Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-15-2017 Item 16 - Broad Street Bicycle Blvd Options Meeting Date: 8/15/2017 FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager Luke Schwartz, Transportation Planner-Engineer SUBJECT: BROAD STREET BICYCLE BOULEVARD OPTIONS RECOMMENDATION 1. Hold a study session and receive a presentation on three alternatives for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard; and 2. Receive public input and provide guidance to staff regarding the Council’s preferred alternative; and 3. Direct staff to complete the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard plan with the Council’s preferred alternative and return to Council for consideration of the completed plan. REPORT-IN-BRIEF Transportation staff have progressed with planning efforts for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard project, with the goal of developing a safe, low-stress priority route for bicyclists and pedestrians connecting the downtown core to Foothill Boulevard. The intent of this effort is to provide a route that is attractive to not only experienced cyclists, but users of varying ages and ability levels. Based on a year-long process of community engagement and extensive technical analysis, staff has developed three design alternatives for the most challenging portion of this route - the segment between Lincoln Street and Ramona Drive. Each of the three currently proposed alternatives includes unique benefits and trade-offs, and varying levels of support and opposition from the community. The purpose of this study session is to review the three design alternatives for the project. Staff requests that Council consider the analysis findings and community input provided on each of these alternatives, and provide feedback and direction on a preferred option to carry forward into refinement and development of the final plan. The Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard project supports several key City programs and policies, including the Multimodal Transportation Major City Goal, the General Plan objective to achieve 20 percent bicycle mode share citywide, and Vision Zero initiative to eliminate traffic-related deaths and severe injuries for all the city’s road users by 2030 DISCUSSION Background Over the past year, Transportation staff have progressed with planning efforts for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard, with the intent to develop a low-stress, priority route for bicyclists and pedestrians connecting the downtown core to Foothill Boulevard. A “low-stress” route is a connection that serves users of varying ages and ability levels, from families with young children Packet Pg 417 16 to less-experienced adult cyclists who may be intimidated sharing the street with vehicular traffic under current conditions. This project is a “first priority” bike route project identified in the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan and supports several City programs and policies, including the Multimodal Transportation Major City Goal, the General Plan objective to achieve 20 percent bicycle mode share citywide, and Vision Zero initiative to eliminate traffic-related deaths and severe injuries for all the city’s road users by 2030. Staff has hosted three community meetings over the past year, including an interactive design workshop, to identify key concerns and types of features desired for the proposed bicycle boulevard. Based on input provided through these outreach activities, and via the project’s online forum, the staff recommendations for the northern and southern sections of the boulevard are generally straightforward. However, the middle section from Lincoln to Ramona is very challenging, with all options having significant benefits, trade-offs, and varying levels support and opposition from members of the community. There is significant history for these sections of Chorro and Broad that includes some of the earliest traffic calming efforts that the City undertook. The purpose of this study session is to review the three design alternatives for the project which have evolved from community outreach efforts to-date, with a focus on the middle segment. Additionally, we will request that Council consider the analysis findings and community input provided on each of these alternatives, and provide direction on a preferred option to carry forward into refinement and development of the Final Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Plan Project Alternatives The three alternatives that are being presented to Council are: Alternative 1 - Bicycle Boulevard with Traffic Diversion Along Broad Street Alternative 2 - Broad/Chorro One-Way Couplet System Alternative 3 - Traffic Calming on Broad & Chorro without Traffic Diversion Each alternative is summarized below and described further in Attachment A. Alternative 1 is shown in Figure 1 below. This alternative is similar to the Morro Street bicycle boulevard, as it includes diverters at three intersections along Broad Street that prevent thru automobile traffic and reduce automobile volumes. In addition, it includes speed cushions, neckdown points, and a traffic circle to reduce traffic speeds along Broad. The tradeoffs of this alternative include increased traffic on Chorro, Meinecke, & Lincoln beyond general plan thresholds, less convenient access to properties along Broad Street, and a loss of approximately 16 parking spaces. Packet Pg 418 16 Figure 1: Alternative 1 Alternative 2 is shown in Figure 2 below. This alternative includes the reconfiguration of Chorro and Broad into a one-way couplet for auto traffic, with Chorro being a northbound only street and Broad being a southbound only street between Meinecke and Lincoln. Converting to a one-way couplet will provide space for protected or buffered bike lanes and more evenly bal ance traffic volumes between Broad and Chorro Streets. The tradeoffs with this alternative include Packet Pg 419 16 increased traffic on Meinecke and Lincoln beyond general plan thresholds, less convenient access to properties along Broad and Chorro, and a loss of approximately 9 parking spaces along Broad and 22 along Chorro. Packet Pg 420 16 Figure 2: Alternative 2 Packet Pg 421 16 Alternative 3 is shown in Figure 3 below. This alternative evolved in response to neighborhood concerns about significant changes to circulation patterns in conjunction with the project. This alternative includes chicanes, speed cushions, and a roundabout to calm the speed of traffic on Broad and Chorro Streets; however, no diversion of traffic or dedicated bicycle lanes are provided. Alternative 3 will not have a significant impact on circulation patterns in the neighborhood. The trade-off with this alternative is a lower level bicycle facility. Packet Pg 422 16 Figure 3: Alternative 3 In addition to the three alternatives presented above there were several other alternatives and variations of these three alternatives the Council may like to consider some of these include: Lincoln Street Alignment - Moving the boulevard to Lincoln street was discussed due to the already low volume. However, this alternative did not evolve into the three options being presented due to the out of direction travel, lack of a controlled crossing at Chorro/West and incomplete connectivity to bicycle network. One-Way Couplet: Reversed Direction - A reverse one-way direction with Chorro being Southbound and Broad being Northbound was considered. However, the current configuration of alternative was selected based on the existing directional flow of traffic patterns. Reversing the direction of the one-way couplets would increase cut-through volumes on side-streets between Broad and Chorro compared to the currently-proposed option. One-Way Couplet: Reverse Direction of Bike Lane on Broad St. - The current configuration of the alternative, which includes a southbound only bike lane, was selected to provide a less confusing striping configuration for motorists; however, a northbound contra-flow bike lane on Broad Street can be considered and would potentially improve connectivity for bicyclists. On-Street Parking Removal in-lieu of One-way Couplet - The purpose of creating the one-way couplet is to provide space for a dedicated bicycle lane by removing a travel lane. This could also be achieved by eliminating on-street parking on one-side of the street for segments of Broad and/or Chorro to provide dedicated bicycle facilities without affecting auto circulation within the neighborhood. Preliminary parking supply and demand data collected by staff indicate that this could potentially be achieved while maintaining adequate parking supply within the neighborhood, albeit on-street parking locations would be less convenient for some homes. This alternative did not evolve into the three currently options being presented due to initial neighborhood concern regarding the loss of on-street parking, but can be studied further if desired. Pre-emptive Cut-Through Traffic Mitigation on Lincoln St. - Following public review of the proposed project alternatives, several residents have expressed concerns regarding the potential for increased cut-through traffic and speeding along Lincoln Street east of Chorro in conjunction with the proposed project. While any of the proposed options would be implemented in phases, allowing for monitoring of potential cut-through traffic impacts on adjacent streets, there appears to be significant interest in pre-emptively mitigating this potential impact on Lincoln Street by including traffic calming measures on Lincoln as part of the initial project phase. While not included in the currently proposed project alternatives, this is a reasonable amendment to consider. Alternatives Evaluation Transportation staff has conducted an extensive screening assessment to analyze each project alternative. The purpose of this assessment is to provide a transparent evaluation of the proposed alternatives to communicate the relevant benefits, disadvantages and challenges associated with each option to the community and decision-makers. This alternatives analysis includes Packet Pg 423 16 quantitative and qualitative review of the following relevant criteria: •Vehicular Traffic Access & Circulation •Parking Considerations •Costs & Implementation Feasibility •Benefits to Bicycling Environment •Pedestrian Environment & Streetscape Benefits •Potential for Green Street Elements •Ability to Achieve Overall Project Goal & Objectives A simplified summary of key pros and cons for each project alternative is included in Attachment A. The detailed Alternatives Screening Analysis Report is available for public review on the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard project website, and is included for Council review as Attachment B. Community Input As described above, each project alternative has unique benefits and drawbacks and will require challenging decisions to achieve a balance between improving safety and mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists of varying ages and ability levels, maintaining sufficient access for drivers, and retaining a quality neighborhood environment for residents of this area. To supplement the input provided at previous community meetings and via the project’s web forum, staff has conducted surveys of residents to gauge support for any of the three proposed project alternatives. An online survey was made available for citywide participation via the project webpage, while a mail-in survey was distributed to approximately 1,200 residents in the Broad and Chorro neighborhood. In total, 479 survey responses have been received as of August 1, 2017. The results of this survey are summarized below. 7% 27% 30% 37% 15% 44% 23% 19% 11% 35% 26%28% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Alt 1: Bike Blvd w/ Diversion Alt 2: One-Way Couplet Alt 3: Traffic Calming, No Diversion No Alternatives Acceptable Community Survey Results (as of 8/1/17) Neighborhood Mailer (239 responses) Citywide Online Survey (240 responses) Total (479 responses) Packet Pg 424 16 Based on the survey responses collected to date, Alternative 1 appears to be the least-favored project alternative both citywide and within the Broad/Chorro neighborhood. Per the citywide survey, Alternative 2 was the most popular option, receiving 44% of the total votes-nearly double that of the second ranking option. Within the neighborhood, there appears to be less consensus for a preferred option, with 37% of participants indicating that “No Project Alternative is Acceptable”, 30% of participants indicating support for Alternative 3, and 27% supporting Alternative 2. All comments received during the community survey process are included for review in Attachment C. Next Steps Following recommendation of a preferred alternative, staff will make any requested refinements to the preferred concept design and prepare a Final Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Plan, which will be made available for public review and presented to Council for final consideration for adoption. The Final Plan will present the preferred design concept, document the public outreach and alternatives analysis process, and identify a proposed project implementation and monitoring plan. The project improvements are anticipated to be implemented in phases. Throughout the implementation, staff will monitor the effectiveness of the features, identify any unanticipated impacts, and refine project designs as necessary. This phased approach would allow staff to identify and mitigate potential impacts to Broad and Chorro Street users, as well as potential neighborhood cut-through/speeding issues on nearby local streets. CONCURRENCES The City Bicycle Advisory Committee has reviewed the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard project alternatives and unanimously selected Alternative 2 as the BAC’s preferred alternative and recommends it approval to the City Council. Due to the limited time between the Bicycle Advisory Committee Meeting and City Council Meeting, draft minutes will be provided as part of Council Correspondence. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT No formal environmental review is required at this time. Once clear direction regarding a preferred alternative is known, the required CEQA environmental analysis will be conducted for the final project alternative. The findings of this analysis will be included for Council consideration with presentation of the Final Bicycle Boulevard Plan. FISCAL IMPACT No authorization of funds is requested as part of this study session or in conjunction with Council recommendation of a preferred project alternative. The Final Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Plan will be presented for Council consideration at a subsequent meeting, and request for authorization of funds for design and construction will follow the City’s financial planning process. Packet Pg 425 16 ALTERNATIVES 1. Council could recommend major changes to the currently proposed project alternatives, requiring significant updates to concept designs and screening analyses to appropriately understand potential project impacts prior to Council recommendation of a preferred option to carry forward. 2. The Council could continue this item to a future meeting date and request additional information of staff. Attachments: a - Project Alternatives b - Council Reading File - Broad Street Bicycle Boulevards Alternatives Screening Analysis c - Council Reading File - Community Survey Comments Packet Pg 426 16 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Alternative 1: Bicycle Boulevard with Traffic Diversion Along Broad Street Like San Luis Obispo’s first bicycle boulevard on Morro Street, this alternative creates a comfortable shared street for bicyclists along Broad Street by managing auto speeds and volumes between Lincoln and Ramona Streets. Traffic diverters are proposed at at the intersections of Broad/Meinecke, Broad/Mission and Broad/Center to shift through auto traffic to alternate routes, while traffic speeds are reduced with the addition of speed cushions, neckdown points and a neighborhood traffic circle at Broad/Mountain View. The Almond Street "Wiggle" includes addition of a northbound bike lane on Chorro between Lincoln and Center, and bicycle wayfinding signs/markings to provide an alternate northbound route to bypass the uphill climb on Broad. PROs CONs  Significant speed reduction on Broad  Decreases traffic volume on Broad to provide a comfortable biking and pedestrian experience.  Strong potential to establish a low-stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad.  Can be installed for interim testing with low-cost temporary materials.  With traffic diversion, increased traffic volumes on Chorro, Meinecke and Lincoln exceed established maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds.  Less convenient access to properties on Broad Street.  Degraded conditions for residents, drivers, bikes and pedestrians on Chorro.  Loss of on-street parking (16 spaces on Broad; 0 on Chorro) Packet Pg 427 16 Alternative 2: Broad/Chorro One-Way Couplet System Instead of improving the bicycle environment by reducing auto speeds and volumes on a shared street, this alternative improves conditions for bicycles by separating bicycle facilities from auto traffic. With this concept, Broad Street and Chorro Street are converted to a one-way couplet system. Broad (southbound) and Chorro (northbound) would be converted to one-way auto travel between Meinecke and Lincoln. This frees up street width to add a southbound buffered bike lane on Broad, provide a two-way protected bikeway (cycle track) on Chorro, and maintain the majority of on-street parking supply on both streets. Speed cushions are proposed on Broad Street between Mission and Mountain View to provide traffic calming. Further traffic calming can be considered along Broad and Chorro, if warranted. Packet Pg 428 16 ALTERNATIVE 2 TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS PROs CONs  Moderate speed reduction on Broad.  Traffic volumes evenly distributed between Broad/Chorro.  Bicycles fully separated from auto traffic.  Significant potential to establish a low- stress, convenient bicycle route for users of all ages & ability levels.  Most potential to attract new bicycle ridership.  With traffic diversion, increased traffic volumes on Chorro, Meinecke and Lincoln exceed established maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds.  Less convenient access to properties on Broad and Chorro Street.  Loss of on-street parking (9 spaces on Broad; 22 on Chorro)  Higher overall costs and more challenging to test/install with interim treatments.  Least desirable alternative for emergency service providers. Packet Pg 429 16 Alternative 3: Traffic Calming on Broad & Chorro without Traffic Diversion This alternative is similar to Alternative 1, but without any features that physically divert traffic from Broad Street. Alternative 3 works towards developing a comfortable shared street for bicycles through (a) traffic calming in the short-term on Broad and Chorro Streets, and (b) volume reduction in the long-term in conjunction with Caltrans’ ultimate plans to close the US 101 ramps at Broad Street. Traffic speeds are reduced with the addition of speed cushions on Broad and Chorro, and neckdown points and a neighborhood traffic circle on Broad. The Almond Street "Wiggle" includes addition of a northbound bike lane on Chorro between Lincoln and Center, and wayfinding signs/markings to provide an alternate northbound route to bypass the uphill climb on Broad. PROs CONs  Significant speed reduction on Broad and moderate speed reduction on Chorro.  No impact to circulation or property access.  Moderate potential to establish a low-stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad.  Can be installed for interim testing with low-cost temporary materials.  Chorro Street would continue to exceed established maximum thresholds, however, no additional impact to neighborhood traffic.  Volumes on Broad and Chorro remain above desired level for ideal low-stress bicycle facility.  Higher costs than Alternative 1, however, can be installed for interim testing with low-cost temporary materials.  Loss of on-street parking (20 spaces on Broad; 0 on Chorro)  Least potential to attract new bicycle ridership Packet Pg 430 16 RatingCommentsRatingCommentsRatingCommentsRatingCommentsTraffic ImpactsRoadway Segment Levels of Service (LOS)All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS.All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS.All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS.All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS.Intersection Levels of Service (LOS)All study intersections operate at acceptable LOS. All study intersections operate at acceptable LOS. All study intersections operate at acceptable LOS. All study intersections operate at acceptable LOS.Neighborhood Traffic ImpactsVolumes along Chorro & Lincoln exceed established maximum volume thresholds.Volumes along Chorro, Meinecke and Lincoln exceed established maximum volume thresholds.Volumes decrease on Chorro. Meinecke and Lincoln volumes exceed established maximum thresholds.Volumes along Chorro & Lincoln continue to exceed established maximum volume thresholds until potential US 101/Broad ramps closure.Property Access‐Access to Broad Street properties somewhat less convenient with diverters.Access to Broad & Chorro St. properties somewhat less convenient with conversion to one‐way.No impact to property access.Emergency Services Access‐Traffic calming treatments & diverters designed to minimize impacts to emergency services.Conversion to one‐way travel adds some inconvenience for emergency services access.Traffic calming treatments & diverters designed to minimize impacts to emergency services.Parking ConsiderationsOn‐Street Parking Loss‐Loss of apx. 16 on‐street parking spaces on Broad(≈ 11% of total supply). Loss of apx. 8 on‐street parking spaces on Broad; 22 on‐street spaces on Chorro(≈ 10% of total supply on Broad & Chorro). Loss of apx. 20 on‐street parking spaces on Broad(≈ 14% of total supply). CostsCosts & Feasibility of ImplementationNo cost above ongoing maintenance activities.Full improvements estimated at $879k. Can be installed for interim testing with low‐cost temp. materials.Cost for full improvements estimated at$1.12M (26% higher than Alt. 1 on avg.). Difficult to test/install with interim treatments.Full improvements estimated at $1.13M (28% higher than Alt. 1). Can be installed for interim testing with low‐cost temp. materials.Bicycling EnvironmentTraffic CalmingExisting prevailing speeds at 27‐30 mph, providing high‐street bicycling environment on Broad St. Chorro prevailing speeds at 31 mph.Diverters, speed cushions & traffic circle provide significant speed reduction on Broad St.One‐way conversion & speed humps provide moderate speed reduction on Broad St.Speed cushions, chicanes & traffic circle provide significant speed reduction on Broad St. and moderate speed reduction on Chorro St.Volume ManagementExisting volumes on Broad St. exceed maximum recommended volume for bicycle boulevard.Broad St. volumes within ideal range for bicycle boulevard. Increased vols on Chorro degrade bicycling environmentVolumes evenly distributed between Broad/Chorro.Bicycles fully separated from auto traffic.Existing volumes on Broad St. continue to exceed maximum recommended volume for bicycle boulevard until closure of US 101/Broad St.Bicycle Level of Service (LOS)(City Target = LOS B; Min Acceptable = LOS D)Bike LOS on Broad at LOS C/D.Bike LOS on Chorro St. at LOS DBike LOS on Broad at LOS A/B.Bike LOS on Chorro St. at LOS D/E.Bike LOS on Broad at LOS C (SB Only) &Bike LOS on Chorro St. at LOS A.Bike LOS on Broad mostly at LOS C/D, with slight improvement from existing.Bike LOS on Chorro St. at LOS DPedestrian/Streetscape EnvironmentConnectivity/Accessibility/Comfort‐Sidewalk improvements, new curb ramps, much lower traffic volumes/speeds greatly enhance pedestrian Environment.Sidewalk improvements, new curb ramps, fewer conflicts & shorter crossing exposure for pedestrians at intersections.Sidewalk improvements, new curb ramps, lower traffic speeds greatly enhance pedestrian Environment.Street LightingLimited street lighting along segments of Broad St. create poor nighttime visibility for users.Proposed street lighting will improve nighttime visibility/comfort for vehicles, peds & bikes.Proposed street lighting will improve nighttime visibility/comfort for vehicles, peds & bikes.Proposed street lighting will improve nighttime visibility/comfort for vehicles, peds & bikes.Potential for Green Street Elements‐Sidewalk bulbouts, diverters, traffic circle provide moderate opportunity for green street elements.Sidewalk bulbouts and cycle track buffer provide moderate opportunity for green street elements.Sidewalk bulbouts, chicanes, traffic circle provide moderate opportunity for green street elements.Overall PerformanceAchieves Overall Project Goal & ObjectivesExisting conditions on Broad St. do not provide ideal environment for bicycles & pedestrians.Improvements provide strong potential to establish a low‐stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad. Trade‐off is degraded conditions for other users on Chorro.Improvements provide significant potential to establish a low‐stress, convenient bicycle route for users of all ages & ability levels. Improvements provide moderate potential to establish a low‐stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad in short‐term.  Long‐term benefits are more significant with closure of US 101/Broad ramps.No Change from Existing‐Rates ModeratelyRates Very Poorly Rates WellRates Poorly Rates Very WellAlternative 3Alternatives Screening Analysis Summary MatrixPerformance Rating CriteriaCriteriaNo Build Alternative 1Alternative 2Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard ‐ Alternatives Screening AnalysisPacket Pg 43116 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg 432 16 Broad Street Bicycle BoulevardProject Alternatives Study SessionCity Council, August 15th, 2017Presenters:Jake Hudson, Transportation ManagerLuke Schwartz, Transportation Planner-Engineer• Introductions & Background• Present 3 Alternatives for Northern Segment (Lincoln to Ramona)• Discuss Other Project Options• Community Feedback• Open Discussion Focus Areas:•Northern Segment• Foothill to Hwy 101•Southern Segment• Hwy 101 to Monterey•Bike/Ped Crossing of Hwy 101 What is a Bicycle Boulevard & what makes a “low-stress” bicycle street?• Bicycle BoulevardoShared StreetoLow auto volumes/speedsoPrioritizes bikes/peds, accommodates carsoBranded signs & pavement markings• Low Stress Bicycling EnvironmentoSeparation from vehicle lanesoLow traffic volumes & speedsoExisting Broad/Chorro volumes & speeds exceed recommended levels for bike blvd.oComfortable for users of varying ages & ability levels Public Outreach Activities3 community meetingsIncluding interactive design charrette≈45 people attended each meetingOnline Forum1,000+ visitors to project site120+ commentsCommunity SurveyMailed to 1,200+ residents in project area239 responsesOnline survey available community-wide240 responsesSocial Media PlatformsPress ReleasesCity WebsiteE-BlastsTribuneKSBYNeighborhood Mailers Three Concept AlternativesAlternative 1:Bicycle boulevard with traffic diversion along Broad StreetAlternative 2:One-way “couplet”: Broad southbound, Chorro northboundAlternative 3:Traffic calming on Broad and Chorro without traffic diversion*Final solution may be variant of these options or other strategies* Alternative 1: Bicycle Boulevard with Traffic Diversion Along BroadPROS CONS• Significant speed reduction on Broad.• Decreases traffic volume on Broad to provide a comfortable biking & pedestrian environment.• Strong potential to establish a low-stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad.• Can be installed for interim testing with low-cost temporary materials.• Most favorable option for emergency response providers• With traffic diversion, increased traffic volumes on Chorro, Meinecke and Lincoln exceed established maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds.• Less convenient access to properties on Broad.• Degraded conditions for residents, drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians on Chorro with traffic diversion.• Loss of on-street parking: 16 on Broad ; 0 on Chorro Alternative 1: Bicycle Boulevard with Traffic Diversion Along Broad 02,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,0000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMEMOTOR VEHICLE SPEED (MPH)SPEED AND VOLUME THRESHOLDS FOR SHARED BICYCLE STREETBROAD ST(EXISTING)CHORRO ST(EXISTING)MaximumPreferredAlternative 1: Bicycle Boulevard with Traffic Diversion Along BroadBROAD ST(EXISTING)BROAD ST(ALT 1)CHORRO ST(ALT 1)MAX NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC THRESHOLD Alternative 2: Broad/Chorro One-Way Couplet SystemPROS CONS• Moderate speed reduction on Broad.• Traffic volumes more evenly distributed between Broad/Chorro.• Bicycles fully separated from auto traffic.• Significant potential to establish low-stress, convenient bicycle route for users of varying ages & ability levels.• Most potential to attract new bicycle ridership.• Meinecke and Lincoln volumes exceed neighborhood traffic thresholds, althoughlower than with Alt. 1.• Less convenient access to properties on Broad and Chorro.• Higher cost & more challenging to test/install with interim treatments.• Loss of on-street parking: 9 on Broad; 22 on Chorro.• Least-desirable option for emergency response providers. • Modifies primary response route• Response time to DT increased by apx. 60 sec.; but not beyond minimum• Limits use of ladder truck & available space for crew to operate in• Expectation that Fire will occupy cycle track lanes during a response PROTECTED BIKEWAY (CYCLE TRACK)BUFFERED BIKE LANESAlternative 2: Broad/Chorro One-Way Couplet System Alternative 3: Bicycle Boulevard with out Traffic Diversion on Broad StreetPROS CONS• Significant speed reduction on Broad and moderate speed reduction on Chorro with traffic calming.• No impact to circulation or property access.• Moderate potential to establish a low-stress, convenient bicycle route on Broad• Can be installed for interim testing with low-cost, temporary materials.• Minimal impact to emergency response• Near-term volumes on Broad and Chorro remain above level for low-stress bicycle boulevard. Long-term closure of Highway 101 ramps would reduce Broad volumes into acceptable range, but timeframe TBD.• No new impact, but Chorro volumes continue to exceed max neighborhood traffic thresholds. • Loss of on-street parking: 20 on Broad ; 0 on Chorro.• Least potential to attract new bicycle ridership. Alternative 3: Bicycle Boulevard with out Traffic Diversion on Broad Street 02,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,0000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMEMOTOR VEHICLE SPEED (MPH)SPEED AND VOLUME THRESHOLDS FOR SHARED BICYCLE STREETCHORRO ST(EXISTING)MaximumPreferredBROAD ST(EXISTING)BROAD ST(ALT 3)CHORRO ST(ALT 3)MAX NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC THRESHOLDAlternative 3: Bicycle Boulevard with out Traffic Diversion on Broad Street •On-Street Parking Removal on One Side of Chorro and/or Broad to provide protected bikeway in-lieu of one-way couplet conversionOther Variations Considered & Suggestions from Public Comment: Other Variations Considered & Suggestions from Public Comment:Example Broad Street Two-Way Circulation with One-Way Protected Bikeway (Parking Removal One Side)Example Chorro Street Two-Way Circulation with Protected BikewayExample Broad Street Two-Way Circulation with Protected Bikeway (Parking Removal Both Sides)Example Broad Street w/ Shared Lanes (Existing) Broad St30+% (50-60 sec) longer tripOther Variations Considered & Suggestions from Public Comment:•Lincoln Street Alignment Other Variations Considered & Suggestions from Public Comment:•Pre-emptive Cut-Through Mitigation on Lincoln St.•Alt 2. (One-Way Couplet): Reverse couplet direction and/or reverse Broad one-way bike lane•Align route so cyclists avoid difficult uphill grades:•Broad (NB Mountain View to Mission)•Chorro (SB/NB approaching Murray & Meinecke)•Replace existing speed humps on Broad w/ Speed Cushions•Replace existing stop signs on Chorro w/ Traffic Circles•Consideration for Aesthetics Interim vs. Permanent Features Interim vs. Permanent Features Interim vs. Permanent Features BAC Feedback• SLO Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) received presentation and public input at 7/20 meeting.• BAC deliberation focused on challenging balance between improving bicycling vs. neighborhood trade-offs• Formal BAC recommendation to pursue Alternative 2 (Broad/Chorro One-Way Couplet) for further development to promote highest potential to increase bike safety & mode share Community Feedback Funding•Included as CIP Project in 2017-19 Financial Plan•FY2017/18 – Phase 1 (interim testing) $105k•FY 2018/19 – Phase 2 (permanent features) $180kTOTAL$285kFunding Source: General Fund•68% from SB1 Transportation Funding•32% from General Capital OutlayFuture Year Funding Requests: $270,000 Where to Go From HereCouncil Study Session on Alternatives (8/15):•Invite questions & additional public input•Request Council guidance on preferred directionPlan Refinement•Refine designs & analysis for preferred concept•Prepare plan documenting process and final recommendationsFinal Community Meeting (4thQuarter 2017)•Present refined concept and analysis for preferred alternativeFinal Plan (early 2018)•Present Final Plan to BAC & Council for adoption•Phase 1 rollout 2018 PREFERRED CONCEPTAlt 1 (Traditional Bike Blvd.): Are volume diversions onto Chorro an acceptable tradeoff ?Alt 2 (Protected Bike Lines): Is one-way circulation an acceptable tradeoff ?In lieu of one-way circulation is the loss of parking an acceptable tradeoff, where & to what degree?Alt 3 (Traffic Calming): Is diminished mode shift potential as acceptable tradeoff ?Do Nothing: Do all the options have unacceptable tradeoffs ?