HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/4/2018 Item 15, DandekarDate: August 26th, 2018
To: San Luis Obispo City Council
From: Hemalata Dandekar
RE: Anholm Bike Plan
Dear City Council members,
I write as a resident and home owner in the Anholm neighborhood, not as a City Planning
Commissioner. Although I recused myself, I completely support the commission's
recommendation to reject: the proposed reclassification of Chorro, Murray and Meineke; the
traffic diversions; and the changes to the General Plan. Rather, alternative approaches to
diffuse automobile counts and speed, divert traffic, will succeed in eliciting mode shift to biking,
increase pedestrian comfort, and protect a quality neighborhood.
I served on the LUCE advisory committee, and I specialize in urban design and land use in my
role as a Professor of City and Regional Planning, Cal Poly. The LUCE committee was unanimous
in wanting to reduce vehicle numbers on Chorro and Broad. The plan before you is one that is
based on a technical rational model, privileging efficiency in vehicular flow. It optimizes for that
and projects a mode shift. It does not factor in the qualitative, subjective assessments that
people make when they decide to walk, bike, or drive in, and through, neighborhoods. These
assessments are often made based on urban design qualities and the sense of safety and
interest that a walkable neighborhood provides.
You have been presented with a false dichotomy — a yes (approve) for bikes or no (reject) for
neighborhood. An alternative paradigm is to think of this as a choice between a yes (approve) -
for cars, and a no (reject) -for bikes, pedestrians and preserving the quality of a neighborhood.
There is another choice.
Diverting and diffusing automobile traffic and reducing it away from Chorro and Broad Streets
(which the LUCE committee was unanimously in favor of) and introducing stringent traffic
calming infrastructure widely in the neighborhood will make the streets more attractive and
friendlier to biking, walking and protect the quality of life in this neighborhood. A mode shift to
more bikes - as much as is "organic" and desired by area residents - will result. This is the
purported goal of this plan, to enhance a mode shift to biking and walking. However, the mode
share goal for 20% biking that is posited is unproven. It may well be unattainable regardless of
what is put in place in terms of conducive infrastructure. Mode shift happens from the ground
up, with residents voting with their feet, literally, to walk or to bike.
There are many reasons to vote no and send this plan back to the drawing board.
1. The need to maintain the quiet residential character of the Anholm neighborhood. It is a part
of the heritage fabric of the city — as one of the first "inner-city" subdivisions. It's
characteristics, walkable, pedestrian -friendly, tree -lined street scape is exactly what city
planners seek to establish throughout the nation, and in San Luis Obispo. This plan endangers
this special neighborhood. A yes vote on this plan will facilitate and legitimize vastly increased
traffic flows on Chorro, Broad, and Meineke. Unique residential qualities will be lost.
If increased bike use is desired, please request a plan to reduce automobile traffic that cuts
through the neighborhood. Reducing and calming traffic on Chorro and Broad, and the
subsidiary residential streets will promote biking and walking through it to go to the
Downtown. Routing car traffic to Santa Rosa, especially with increased traffic from new
developments on Foothill, rather than facilitating automobiles to cut through quiet and
traditional residential areas via Chorro and Broad, puts cars before people, before bikes and
before walking. A mode shift to biking and walking can be achieved by stringent traffic calming
measures throughout the Anholm neighborhood. Please:
1. Do not reclassify Chorro and Lincoln Streets from Residential Collectors to Residential
Arterials.
2. Do not reclassify Meinecke and Murry from local streets to Residential Collectors minor.
3. Do find ways to stop or reduce traffic turning south off Foothill to Chorro and Broad and
to stop or reduce traffic using Chorro going north to exit the downtown.
The plan presented to you will serve only to divert automobiles to the adjoining neighborhood
streets, particularly Lincoln which is an obvious cut -through. Lowering the stress for bicyclists
and pedestrians will result from reducing overall vehicular traffic along Chorro and Broad, and
throughout the neighborhood, not by endorsing it.
2. The Anaholm neighborhood is in transition. Younger families with children are moving in and
raising their families.
• On tiny West Street alone there are some 12 children under 10 years old, (with two due
to arrive soon.) They play on the footpaths and visit each other in the neighborhood.
• Diversion of traffic onto such local residential streets is dangerous. Even now, cars drive
up Lincoln and West at high speed to avoid the stop signs on Chorro. A plan that
protects the neighborhood character of these streets is as important as implementing a
plan that hypothetically models that more people will shift to biking. The bike way plan
will squeeze traffic from Chorro and Broad to the local streets in the neighborhood.
3. Traffic calming works. The more drivers are inconvenienced and the more constrained the
driving environment is, the safer it becomes for cyclists and for pedestrians. Also, drivers will
use less constrained streets. (See Streetfight: Handbook for an Urban Revolution, Janet Sadik-
Kahn and Livable Streets and Protected Neighborhoods, Donald Appleyard.
Please reject this proposal and direct staff to develop an incremental plan with significant traffic
calming measures for the whole Anholm neighborhood. Deter the pass-through traffic in this
area to increase biking, walking, and protect a unique residential neighborhood in our city.
2