively of government employees. Have the new committe represent the bike needs of the entire community; businesses, employees, parents and kids, not just Cal Poly students and Government employees. R.W. Ferris, B.I.A. Parking Committee Co-Chair File DSK2:PARK1 . LET1201, 101 Printed on 25—Aug.-9:3 15: 10:26 TO: Mr. Wayne Peter 17 City Engineer Mr. Mike McClusky, Public Works Mr. John Rawles, Public Worl:s 25 August 1993 Dear Gentlemen, We at the BIA Parking Committee have been reviewing the bicycle committee's Plans for Marsh St. We feel that the following details are very confusing and need to be clarified: A) TURN POCKETS: 1 ) For Marsh Street traffic to flow continuously with only two lanes, all intersections must have the appropriate length turn Pockets. If this is not true—' why? 2) The restriping of lower Higuera was successful because of an extremely long turn lane and low turn volume. This is not the case with the proposed Plan on Marsh St. Turn Pocket length is the key factor in the restriping of Marsh St. being feasible from a traffic flow standpoint. Please explain and comment on the discrepencies between: a) The original Proposed turn Pocket lengths as given 'to A.T.E. to use in Preparing their report. b ) Turn Pocket lengths recommended by the traffic engineer-iris firm (A. T. E. ) to show the feasiblity of eliminating a lane. c ) The actual turn Pocket .lengths on the- proposed tricycle lane information sheet. There is up to a 3—to-1 difference between recommended as necessary turn Pocket lengths in the A. T.E. report, and currentl-y Proposed turn Pock.et, lenshts on the information sheet. 3) Necessary turn Pockets for all streets that cross Marsh St. need to be included in calculating the number of Parking spaces that are going to be removed. 4) As Peal; traffic flow occurs downtown on Thursdays and Frida•,•s, the length of the turn Pockets recommended by the transportation engineering company could well be insufficient. The report was based on WEDNESDAY traffic flow! Thursday and Friday traffic is greater than on Wednesday! B) MARSH STREET AND THE NEW DOWNTOWN CENTRE: No additional right—hand turn Pocket length has been Proposed for the Marsh Street Parking garage. The new Downtown Centre will radically increase this Parking garage's use. Why is there no larger turn lane allocation for the Parking gar-ase? Won't cars going in to the Parkins garage at times eliminate one lane of Marsh Street during Peak garage use? The new Downtown Centre has not been factored into the traffic data given to the traffic engineers- why? Please comment on the additional traffic that will be generated dur•ins the Peak DAY traffic Periods by the new multi-screen theatre and .the increased use of Marsh St. generated by the new Downtown Centre. C) FACTUAL DISC:REPENCIES AND INADEQUATE CONCERN FOR TRAFFIC FLOW: In light of the slar•ins .discr•epencies in the handout given to the Public versus the needed turn Pocket lengths as cited by the traffic engineers in their report, we would appreciate Your• department's basis for supporting the new configuration WITHOUT full consider•atif.n of the following 1 ) The recommended turn Pocket lensths 2) Downtown Centre traffic 3) Considering a larger• turn lane for• the Parkins garage 4) Turn Pockets on Garden St. 5) Downtown's Possible traffic needs two, five, and ten •rears into the future 6) Fire department and safety input . With only two lanes, the ability to Pull over• for• fire and Police vehicles is greatly reduced. D) THE A. T. E. REPORT I'S BASED ON INACCURATE EXISTING GEOMETRICS AND ASSUMES INFINITE TURN POCKET LENGTH: The report generated' by ATE ASSUMUES that at ALL times, ALL turning cars ar•e able to store in turn PocG:;ets ( ie: turn Pockets of infinite length) . Using this assumption, all the Pr•ogr•am really sags is that 4 lanes ar•e better• than 3. In Preparing this report, the cit•. staff did riot tell ATE of turn lanes that already exist on Marsh St. (right turn lanes on to Broad St. and Santa Rosa St. ) . This further decreases the accuracy and value of. ATE-'s report. E) THE GOALS OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY PLANNING STAFF ARE IN DIRECT C'•ONFLICT WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW NEEDS OF DOWNTOWN: The city Planning staff of San Luis Obispo has stated that Marsh St. traffic needs to be more congested in order to slow traffic down and to Promote alternate transportation. B•, making the auto roadway system less functional , the cit••r Planning staff is trying to create a more time consuming and miserable experience for drivers that want to spend their• time and money downtown. These customers will take their• business elsewhere. In the city Planning staff's view, Promoting alternate transportation is achieved by: 1 ) Slowing down traffic by eliminating a lane on one of San Luis Obispo's major- thoroughfares 2) By increasing the congestion on an already crowded street, the Planning Staff hopes to force customers out of their cars and therefore "encourage" alternate ARKING SPACES LOST BY PLACING BIKE LANES ON MARSH ST. Handout Sheet Likely Minimum City Originally ATE Rec. Parking Removal Proposed Nipomo 0 L-1 0 N/A R-2 Broad L-1 (30') L-1 L-1 (100') L-4(150') R-3 (100') R-3 R-3(100') R-3(100') Garden 0 R-1 0 N/A L-2 Chorro L-2(30'+) L-3 L-3(70') L-4(100') R-2(40') R-2 R-5(125') R-5(125') Garage Parking 0 0 0 N/A spaces R-2 more LZ likely needed (-2 in place) Morro L-0 L-3 L-3 N/A R-2 R-2 R-2 Osos L-3 L-3 0 N/A R-1 R-1 (100') Santa Rosa L-3' (100') L-4 L-3(65') L-4(150') R-1 (65') R-1 R-1 (65') R-1 (1001) Handout says 3 but actually shows 4: (4 spaces needed). Total Parking on Marsh between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Sts. lost is 31 to 35 out of 95 total spaces. Total parking on Marsh St. in B.I.A. District lost is 34 to 38 out of 122 total spaces. N/A-A.T.E. (Associated Transportation Engineers)did not study these intersections. L-Left Lane R=Right Lane LZ=Loading Zone The number to the right of lane=parking spaces lost ransport ation. 3) The effects on business, traffic flow and commerce are considered by the Planning staff to be of little or no importance. F) PLEASE HELP WITH OUR C ONCEkNS: We at the HIA Parking Committee de.speratel•,• need a clear, accurate, and Professional statement on the impact that these bike lanes will have on ALL of Marsh Street, not ..lust the three intersections surveyed. We are Puzzled that neither San Luis Ubispo's Engineering nor Public Works Departments have made a clear statement or correctly identified the actual Parking that will need to be eliminated ( including loading zones) using realistic turn Pocket lengths recommended by the ATE report. This report is being used as the basis for the workability of the Marsh Street restr•iping, -yet its recommendations and results are being ignored. As for the ATE report itself, the aforementioned departments might well question its over-all validity and accuracy, considering the data manipulation and actual goals of the Planning department. We would ask that Your office tale a strons and realistic stand on the impact of Parking and traffic flow through the heart of our city. In later- wears, your actions ( of lack of actions ) or, this matter will have major long—range impact on the transportation flow and resulting health of our community. We need additional information on the questions and concerns outlined in this letter. A representative from •,•cur committee could do a verbal Presentation at our next Parkins committee meeting. We meet on the first Friday of. every month. Thank You for "lour time in reviewing our- concerns. Please do not he.sistate to contact me if I can be of assistance in clar'if'ring or- further explaining our questions. An informative- response from •,•ou would be greatl -y appreciated. i Sincr'er•elY, Richard W. Ferris BIA Parking Committee ETI C. AGENDA f ...IEITEM # 2250 King Street #25 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 August 31, 1993 QrP9UNCIL ❑ COD IR ❑ R DIR VPII�j E CHIEF 9FMDRNEY DIR Mayor Peg Pinard and Members of the City Council UrCLERKCRG O POUCE CHF City of San Luis Obispo ❑ M bITTE4.M .❑ REC DIR 990 Palm Street ❑ R FILE ❑ UTIL DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 j � 0 PERS DIR xx SUBJECT: Tonight's City Council hearing on the proposed Bicycle Transportation Plan Honorable Mayor and City Council: Due to prior commitments, I regret that I will not be able to attend tonight's hearing concerning the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Instead, I wish to express my support for the Plan by means of this letter. I live and work in the City of San Luis Obispo, and commute daily by bicycle. I am an experienced cyclist, and will continue to bicycle to work whether additional bicycle lanes are striped or not. However,in order to encourage bicyclists with relatively little experience to leave their cars at home and use a bicycle to get to work or do an errand, they must be encouraged. This will be accomplished by sending a clear signal to bicyclists and motorists that bicycles are welcomed on the streets of San Luis Obispo. Designated bike lanes will provide the necessary incentive for many to switch from cars to bicycles, at least for some of their trips in and around town. The benefits of a greater percentage of bicycle trips are enormous: better air quality, less noise,fewer parking places, and a much more human-oriented, rather than automobile-oriented downtown. The Chamber of Commerce's endorsement of the Plan should be sufficient evidence that the Plan will not have a long-term detrimental effect on city merchants. The Plan is a step toward maintaining our city as a unique and attractive place to live and visit. Sincerely, ERIC N. W1ER fs� 1`l\,\S MEET IN , AGENDA TEl-9 ITEM # �. SAWN LWN COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR XFCHIEF AfC YRNEY 0111 August 31, 1993 LEP.K/OMG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ MGMT TEEN ❑ REC DIR ❑ CRtAQFILE ❑ UTILDIR Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Cou / p PERS DIR _ City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 L k-..1= RE: Bicycle Circulation in Downtown San Luis Obispo AUG 3 11993 CITY COUNCIL Dear Mayor and Council Members: SAN LUIS OBISP.O, CA The Business Improvement Association Board of Directors would like to ask the City Council to refer the Marsh Street Bike project to the coalition of the Sierra Club Alternative Transportation Task Force; Chamber of Commerce, and BIA to work with the City staff on an alternative to the current proposal. The BIA has worked with the Chamber of Commerce and Sierra Club to develop support for a bike boulevard concept on Pacific Street. We feel that the tremendous effort that has gone. in to gaining support for this concept among the business and environmental communities represents a strong basis for successful implementation of this plan. In addition, the BIA would like to state its agreement with the following and request your consideration of our position: 1. Support the City Bike Committee on it' s proposal for a' bike boulevard on Morro Street between Pismo and Santa Barbara. 2. Recommend that no action on bike lanes for Marsh Street be taken due to conflicting information from staff and the City' s consultant. In the interim, refer the plan to the Sierra Club, BIA, Chamber of Commerce and City staff for exploration of the bike boulevard concept on Pacific or Pismo r and Pacific as a couplet. 3. Support the continuance of the City Bike Committee with membership re-organized to include business and other community representatives. P.O.Bax 1402-San Luis Obispo-C4.93406.805/541-0286 4. Support an existing City staff member to perform bike coordinating functions for the community at least half-time, and to have this responsibility in designated function and title. 5. Request that no City staff member have voting privileges on the City' s Bike Committee. 6. Support the continued implementation of a bike master plan. The BIA recognizes bicycles as a viable means of Alternative transportation and is supportive of a bike transportation plan. The BIA would urge the City Council . to give the coalition the opportunity to explore and develop creative alternatives to the current proposed plan. We feel that we can continue to work together on the development of a plan that works to the benefit of all community residents. We hope that the City Council will give direction to the staff to work favorably with the BIA, Chamber of Commerce, and Sierra Club. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I CK, Dick Cleeves, President Business Improvement Association t%;,,-LTING 7'oolonAGENDA MATE S ITEM # CENTRAL REHABILITATION CLINIC, INC. • 1334 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo,Califomia 93401 0 (805)543-5144 August 31, 1993 To: San Luis Obispo City Council Members RE: Petition regarding Bike Lanes as Proposed by the San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee. The following signatures are employees of the Central Rehabilitation Clinicwhich falls into an area that would be directly affected by the proposed bike lane. The majority of the employees drive from distant areas to the job site and must use on street parking. As a Medical Clinic we serve a large number of older patients and disabled persons who would be severely affected by the reduced parking this bike lane would create. Many of the patients served here are not able to walk distances. We urge you to consider alternate plans which would not affect the parking spaces. Sincerely, r � Regina M'. AUscfn, M.D. Medical Director F&rACAO ❑ CDD DIR ❑ FIN DIR _ ❑ FIRE CHIEF F � Y �lN D!RRIG ❑ POLICE CHFAUD 3 1993 S,M ❑ RECOIR ELE ❑ UTIL DIR f. C!Tl'CLE!'rC J N L PSRS DIR r: L. CENTRAL REHABILITATION CLINIC, INC. • 1334 Marsh Street,San Luis Obispo,California 93401 • (805)543-5144 PETITION AGAINST BIKE LANE ON JOHNSON AVENUE WHICH WOULD NARROW TRAFFIC LANES AND REDUCE ON STREET. PARKING. NAM/)E Printed SIGNATUR1E� �f HOME ADDRESS CIT t l:Y 1 Q rl S C 11 `iit..c ='tJ [.� �r fit-0 C./t' •'�yQ.Qr F5 2Cat�ZrlcreS CLL G'Ceca✓1'>O C)Q �azf�T �,sii/Z l E,t.iE ��A Z Z,9 ���Lc�2�cc� �1 Q� �d%o �c fI.�LSa�•C' �•'E. �• .1•c-_ jcdt' Fat f- Ieid o(c: AzE- SLO Lml'!mj OY m(L C i? e .e2 S• 0n cl.✓iS wd $I}�uiwe,j 'NL �mw '�h curt -k/AR-mo m. Sr-la AJ& 1,sq � Ili S-rReeT 6,sosnS -�q'i,- '(e,0g4lr.Rx. MO L.LI E DEVOIF Lyda. ��� 3� �r�a- Ca�.��.aC0. q3 Emr' 3 I-l4adZ.P.A O z�L,� Sc U C'�t g3yC,(rA i MEETTKG? �AGENL. S � A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION MORRIS £,'•BUTTERY 1304 Parc street L.' Post Office Box 730 C.. ., is ✓, San Luis Obispo I:•.?:: California 93406-030 ;'. V, Telephone 8051543-4171 Fax A'umber 8051543-0752 f A Maryellen R. Simkins August 31, 1993 Legal Administrator r•= 1 San Luis Obispo City Council ; = City Hall [s San Luis Obispo, CA By Hand Delivery L Re: Bike Lane Proposal Ladies and Gentlemen: ! ' For your review prior to this evening's meeting, enclosed please find copies of a petition circulated to the residents and I` businesses on Pacific Street between Johnson and Pepper and on the south side of Marsh Street between Johnson and Pepper in opposition to the proposal to install bike lanes on Johnson Avenue. �. We appreciate your consideration and look forward to presenting the W'0__ original__of the petition_ at_this evening's meeting. _ kvery truly yours, I.7 ' I_ E, rti• ELEV ]EIEF' IEF _IEC .. MC V F, ED HF SEC DIR 3 c AUG 3 1993 k F, _- Clry CLrrx =- - J , A*mn� A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION A V RE, MORRIS & BUTTERY 1304 Pacific Street Post Office Box 730 San Luis Obispo California 93406-0730 To: Our Neighbors on Pacific and Marsh Streets Telephone 80515430 171 TOihb8051543-0752 7 Fax Number 805!543--075252 . ' Re: Bike Lanes Maryellen 1L Simkins Legal Administrator On Tuesday, August 31, 1993, at 7:00p.m. the San Luis Obispo City Council will hear the Bicycle Committee's proposal regarding bike lanes on Johnson Avenue from Lizzie to Buchon and then from Pismo to Monterey (and possibly including the portion from Buchon to Pismo). The proposal, as we understand it, is to have the bike lane run alongside 11 foot wide travel lanes, eliminating parking on the east side of Johnson for the length of the bike lane. We are concerned that the implementation of this plan will cause additional parking problems in the residential areas of the surrounding neighborhoods. As an example, 6 parking places would be eliminated in the block between Pacific and Marsh Streets alone. Those six cars will still need a place to park. In all likelihood, they will seek space on the residential streets, primarily Pacific. As we and the other businesses along Johnson and Marsh have grown, we have tried to be good neighbors and to be sensitive to the needs of the private residences in the area. As an example, we have encouraged employees to park alongside our building (on the Johnson side) and across Johnson (in front of Payless) rather than on Pacific. With the implementation of the bike lanes as proposed, this will become increasingly difficult. I In order that the City Council might become more aware of the feelings of those who reside and work in this area, and because we cannot all be present at the meeting on the 31st, we 3 thought it might be helpful to circulate the attached petition. ;X Of course we realize that not everyone will agree that the bike lanes as proposed are not in our mutual best interests and respect those of you with differing opinions. If you do agree with the petition, lease sign if and rint our name address and whether Y g P , P gn — P Y s; you are a resident or are employed in the area. tee:. C1� r.V A' To: San Luis Obispo City Council Members Re: Petition regarding Bilge Lanes as Proposed by the San Luis Obispo Bicycle Committee The following signatories are residents or business people of the Johnson Avenue and Marsh Street areas which would be directly affected by the proposed bike lane along Johnson Avenue, particularly between Pismo and Marsh. In establishing bike lanes, we request that the Council consider the current character of our neighborhood. Parking is already at a premium during the business day. While the employees of the businesses in the area make every effort to cooperate with the residents, the elimination of parking on Johnson will further push the business parking into the residential areas. We cannot expect employees of businesses in the area to ride their bicycles to work from their homes in Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, Morro Bay and Los Osos. Neither can they be expected to utilize public transportation as it is not currently a practical means of commuting to an 8 to 5 job. In addition, we would like to remind the Council that when the Planning Commission approved the PayLess/Scolari's shopping center with fewer than the required number of parking spaces, it cited the abundance of on-street parking on Johnson Avenue and Marsh Street as a primary basis for allowing the parking variance.. Now you are being asked to replace many of those spaces with bike lanes. We support and encourage bicycle riders and their right to have access to safe travel conditions. We question whether the proposal before you meets the safety criteria as well as the needs of the larger community. We urge you to consider alternate routes or a combination of bike and parking lanes, where no parking spaces are sacrificed. 4. Thank you for your consideration. Signature (Please print your name below your signature) Street Address Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. fv i _ I %Dm t � /� I � t �Ll'�C10.1[.0 i l�'.1iL4'.� �•'r 1'% '•��C� J 7 4. (`c�lE�{r f-��l�l�c- �LC4.•2c�� G1 c2,1:CL �%-•rte. � 5 f3aY llrctics L • ��,' ✓ •-z...N Jc.,-Disc- 6. �. �o nom%- - P E. Mthli seer- 7. - P�.•o 13 Am6sr I"�su5o 0{ Pac:-�ic- Si: e�-gle•�c.� h AA. Ea rr�f, 13D L( C•fiC P.4+ 9. � . 10. — c� /a .61 Gv+ r• / Z— •Lo v 6s I A/V4 M , D/' � Slgnaiuie (Please print your name _ .ow your signature) Street Addrt Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 12. c 13. Ck.3; 'c:�Y C--', L�-Li � '�- y,c� �- SL,v 1<CuI' �.•T 14. . f'O,y�•�.t 1�G"/ TU P;c;(;, i� S.L.15. r2cs(dh,1 •� �,fi•�• � ��, �iii��Lys J ` i�,�11��\ %� ��-L \� -`,1"1'�r• C�r-�,}F�l� �� � ��;� ,,:i 1 LL.1`� ��il`�.=%l� c ' J 17. 18. r9gi &�h, •e 1 C.. V i7✓ffc / �c���t Ci I ` 19. e� /�e r/�,✓�- 20. ,_,=2 Z_. r 21. �J J � � �it-z. pct C_ S�-`7 •i:�i`lzti .�,-�. :�d r 2•v-� `� . Go arc.. S .�--•O ����"'1 ec� 23. o`,`"'' �°n( .�."^''`J 130. T.(%A-CSh S 24. L�;7 G� rw L'I G��e r�i 1 3%�% /yM2.�tl S <CH-4 12 iNSO - /� 7 25. 26. N.% a r _ nI- Al fir�t F 27. BPhZQ 1339 ltWA-J--`� nnI 28. - �P� a tj CD -e r- ,e r SL O q 3 t/D) 29. ti (� , ifs cSZ. I� 3 M'IiJX lFX pGe rte, 93��i > Signature (Please print your nam low your signature) Street Addi Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. URAZi I�1q R �o e 31. e!!F Q u E fele n /3/ /o 32. y, _�d� A?, Aa 6 8. .r 9 33. 41-tS l, Ta 34. 35. 36. T . 7,rrLi 4,-41er ,S a. (3io4r4.z.38. !33q 7fxctfjl�, ` -. 6 � � G L•4%'% F'Y 39. L �f' 40. i ; ✓� -I 7G1 J6 k rl5 ~•1 l�Z'�t cl 41. e ,d e.)r IL t� c 7Z112--t 1 3-7 r acs n�-49 la4 _ 43. ���l-c-�'i•- � I � 111�115sCL 4Dr"iSv n 13 -71 wc_lr{,c c1t �Z`l c� l •/ 44. ` QYi tJ Er \ L_R�lC `�`�'4 '..ul`t<•�) �T 1'�f't�'1 C'l� u1��Lr7`(zE� 45. 1A �hlScl �t,i C 'Fi L57 VF 46. �`: ,�,.c l 13-71 ffn ftio. JOm�n� 47. Lam. � • — _ _ -- ----------- --- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - ,sr>?r�Gt C llt,i� %nature (Please print your name . elow your signature) Street Adds,._., Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. I 12. j PLA c,A (C C C- 0 TN TI t 13. C. ot.-Z-� r -' fes. 77 -Fo q e -n e 'E. M; e- 14. Cel 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Signature (Please print your name ;ow your signature) Street AddrL Please indicate whether you are a resident or are employed at this address. 30. Ca.. q'3910 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. I MtETI G �'�AGENDA , DATE ITEM # �® Michael Cripe 3427 Miguelito Ct. San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO REGARDING BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AREA:Johnson Ave. Marsh to Buchon Street I own the property located at the corner of Pismo and Johnson ave. The addresses are 1405 Johnson and 1267 Pismo. The house was built in 1926 and was designed and built as a duplex with 2 one bedroom units. The current zoning is a legal non-conforming R-2 lot. Johnson ave has parking for one car off street but the Pismo unit at this point has no off street parking and the tenants have parked on Johnson ave in front of the.unit for years. Both sides of the curb on Pismo St. in front of the unit and for at least two houses down are red curbs and have no parking. Eliminating the parking in front of my units on Johnson ave will place a severe hardship on the rentability of the Pismo unit. I am not against bike lanes as I am a cyclist, but I disagree with placing hardships on property owners in the process. I have a current city business license that I am required to have because of having rental income property with in the city limits, will the city look after my interest as well so I can continue paying the for my business license. I have included a proposed off-street parking area for the 1267 Pismo unit which I have discussed with Planning and Engineering. They stated it would require a variance and would have to be approved by the City Council in order for them to approve it. I am requesting this variance be considered and approved by the Council prior to eliminating the parking on Johnson ave. Thank you for your consideration. Sincer IILAO, Michael L C? ur:CIL ❑ CDD DIR FWK'ATi ❑ FIN DIR O ❑ ECHIEF ORNEY Will DIRRK/CRIG ❑ POUCECHFMTTFJ.St . ❑ REC DIR E D FILA ❑ JTIL OR V E. k �i., ❑ PGRSDIR AUG 3 1 1993 CITY CLERK 7'r 71 i fa �d �-I z , • I �i AM, It ra r3 a UX _._.__._.... -...._._......................... .... . .. I I L. i AIR. POLLUTION MEMN V00I,0 AGENDA CONTROL ®ISTRICTDATE 41 M#L COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO August 31, 1993 City Council Members City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: The City of San Luis Obispo's Bicycle Transportation Plan Honorable City Council Members: The District has reviewed the City of San Luis Obispo's Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Council Agenda Report dated 8-31-93. We are quite pleased with both the Bicycle Committee's and City staffs efforts to improve bicycle facilities in San Luis Obispo. We believe the Bicycle Transportation Plan reflects the City's commitment to achieving the goals and objectives of the Clean Air Plan, and provides a blueprint to improve the bicycling experience for City residents and visitors alike. A key goal of the Bikeways Measure of the District's Clean Air Plan is to achieve a "modal shift" of commuters from polluting to non-polluting forms of transportation. We see the City's Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan as an important step in providing the facilities necessary to attract new bicycle riders. As the Council weighs suggested alternatives and modifications to the Bicycle Transportation Plan, we urge you to also consider the District's modal shift goal and the importance of attracting new cyclists in the City of San Luis Obispo. We commend the City for its proactive policies to enhance alternative transportation, and wish you success in adopting and implementing your Bicycle Transportation Plan. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call me at 781-5912. Sincerely, 7 Larry R. Allen Manager, Air Quality Planning COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR CAO ❑ FIN DIR VACAO UF RE CHIEF ATTORNEY L$fPWDIR LRA/RSL rsl trCLERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR ❑ �C. FILE ❑ UTIL DIR R E C E I V E D J ❑ PERS DIR AUG 3 1 19.93 - — — — - —-- ----- ' P CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO.Ca. 2156 Sierra Way. Suite 8 •San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 • 805-781-5912 FAX: 805-781-1035 . a printed on recycled paper C : Cc- WT-TING AGENDA a o f D E3-31-93 ITEM #CM �n y ci�,r� yCc ��< c�PO : Members , SL? ity Council/Editor, Telegram-Tribune 'FROM: Richard Unwin 2. N. RE: PROPOSED BIKE LANE PROJECT/EXPERIENCE OF CITY OF PALO ALTO Before this debt-burdened city commits 2 .5 million dollars to further its bike lane project, it may wish to consider the recent experience of the city of Palo Alto. Beginning nearly a decade ago and pressured by the demands of local cyclists armed with "surveys" purporting to show that great numbers of .-environmentally concerned motorists would gladly abandon their cars if bike lanes were available, Palo Alto embarked on one of the most ambitious -- and expensive -- bike lane programs in the state. Not content merely to develop miles of bike lanes , bike paths, and even a new bike boulevard, Palo Alto went even further -- requiring builders to install bike lockers and showers and even offering to pay city employees 7t a mile for every mile they travelled on two wheels instead of four. It all sounded grand -- every cyclist ' s fantasy come true. The only problem was it didn 't work. Instead of the expected increase in ridership, the number of Palo Alto ' s bicycle commuters actually declined a staggering 44% since the program began. (Source : Mayor ' s Office/City of Palo Alto) . What did increase, however, were the exhaust emissions which bicycling is supposed to reduce. Why? Because all those bike lanes have constricted traffic flow to the point where it can now take an hour or more at commute times to get in or out of the downtown area. I know because I was just in Palo Alto stuck in traffic on University Avenue eyeing the unused bike lanes lining both sides of the street. One should keep in mind , too, that Palo Alto funded its bike program in the hay-day 80 ' s when cities had access to plenty of outside bucks to toss to special interest groups like cyclists . But this is the cash-strapped 90 ' s and SLO can i.11-afford either to waste money on yet another "Great Bike Experiment" or spend any more taxpayer time discussing it. Besides, who is going to be riding .all these bikes? Cal Poly is facing declining enrollments and the city is fast losing population between the ages of 25-44, so who 's left to pedal down these paths besides our ever-growing population of elderly retirees and babies who have yet to boom? Face it. In these economic times and for this city, bike lanes are an ideawhosetime may have come- -- butisnow long- gone,- or--- well should be. � /��� P' -TING '�)OAGENDA / DhI E ITEM #. San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce 1039 Chorro Street " San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278 (805) 781-2777 e FAX (805) 543-1255 David E. Garth, Executive Director August 27, 1993 Iir COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR I211111C AO ❑ FIN DIR ACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF Q�ATTORNEY 2rPW DIR C CLERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHF Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ❑ Li(WTEAM ❑ REC DIR City of San Luis Obispo C READ FILE. ❑ UTIL DIR P.O. BOX 8100 11fO - - ❑ PERS DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 RE: Bicycle Circulation in Downtown San Luis Obispo Dear Mayor and Council Members: AUG ` 1993 CArY COUNCIL C.� The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce agrees to the following: %M LVJYS OBISP_0, 1. Support the continuance of the City Bike Committee with changes in the make-up of the committee to include business representation. 2. Support an existing City staff member to perform bike coordinating functions for the community at least half-time, and to have this responsibility in designated function and title. 3. Request that no City staff member have voting privileges on the City's Bike Committee. 4. That Pacific and Morro Streets also be developed as 'bike boulevards" to facilitate bicycle circulation in the downtown core. 5. That Marsh Street not be developed as a bicycle route with designated bike lanes for one year, while the Pacific Street boulevard concept is developed through a joint effort of the Chamber of Commerce, the ATTF, and the City. Upon acceptance of the Pacific Street bike boulevard, the narrowing of Marsh Street to slow traffic should be pursued. 6. We recognize bicycles as a viable means of alternative. transportation, and therefore, favor the continued implementation of a bicycle master plan. ACCREDITED G AMBER OF COMMERCE CN•4Br.Or COMUE-CE Or INF LN17ED STATES The Chamber believes, along with the Sierra-Club, that the proposal outlined above is a win-win solution for the parties involved and the community. We hope that the Council and City staff will endeavor to support this historic effort on the part of the Sierra Club and the business community. Sincerely, Charlie Fruit, President San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce �,avp�l MEE,, Environmental Center DATE 967 Osos San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Tel.:805/544- 1777 Recycling Center 45 Prado Rd. San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Tel.: 805/543 -4296 Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County August 27, 1993 uNat ❑ CDD DIR o ❑ FIN D] IR Peg Pinard [OMGMT FIR CHIEFCity of San Luis Obispo ORNE�' v DIR990 Palm St. LERivoRIG ❑ POLICE CHF TEPM ❑ REC DIRSan Luis Obispo, Ca. R D =FW _ ❑ UTIL DIR- ❑ PERS DIR Dear Mayor Pinard, On behalf of the ECOSLO Board of Trustees I want to extend ECOSLO's support of the Bicycle Transportation Plan. We encourage Council to adopt the Plan and further to allow time for the Pacific St. "slow street" alternative to be implemented. Many on our board are parents and bicyclists. We believe the Pacific St. proposal will attract new cyclists and lend confidence to parents in promoting cycling to their children. While the Pacific St/Marsh St discussion has perhaps been the media focal point of the Plan, we respectfully request Council to bear in mind that over two years of staff time and committee work has gone into formulation of a city-wide bike plan. The Plan is future- thinking. It will reduce congestion, improve air quality and contribute to our city's attractiveness as a tourist destination point. Thank you for consideration. Sincerely, Thn Ewan, chair oard of Trustees AN 2 1993 clTr Coul4cll. SF,4 LUIS OBVSPo, CA Mailing Address: P.O.Box 1014 San Luis Obispo,CA 93406 �nkevew 1C3 AGENDA DATE 'J� ITEM # 040'. 1192 SIERRA CLUB %wSANTA LUCIA CHAPTER V. 27 August, 1993 �NCIL ❑ CDD DIR O ❑ FlN DIR Mayor Peg Pinard CAO ❑ F10 NEY IRE CHIEF City of San Luis Obispo CLERK/ORlG ❑ POLICE CHF 990 Palm Street ❑ MGMTTEItM ❑ RECDIR San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93403-8100 ❑ C_R ADe!LE ❑ UTILCIR �: ❑ PERS DIR ' Dear Peg, 1gg The Sierra Club Alternative Transportation Task Force (ATTF) is shy u 8 oe sp0ic writing to urge you to adopt the Bicycle Transportation Plan on August 31st, and to implement the plan in as timely a manner as possible. Your council has wisely set, as one of its major goals for the 93-95 budget cycle, the enhanced "...use of alternative transportation through the implementation of projects identified in the Circulation Element, Short Range Transit Plan, and Bicycle Plan...". We heartily concur with that goal and are eager to "get on with it". First, we would like to commend the Bicycle Committee and city staff for the two years of hard work that have gone into the making of this plan. There have been many long, sometimes heated, public meetings, and mountains of paper to review. Your committee and staff have done an exemplary job of digesting all this information and turning it into a plan that this city can be proud of. We would particularly like to single out the Chairman of the Bicycle Committee, Richard Marshall, for praise. Throughout this process, he has presided over the meetings with firmness, fairness, and dignity. Even in the face of controversy and heated passion, Richard has conducted himself as a gentleman and set an example for others to follow. Every person who has come before the Bike Committee has been treated fairly and equally regardless of their point of view. One could hardly ask for more. We urge the Council to adopt the Bicycle Transportation plan and to implement it immediately. There are, of course, many things that we want that didn't get into the plan, but it's a good starting point and has the potential, when implemented, to not only make San Luis . . . To explore, enjoy, and protect the notion's srenic rrsourres . . . A • (2) Obispo a safer place for current cyclists to ride, but to also effect a modal shift from cars to bikes that will benefit the entire city The ATTF supports all of the staff recommendations in the Council Agenda Report with the following exceptions: Item 9, page 1-8. The ATTF supports the Committee recommendation. Bike lanes of a different color than the adjacent street would stand out and be more noticeable to cyclists and motorists alike. This is a system that is used extensively in Europe and we would like to see it tried here. Item 15, page 1-12. The ATTF supports the Committee recommendation. Parking demands along this segment of street are very low with plenty of off-street alternatives. It would be a shame not to.get the bike lanes now while it is relatively easy to do. This is a route used by many children and would be much safer if the bike lane was not next to parking. Item 16, page 1-13. The ATTF supports neither the Committee's or staff s recommendation. We would like to see Morro Street as a full Bicycle Boulevard in both directions with some kind of stop control at Morro and Santa Barbara Streets, and signage to direct cyclists onto Morro. Our concern is that southbound cyclists will still use Osos Street despite there being no bike lane in that direction. We're assuming that traffic lanes on Osos will be narrowed to create the northbound bike lane. This will create an even more dangerous condition than what already exists for the southbound cyclist as he or she is squeezed between fast-moving traffic and parked cars. The ADT on this street is very high, and so is the speed differential between cyclists and automobiles. We either need to create a desirable alternative route, like the Bicycle Boulevard on Morro, or remove parking on Osos to create bike lanes. Stop controls at Morro and Santa Barbara Streets would help slow traffic on Santa Barbara/ Osos. There have been many complaints from the neighborhood about the volume and speed of traffic on this street and about the lack of crosswalks, signals, or other means (3) for pedestrians to cross the street. We would suggest that the Council direct staff to take a hard look at this area and try to come up with some solutions to make Santa Barbara/ Osos Street more pedestrian-friendly as well as more bike-friendly. Item 17, page 1-13. The ATTF supports the staff recommendation with the following addition: Sacramento Drive should only be extended through to Orcutt with a Class I bike path. This could be built wide enough to accommodate emergency vehicles. This route would encourage people working in the Sacramento/ Capitolio area to ride their bikes to work and, if successful, would serve to reduce traffic volumes in the area ( please see my letter to you from the July 20th council meeting). Item 18, page 1-14. The ATTF supports the staff recommendation, but we would like to suggest an alternative if staffs recommendation is not acceptable to Council: Eliminate the left-hand-tura onto Pismo Street from Johnson, remove the left-hand-turn lame, and create bike lanes. Make Marsh Street two-way between Johnson and Santa Rosa Streets so traffic could tuin left on Marsh and access the neighborhood, now served by Pismo, by turning left on Toro or Santa Rosa Streets. Pismo Street would have to be made two-way between Santa Rosa and Johnson as well. This plan would get safe bike lanes on Johnson with no parking removal required. Item "A", page 1-17. The ATTF wants to see a Bicycle Boulevard on North Broad Street at the soonest possible date. We agree with the Bicycle Committee that," traffic diversion associated with the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard is not a significant impact and therefore does not require mitigation". However, we are concerned about traffic levels on Chorro, Murray, and Meincke Streets and we suggest that Option 2 be implemented as funding allows. We also suggest that the barricade to through traffic on Broad Street be placed at Broad and Ramona instead of at Broad and Murray. This would mitigate the increased traffic on Murray and Meincke streets. This idea was discussed (4) with some of the residents of Murray and Meincke and they were enthusiastic. Closing the south-bound freeway off-ramp at Broad would also reduce traffic on Chorro and divert it to Santa Rosa instead. Item 1, page 1-22. The Alternative Transportation Task Force certainly subscribes to the "underlying philosophy of the Bicycle Plan"...BICYCLISTS USE OF CITY STREETS. However, we believe that there are a few special instances where it is worth while to explore alternatives to the"paint on major arterials" approach to bicycle planning. This is why we have endorsed plans like the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard, the Morro Street Bicycle Boulevard and why we are willing to give the Chamber of Commerce a chance to design a plan for Pacific Street. Item 2, page 1-23. The ATTF agrees with this section. However, as stated before, occasionally a parallel route can be made so attractive that cyclists will choose it over a more direct route. These if routes will do just that; attract bicyclists.Hopefully, new bicyclists, who might feel uncomfortable on n*jor arterials, will be attracted as well. We think that itis important to have enough flexibility in our planning to try out new ideas. Item 3, page 1-24. Finally, we get to the "big one". Given the public discussion for the last few months, you'd think that the entire Bicycle Plan consisted of Marsh Street. The reason that we have taken this item in order, instead of singling it out for special discussion, is to emphasize that Marsh Street is only one plan of many in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Regardless of your decision on this one item, please keep the "big picture" in mind. There are a lot of excellent projects and ideas in the Bicycle Plan and we hope You will support them all. The ATTF supports the Marsh Street Plan. The current situation is unsafe for cyclists with high traffic volumes and high speed differentials between cars and bikes. Something has to be done. We agree with staff that, of all the plans proposed thus far, (5) reducing the traffic lanes from 3 to 2 and putting in turn pockets and bike lanes is the best solution. The business community is opposed to the Marsh Street Plan. They don't want parking removed and they don't want traffic lanes reduced. This probably comes as no surprise given their traditional stance on bicycling and parking in the downtown. What should come as a surprise is that instead of just saying, "we don't want it", they are saying, "we can come up with something better". The ATTF was skeptical at first, but after meeting with them on numerous occasions and seeing the research they have done and the ideas they are bringing to the table, we're convinced that they are serious. We would like the opportunity to work with them, city staff, and the Bicycle Committee to see if we really can come up with a plan that could work and that could maybe be an enhancement to the downtown. If nothing else, this would draw the business community into bicycle planning and we're willingto bet that we can all learn something in the process What the ATTF is asking you to do is to approve the Marsh Street Plan and to set funding aside for its immediate implementation. Then we would ask that you delay implementation for one year while the Chamber of Commerce, the BIA, and the ATTF work with the Bicycle Committee and City Staff to develop a plan for Pacific Street that is acceptable to all parties involved. After one year, we would come back before you to present our plan. If you accept it, it gets implemented. If not, the Marsh Street Plan that was on hold gets implemented immediately. In other words, load the gun, cock it, but don't pull the trigger for one year. We feel that it is worth a try and that we have nothing to lose and everything to gain. That concludes our comments on the Council Agenda Report. As for the remainder of the Bicycle Transportation Plan, We enthusiastically endorse it and we hope to see it implemented "in our lifetimes" There are a couple of other items we feel are appropriate to discuss at this time. One is the Fate of the Bicycle Committee which is due to (6) sunset in September. As you know, the Bicycle Committee voted to extend itself. They saw a need for a standing committee that would be available to make recommendations to the council, as needed, and to assist staff in developing plans on an ongoing basis. Now that the Bicycle Plan has been updated, we would think that the Committee would meet much less often and would need much less staff time to support it. The ATTF strongly supports the City of San Luis Obispo having a standing Bicycle Advisory Committee and we hope you will take steps to assure that we do. We hope that in the future, staff would not be voting members of the committee, and that the business community would have a qualified representative on the committee as well. Last, but certainly not least, is the Bicycle Coordinator position. The ATTF is upset that the city would rather spend money to buy a 20 thousand dollar electric golf cart for parking meter readers than re- hire our half-time Bicycle Coordinator. We need a Bicycle Coordinator in San Luis Obispo and we hope that you will reconsider hiring one now that the smoke from the budget hearings has cleared somewhat. Progressive cities that have progressive Bike !Plans have Bicycle Coordinators. It's ridiculous, to think that we can effectively plan for and enhance the second largest mode of transportation in this city without someone assigned to make it happen. Please reconsider your decision to not rehire our Bicycle Coordinator. Sincerely, Gary Felsman Chairman, Sant /Lucia Chapter of The Sierra Club 6 P t Veesart Chairman, Sierra Club Alternative Transportation Task Force cc: Peg Pinard, Dave Romero, Bill Roalman, Penny Rappa, Alan Settle Mike Mc Cluskey, Chamber of Commerce, BIA. MMING AGENDA Dt. . -3(-3 ITEM #� San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce 1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278 (805) 781-2777 • FAX (805) 543-1255 vid E. Garth, Ex Director C t3 FINDIR i SAS#A D DIR ❑ PR E CHIEF August 25, 1993 4!rA_5MEY VPW DIR W15LERWORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ MGMT TEAM O REC DIR ❑ CR F ❑ UTIL DIR ❑ PERS DIR AUG 2'� 1993 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of San Luis Obispo sAN1.u1s ooa1"seo,cA 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Bicycle Circulation in Downtown San Luis Obispo Dear Mayor and Council Members, We would like to clarify the Chamber of Commerce's position on bikeways in downtown San Luis Obispo. As you are well aware, the Chamber of Commerce has been working diligently on forming consensus within the environmental and business communities on the placement of bikeways in our downtown. We are proposing a compromise position which all segments have agreed upon....and that is implementation of a bikeway concept on Pacific Street. We believe that we have a solution to the problem. The Pacific Street proposal is an innovative bike circulation plan that meets the transportation needs of the bicycling community and the parking concerns of the business community. More importantly, we believe that this proposal ideally suits the community at large by providing the following benefits. • A safe and enjoyable bike ride for all levels of experience • Promotes bicycling and attracts new bicycle commuters • Revitalizes the old-town "neighborhood" feeling • Is "traffic calming" while not reducing access to business ACCREDITED C "RER OF COF"F E CMAMBEN OF COMMENCE 01 IME VNIIIO 51 A}F5 • A tourist attraction that ties in with "eco-tourism" • An integral link to other bicycle routes across the City • Enhances bicyclist right-of-way • Accomodates local vehicular traffic needs • Minimizes impact of parking loss The Chamber of Commerce asks you, the City Council, to give full consideration of this Pacific Street proposal.. We're confident you will see the value of this compromise position to all segments of the community. This plan is safe, and this plan is workable. Please direct staff to investigate this concept further. We are asking for your support on August 31. Sincerely, Charlie Fruit, President San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce Dave Garth, Executive Director San/Louis Obispo Chamber of Commerce John Ewan, Chair Clean Air/Circulation Task Force San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce =EflNG AGENDA MARSH STREET BICYCLE "MORE" INFORMATION SHEET In an effort to congest traffic and minimize bicycle safety, the city's bicycle committee has presented a very one-sided and misleading information sheet on the Marsh Street bicycle lanes. On August 31, the Sari Luis Obispo city council will consider adopting this-bicycle plan. Please read this fact sheet, and compare it to their information sheet and, if possible, be at the city council meeting to present your views. The installation of bike lanes on Marsh Street would result in the elimination of one of the three lanes of traffic on Marsh Street. Turn pocket lanes would have to be added at selected (if not all) intersections. Massive parking removal will be necessary to accommodate these turn lanes. If the recommended turn lane length, as proposed by the Associated Transportation Engineering report, is used, up to 35 parking spaces out of 95 will be eliminated on Marsh Street between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Streets. Provided below is information for some of the more commonly asked questions about the Marsh Street bicycle proposal. Attached is a chart showing: 1) The currently proposed turn pocket lengths as listed on the Marsh Street information sheet handout and parking lost 2) The actual likely parking lost 3) The originally proposed turn pocket lengths and parking lost 4) The recommended turn pocket lengths and parking lost You will notice that on some streets there is a considerable difference between the recommended turn pockets and the turn pocket lengths as provided on the information sheet. WHY ARE BIKE LANES BEING PROPOSED FOR BOTH SIDES OF MARSH STREET? Generally, bicycle lanes are installed on arterial streets whenever no acceptable alternate route can be found. It has been shown, beyond a doubt, that high volume commercial district arterial streets are the most dangerous bike lanes possible. Rather than using Marsh Street, there are ample alternate solutions in the works to help bicyclists better share the road. SHOULDN'T BICYCLISTS RIDE ON A STREET WITH LESS TRAFFIC? With quiet streets such as Pacific and Pismo available, it is surprising to see the Bicycle Committee and advocates among the city staff still trying to push through the Marsh Street project. The Sierra Club, the Downtown Business Improvement Association, and the SLO Chamber of Commerce all favor bike lanes on Pacific, or Pacific and Pismo Streets, because it is safer for the bicyclist, allows for a larger and better bike lane, and will allow a smooth traffic flow on Marsh Street. There are no insurmountable major obstacles in using Pacific and Pismo streets. The necessary modifications are affordable and there are no negative circulation impacts for using the Pacific-Pismo Street bike lane proposal. The Pacific-Pismo tandem proposal would result in absolutely no parking spaces being would still have full traffic flow in a one-way direction. The cost of changing the COUNCIL stoQlsOMMO a ing signals is within the budget of the bicycle committee's funds. 1�CA0 ❑ FIN DIR /ICAO ❑'E CHIEF R?iF r I V E U ATTORNEY - -- WPW DIR - - -- ���may- -- HJ CLEPY.ORIG ❑ POLICE CHF - - - moved tris domnlmt AUG 2 7 1993 ❑ MGMT TERM ❑ REG DIR EADFILE ❑ UTILDIR CITY 001INGIL bAIV LUId dsiSPO, CA 0 PERS DIR Bicycles,like motorists, will always want the most convenient route to their destinations. The Marsh Street proposal is being touted by the bicycle committee as the best, because it is the easiest and most convenient for the bicycle riders. Although bicycle riders constitute a minority of the users of Marsh Street, the bicycle committee feels that the convenience factor for these bicyclists outweigh the safety for the bicyclists and the needs of.the community as a whole. WHAT WILL THESE BIKE LANES COST? It is impossible for the bicycle committe to compute the overall cost for the"changeover on Marsh Street. The bicycle committee and staff have taken no effort to look into the economic impact of bike lanes on Marsh St. The planning staff feels that higher congestion on Marsh and Higuera Streets will discourage vehicle use and therefore encourage alternate transportation. The effect on patrons using Marsh Street is considered unimportant. HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WILL BE LOST? The bicycle committee states that only 17 spaces would be removed in the entire B.I.A. district. These numbers are distorted in order to make the passage of the Marsh Street bike lanes easier. Accurate figures, that take into account loading zones and realistic turn pocket lengths are much more difficult to figure than the bicycle committe would like to have you believe. In fact,Terry Sanville, a city staff member proposing Marsh Street bike lanes, has said that"if the currently proposed tum pockets do not work, then we will take all the parking spaces needed to make them work." In counting the parking meters and using data from the SLO City staff, 35 out of 95 spaces on Marsh St.reet between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Streets will likely be lost. HOW WILL THE REDUCTION OF LANES AFFECT TRAFFIC FLOW? On Marsh Street, eliminating only 17 parking spaces, traffic would not flow. The information sheet cites an independent traffic engineering report, done by Associated Transportation Engineers. To compute this report, the city provided A.T.E. with turn pocket lengths and traffic flow statistics. A.T.E.'s recommendation is for turn pocket lengths two to three times longer than the bicycle committee is currently proposing. Traffic flow and existing lane geometries were either understated or incorrectly conveyed to A.T.E. WHO CAN I CONTACT TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL? You may contact Craig Anderson or Terry Sanville at the Planning Department at San Luis Obispo City Hall. Both of these gentlemen will give you their current propaganda for Marsh Street. If you wish to find out objective information, you will find that it is very difficult to contact anyone! To put it simply, the City Planning Department feels that cars are bad and bikes are good, and so bikes should be on Marsh Street at any cost regardless of increased congestion or bicyclist safety. WHAT CAN I DO? Show up at San Luis Obispo City/County Library, Community Room, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday August 31 and talk to your friends and neighbors. Help San Luis Obispo take a step forward rather than a leap back. PARKING SPACES LOST BY PLACING BIKE LANES ON MARSH ST. Handout Sheet Actual Likely City Originally ATE Rec. Parking Removal Proposed Nipomo 0 L-1 0 N/A R-2 Broad L-1 (30') L-1 L-1 (100') L-4(150') R-3(100') R-3 R-3(100') R-3(100') Garden 0 R-1 0 N/A L-2 Chorro L-2(30'+) L-3 L-3(70') L-4(100') R-2(40') R-2 R-5(125') R-5(125) Garage Parking 0 0 0 N/A spaces R-2 more LZ likely needed (-2 in place) Morro L-0 L-3 L-3 N/A R-2 R-2 R-2 Osos L-3 L-3 0 N/A R-1 R-1 (100') Santa Rosa L-3• (100') L-4 L-3(65') L-4(150') R-1 (65') R-1 R-1 (65') R-1 (100') •Handout says 3 but actually shows 4:(4 spaces needed). Total Parking on Marsh between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Sts. lost is 31 to 35 out of 95 total spaces. Total parking on Marsh St.in B.I.A. District lost Is 34 to 38 out of 122 total spaces. N/A-A.T.E.(Associated Transportation Engineers)did not study these intersections. File DSK2:PARKI.LETC201, 101 Printed on 25-Aus-93 15: 10:26 TO: Mr. Wayne Petersen, City Engineer - Mr. Mike McClusky, Public Works ' ._-__Mr. _John Rawles.,-Public Works._ Dear Gentlemen, We-at_..the BIA .Parkins Committee have been reviewing...the .bicycle committee's Plans for Marsh St. We feel that the following details are very confusing and need to be clarified: A) TURN PLACKETS: -1-).__-F-o-r _Marsh _Streettraffic--tu flow-continuously with_.only-:,two lanes, all intersections must have the appropriate length turn Pockets. If this is not true- why? 2) The restriping of lower Higuera was successful because of an extremely long turn lane and low turn volume. This is not the case .with t.he_ProPosed .Plan-..on_Marsh_St,_-_Turn .pocket__ length is the key factor in the restripins of Marsh St, being feasible from a traffic flow standpoint. Please explain and comment on the .discrepencies between: _ _ _ a) The original Proposed turn Pocket lengths as given to A. T.E. to use in Preparing their report. --.__.. ..._.. _. __ .. b) Turn . Pocket--lengths recommended.-..by.-the--traffic engineering firm (A. T. E. ) to show the feasiblity of eliminating a lane. c) ._ The...act.ual_.turn._PocE;Et lengths. on. the._Proposed b.icyc.l.e, lane information sheet. There is up to a 3-to-1 difference between recommended as necessary turn _Pocket--lengths in the--A..T_.E.._re-Po_r-t--L---and currEntly__. Proposed turn Pocket lenghts on the information sheet. 3) Necessary turn Pockets for all streets that cross Marsh St. need to be included in calculating the number of Parking spaces that are going to be removed. 4) As Peal: traffic flow occurs downtown on Thursdays and Fridays, _-_ _..__.._.__the length-of_the_ turn . Pockets-recc�mme.nd�d__bY t.h.e... transportation engineering company could well be insufficient. The report was based on WEDNESDAY traffic flow! Thursday and Friday traffic is greater than-on ._Wednesday!----, - B?—MARSH-STREET_AND-THE-NEW.-DOWNTOWN ...CENTRE: No additional right-hand turn Pocket length has been Proposed for the Marsh —Str-eet_P_arking__garase. ...._The new-Downtown._Centr_e-wil-l_r-adi.calhr-increase this_ Parking garage's use. Why is there no larger turn lane allocation for the Parking garage? Won't cars going in to the Parking garage at times eliminate one lane of Marsh File DSK2:PARKI.LETC201, 103 Printed on 25-Aug-93 15: 10:42 . Street during Peak garage use? , .-The., new Downtown Centre has not been factored into thet raffi.c. .data given to the traffic engineers- why? Please comment on the additional traffic that will be generated during the Peak DAY traffic Periods by the new multi-screen theatre and the increased use of Marsh St. generated by the new Downtown Centre. C) FACTUAL DISCREPENCIES AND INADEQUATE CONCERN FOR TRAFFIC FLOW: In light of the glaring discrepencies in the handout given to the Public versus the needed turn Pocket lengths as cited by the traffic engineers in their -report, we._would. appreciate Your department's basis for-. supporting the new configuration WITHOUT full consideration of the following: 1 ) The recommended turn Pocket lengths 2) Downtown Centre traffic 3) Considering a larger turn lane for the Parkins garage 4) Turn Pockets on Garden St. 5). Downtown's Possible traffic _needs. two, five, and ten ..Years___.- ._ into the future G) Fire department and safety input. With only two lanes, the ability to . pull over for. fire and Police vehicles is greatly . reduced. D) THE A.T.E. REPORT IS BASED ON INACCURATE EXISTING GEOMETRICS AND ASSUMES INFINITE TURN POCKET LENGTH: The report generated by ATE ASSUMUES that at ALL times, ALL turning cars are able to store in turn Pockets ( ie: turn Pockets of infinite Using .this assumption, -.all the Program.._real _lY , says _i s_-.that. 4 lanes are better than 3. In Preparing this report, the city staff did not tell ATE of turn lanes that already exist on Marsh St. (right turn __ ... lanes on to broad St. and Santa Rosa St. ) . This further decreases the accuracy and value of ATE's report. E) THE GOALS OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY PLANNING STAFF ARE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW NEEDS OF DOWNTOWN: - -- ----- ------..... -- - ....... ........ ----- - -- - — - --- - The city Planning staff of San Luis Obispo has stated that Marsh St. traffic needs to be more congested in order to slow traffic down and --to--Promote alternate transportation.... --By maki_ng._ the auto.-.road .. .way_ _- . system less functional , the city Planning staff is trying to create a more time consuming and miserable experience for drivers that want to spend their _time and ..money. downtown. These customers will take their business elsewhere. In the city Planning staff's view, Promoting alternate transportation is achieved by: 1 ). Slowing_. down. _traffic by eliminating a lane on one of San Luis Obispo's major thoroughfares 2) By increasing the congestion on an already crowded street, the Planning Staff hopes to force customers out of their cars and therefore "encourage" alternate File DSK2:PARh;1.LETC201, 103 Printed on 25-Aus-93 15: 11:09 transportation. 3) The effects on business, traffic flow and commerce are consi.dered.. by the_P1.anninq- . staff_. t—be._-of .-l-ittlQ-o.r, no importanr_e. F) PLEASE HELP WITH OUR C:ONC-ERNS: We- at the BIA Parkins Committee desperately need a clear., accurat6, , and Professional statement on the impact that these bike lanes will have on ALL of Marsh Street, not ,lust the three intersections surveyed. We are Puzzled that neither San Luis Obispo's Engineering nor Public Works Departments have made a clear statement or correctly identified the actual --_-parki-ns- that-.wi.11. _need to be . eliminated ( inc-I udins.. l oa.dins._zones). using realistic turn Pocket lengths recommended bythe ATE report. This report is being used as the basis for the workability of the Marsh Street restriping, Ye-t__its recommendations and results are being ignored. - As for the ATE report itself, the aforementioned departments might well question its overall validity and accuracy, considering the data manipulation and actual -goals of .__th_e.._Planning department.. We would ask that your office take a strong and realistic stand on the impact __.o.f_ Parking and traffic flow through the heart of our city. In later years, Your actions (of lack of actions ) on this matter will have major lone-range impact on the transportation flow and resulting health of our community. . Weneed additional information on the questions and concerns outlined in this letter. A representative from your committee could do a verbal Presentation --at--our. next Parkins...-committee . meeting. -...We-..meet .on .the f.irst..Friday of..every.- month. _.—Thank--you for—your-time in reviewing our .concerns. Please—do.._not_he.s.i state--to contact me if I can be of assistance in clarifying or further explaining our questions. An informative response from you would be greatly appreciated. Sincrerely, Richard W. Ferris ___-BIA_P_ar•kins _Committee August 23, 1993 Mayor and City Council, MEMNQ AGENDA San Luis Obispo, Cal. , DATEITEM _,[e___ Mon. Mayor and Council Members, Thank you for the information about the Bicycle Transportation. Pian . We have had many fatal traffic accidents over the years, usually disastrous to the bicyclist. I recall several on Johnson . . The corner at Laurel and Johnson with students, people rushing to work , ambulances to two hospitals and Laurel firetruck does NOT need a bicycle lane . too. We understand that an alternate bicycle route is being considered which would bypass this corner and not interfere with driveways to the stores, offices, fire station, Laurel Bowl and several homes . ❑ COUNCIL O.CDD DIR i__, CAO O FIN DIR ��a... .1 V t.* L IT ACAO O FIRE CHIEF e�ArrORNEY r�PjvDIR AUG 2 5 1993 6 CLERWORIG ❑ POLICE CHF O MGMTTEI.M O REC DIR01-' 6 . ..-. -- .__-. . . _. O CCRREEAD FILE D UTIL DIR I 0 PERS DIR � This bicycle lane would run down Augusta and alongside Sinsheimer School to connect with Southwood where pool, baseball diamond, tennis courts and YMCA are used often by cyclists. The route would continue out Southwood as is used for bicycle races. Having talked to residents and comuters who use Foothill since the traffic lanes were altered, we have heard much criticism of traffic jams and potential accidents. Many use Laurel Lane as a safe shortcut and it would be dangerous to interfere with the established safe traffic pattern . am sorry that it is impossible for me to attend night meetings, but hope that some safe solution. can be worked out. Thanks in advance for keeping me informed. , Sincerely,_ P ' . Rose McKeen Riley - - - - 1309 Richard St,S.L.Q. . IT1NG AGENDA DATE.-a.STEM # RECEIVF August 23, 1993 Qac 2 a 199,E . CITY CLERK SAN LUIs or'P0.CA Dear City Council Members: We would like to voice our support for the Bicycle Committee's proposal to add bike lanes throughout the City. We are especially supportive of the lanes proposed for Marsh Street, Broad Street, and Johnson Avenue since these lanes are either in the downtown area or major streets leading to the downtown area.. We believe that adding bike lanes on these streets will make it easier and safer for cars and bikes to share the road and encourage people to get out of their cars and onto their bikes. It seems particularly important to get people out of their cars in the downtown area where auto parking and congestion only seem to be getting worse. We hope you will support the Bicycle Committee's recommendations for bike lanes on August 31. Encouraging residents to bicycle, walk, or ride the bus is just one way to preserve the quality of life we gnaim Luis Obispo. Ur COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR E'CAO ❑ FIN DIR Sincerely, ErACAO ❑ PtRE CHIEF 1" O'ATTORNEY f(PW Din E!rCLERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ MGMTTEf:M ❑ REC DIR Ch istine McBride ❑ C READF E ❑ UTIL DIR ❑ PERS DIR .. Sterling Mc ide 1633 Santa Rosa San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 545-0111 c: Craig Anderson =C AUG 2 41993 CITY COUNCIL SAN LUIS, SPO, CA 4 FullC;oung as this domrrwnt _ h ING ?AGENDA DATE 8-9/ ITEM# ❑ COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR August 25, 1993 m'CAO ❑ FIN DIR 10CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF 0 ATTORNEY ePW DIR CfCLERKJORIG O POLICE CHF Honorable Peg Pinard, Mayor IfMGMTTEI,M ❑ REC DIR City Hall ❑ CREAD FILE ❑ UTILDIR 900 Palm Street ❑ PERS DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Peg, I am writing to express my opinion of the proposed Marsh Street Bicycle Lane Project. First of all, I whole heartedly support the promotion of bicycling in our community. I welcome any programs that would reduce the negative effects of automobile traffic on our environment replacing it with healthy and safe alternative forms of transportation. However, I think it is imprudent to reduce traffic capacity and parking on the major street coming into downtown San Luis Obispo from Highway 101. This project would benefit few, if any, at the expense of many people who do business in the downtown area. Other alternatives exist that encourage and satisfy the relatively small number of potential and current bicycle commuters into downtown. Most of these alternatives have been proposed, discussed and rejected based on questionable facts and a variety of political considerations. The core of my argument against the reduction in traffic lanes and parking on Marsh Street is my disagreement with the Bike Committees premise that many more people will commute by bicycle if bike lanes exist.. I wish that would happen, but it is unrealistic to think that significant numbers of people will give up there cars for bikes just because there is a network of bike lanes into downtown. Bike lanes will be used primarily for recreation not commerce and therefore need not be located on main streets coming into the downtown area. I know that you've heard many arguments on this proposal but it is necessary to express my opinion. Adoption of this proposal will serve the interests of very few while having a negative impact on the downtown community. Please re—consider the Bicycle Transportation Plan and reject the Marsh Street Project. Thank you for your consideration. YRrs truly, _ E Thom�A. Murrel @VLLJ AUG 2 6 1993 CITY COUNCIL SAN LUIS 061SP0, CA SAN LI1I (@ I 0 MEETING _ AGENDA MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Pinard Council members Rappa, Roalman, Romero, and Settle FROM: BIA Board of Directors DATE: August 15, 1993 RE: Marsh Street Bike Lanes The BIA Board of Directors has voted to formally oppose the current Bike Committee plan concerning bike lanes on Marsh Street. The BIA is supportive of alternative transportation, including but not limited to bicycles. Additionally, we have identified public safety and education as our number one priority in relation to any alternative transportation proposals. The BIA was originally formed, by legislative authority, as a parking management district. This mission of the BIA was re-affirmed when the City Council allowed the City Parking Management Committee to sunset; and turned the responsibility of managing parking over to the BIA Parking Committee. Since the BIA Parking Committee has not had the Marsh Street Bike Lane proposal brought before it for analysis and study as to how the proposed loss of parking relates to the overall project, the BIA Board of Directors can not then support this item. Therefore, the BIA Board of Directors recommends that the City Council not approve the Marsh Street Bike Lane proposal. We further recommend that you choose either the Pacific Street Bike Boulevard concept, or alternating one-way traffic for bikes and cars utilizing Pacific and Pismo Streets.. We continue to be concerned about issues of safety, traffic flow patterns, parking loss, and the economic impacts that any proposed alternative transportation plan would have on our members located within the BIA district. M Please feel free to contact BIA President, Dick Cleeves (543-1141) or BIA President-Elect Alan Martin (543-7656) should you have any questions. OrCOUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR ErCAO ❑ FIN DIR C� CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF l,,ATTORNEY 915W DIR CLERIUDRIG ❑ POUCE CHF ❑ MGMT TEAM _ ❑_REC DIR _ ❑ C REVD Fir_4 ❑ UTIL DIR QBE&_ ❑ PERS DIR P.O.Bar 1402•San Lair Obispo•C✓1.93406.805/541-0286 Mi:ETTAGENDA DATE /- ITEM # [','I COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR CAO ❑ FIN DIR 'ACAO ❑ F}RECHIEF �4TTORNEY VIPW Din E Cl yzn1d11TYa�e CLERK/ORIG ❑ POLICE CHF 1412 Johl ison Aleve• MGMTTEAM ❑ REC DIRSaI1 1•uis ,�fbi'�r7o, Cid READ FILE O UTIL DIR 1 ❑ PERS DIR a} Il l JJ Dear NI ayor Pinard, In revie'r�ing the Bicycle Committee's proposal to remove parking on Johnson Street,we have gathered the following information that is limited to a very typical San Luis Obispo "ncigl-iborhood,"defined as the 1401?block of Johnson, 1300block of Buchcn, and 1" 00 block of Pismo. In this area,there are: 24 residences containing, 7331 conforming bedrooms, 5 off-street parking spaces, 0.- .6 street I7arkins spaces ('1 total parking spaces) "1 i:e present city building rqu,lations require one and one-half orf-stre; paI'--I g spaces for each bedroom,so by this star�dard tl:e ;7ar1.:!15:s al. eudy ro'ssl .:�a�iegt.ate 7e.aLitir.InC'�t Oi t.he'�e I,GZTies tre Gv er Orty 4'ear-s old, T13e propoLecl bicycle lai will e14minate 1.-- aa very essential spaces on this one block of Johnson,and more on other-blocks, This,will force the residents,employees,and clients to find -pace on tl�e cross street's, from Buchon to Monterey-streets that are already crayhFded. Consider also that the Payless/Scolari's project is not yet completed and therefore drwxw it�g increased traffic! Please,dont remove any street parking for the prcpcsed ur.mfe and unriecessarybik.elane, Such action will drastically devalue property and reduce business and rental income in both residential and commercial Zones. V k,L) Sincerely, AUG 19 1993 CITY COUNCIL SAN LUIS OBISPOa rrS Every a Talmage v Pali council has received this document