HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-17-2018 - Anholm - Otto (2)1
Tonikian, Victoria
From:Garrett Otto <
Sent:Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:51 AM
To:Advisory Bodies
Cc:E-mail Council Website; Goodwin, Heather
Subject:Re: Anholm Bikeway
Attachments:GNO One way couplet concept.pdf
All,
I forgot to remove some pages from the one‐way couplet idea. I only meant to send the first page. The rest are not
relevant to these ideas. Please see attached.
Thank you,
Garrett Otto
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Garrett Otto < wrote:
Dear ATC members,
I am sending you my comments as a resident of Anholm and a frequent bike commuter. I have resigned my position
from the ATC due to a conflict of interest on the project. I have spent countless hours working with staff, council, and
neighbors to come to some sort of solution. What has resulted is a lengthy drawn out process that has created a lot of
unfounded fear around this project. It is clear that many residents are unwilling to make a slight sacrifice to for the
safety of all roadway users and meet our city wide goals. After the last workshop, many residents opposed the bike
boulevard approach with diverted traffic. You will probably have a large group of people asking for just traffic calming,
which is not inline with our bike master plan, circulation plan, mode shift goals, vision zero goal, or climate action plan.
As the council resolution is worded, the backup plan is for protected bike lanes. I think the recommendation from the
ATC is to pursue one of these protected bike lane approaches (option 3 and 4). In my conversations with staff I did find
out that the original plans for the one‐way couplet are not acceptable by SLO fire department. I gathered that there
needs to be 20ft for the fire truck to get around cars and preferred Chorro to be southbound. Therefore staff has some
suggestions which they will present to you at the meeting. After considering the options, as a resident of the Anholm
neighborhood, I am supportive of these protected bike lanes options. I am leaning toward the one‐way couplet with
some additional suggestions because its ability to accommodate a separate bike lane for the entire length of the
corridor. I have attached two documents that demonstrate the suggestions and overall layout for the neighborhood.
One‐way couplets (see attached drawing).
1. Vehicle traffic is southbound on Chorro and northbound on Broad.
2. Chorro should be configured with Class 2 bike lane southbound with a buffered northbound bike lane maintaining
the ability for bikes to travel both north and sound which maintains the desire lines for the cal poly students that
typically use Murrary. This also will encourage new residents of the student housing project at 22 Chorro to use their
bikes instead of cars.
3. Broad street between Ramona and Mission should remove the parking from the west side of the street so that a
southbound protected bike lane can fit. This will give separated bike lanes the ability to go north or south along this
section which maintain the current desire lines for families taking their kids to school.
Pros:
‐ Separated bike lanes for the entire length of the route will have the highest likelihood of attracting interested but
concerned riders.
‐ Traffic circulation is balanced one Broad and Chorro.
‐ Side streets will likely only see residential traffic and may decrease in vehicle cross cutting.
2
‐ Maintains the desire lines for bikes.
‐ Should give a safe place for young riders to ride and not use the sidewalk.
‐ Could be seen as the compromise that doesn't disrupt traffic circulation as sign
Cons:
‐Contra flow may not seem intuitive to some at first. But this is essentially just like a two way street, but without cars
traveling in one of the directions.
‐ Broad street between Mission and Ramona needs about 15 parking spots removed to achieve the best configuration
for cyclist.
‐There are fewer actual physical protected bike lanes with this option, but is a vast improvement over no dedicated
bike facilities in the current configuration.
Protected Cycletrack with removal of parking (see attached drawing):
1. Chorro street is wide enough to fit a Class 2 bike lane without removing parking or drive lanes. I suggest re‐stripping
the section north of Mission to include a northbound bike lane. This allows riders to have a safe separated bike lane as
they ride up the hill on Chorro and is consistent with Cal Poly students desire line and helps connect to the new 22
Chorro student house complex.
2.Broad street should include additional traffic calming to slow traffic as much as possible for the shared street
approach.
Pros:
‐ The plan is a bit more vetted out
‐ It had the majority community support during the last city council meeting.
‐ It provides protected bike lanes for most of the route
Cons:
‐ There is still a section on Broad that requires bikes to share the lane with bikes and can add a level of stress that may
discourage some concerned riders.
‐ It removes parking which was a fairly contentious item for people.
‐ Two way cycle track can be confusing an a learning curve for people.
Thanks for reading and considering. Let me know if you would like any clarity on any of the points I have made. I look
forward to hearing the results of your discussion.
PS I am supportive of the parking protected bike lanes on Laurel Lane.
Thank you,
Garrett Otto
BROADFOOTHILL CHORROLINCOLNHORROBROADRAMONA SERRANO MEINECKEMURRAYWEST
VENABLEMISSIONMISSIONCENTERLINCOLNCENTERALMONDPEACHMILLPALMWALNUTUS 101BENTONMTN. VIEWCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
BROAD STREET BICYCLE BOULEVARD
ALTERNATIVE 2 SUMMARY MAP
SHEET TITLE:
N1" = 350'EXISTINGSPEED HUMPSPROPOSEDSPEED CUSHIONSEXTEND BIKELANE BUFFERCONCEPT ALTERNATIVE 2(BROAD/CHORRO ONE-WAY COUPLET)ED Restrict parking to one side of street (removes 15 parking spots) between Romona and Mission to fit asouthbound protected bike lane maintaining the existing "desire lines" and achieving separated bike lanesthe entire corridor.Mission to Lincoln is standard Class 2 buffered bike lane in same direction of travel at vehicles.Typical Class 2 southbound bike lane direction of vehicle traffic. Countra flow NB bike lane separated by dots or rolled humpthat will allow cars to park next to curb but will discourage drivers the may start drifting. Contra flow is essentially how two waystreets normally operate, but in this case removes the car from one of the lanes to dedicate it for bikes only. It seems notintuitive, but if you think of bikes as a car, it is the same sort of two way traffic we use everywhere else.NB SEPARATED CONTRAFLOW BIKE LANESB CLASS 2 BIKE LANESB PROTECT CONTRA FLOWBIKE LANENB CLASS 2 BIKE LANENB SEPARATED CONTRAFLOW BIKE LANESIDE STREET WILL ONLY BEUSED BY RESIDENTIALTRAFFIC IN THISCONFIGURATIONONE WAY COUPLET CONCEPTBROAD STREET FROM LINCOLN TO MISSION (LOOKING NORTH)BROAD STREET FROM MISSION TO RAMONA (LOOKING NORTH)CHRRO STREET (LOOKING NORTH)