HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 15 Reading File - Anholm Bikeway Plan (diversion & traffic calming)Amended August 2018
Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan i August 2018 Acknowledgements City Council Heidi Harmon, Mayor Carlyn Christianson Aaron Gomez Andy Pease Dan Rivoire Public Works Department Daryl Grigsby, Director Timothy Bochum, Deputy Director Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager Jennifer Rice, Transportation Planner-Engineer Luke Schwartz, Transportation Planner-Engineer Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager Active Transportation Committee Lea Brooks Past Members Jenna Espinosa Layla Lopez Timothy Jouet Howard Weisenthal Ken Kienow Brianna Martenies Paul Orton Jonathan Roberts Citizens of San Luis Obispo The many residents, parents, and students who participated in the Plan development. Thank you! Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan ii August 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 6 About the Plan ............................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Need ....................................................................................................................... 7 Project Goal and Objectives ......................................................................................................... 8 Relationship to Other Plans, Projects and Programs ................................................................... 8 II. Project Description ............................................................................................................... 11 Design Elements ........................................................................................................................ 17 Designing for Bicyclists All Ages and Ability Levels ................................................................... 25 Future Components ................................................................................................................... 27 III. Analysis of the Project ......................................................................................................... 28 Traffic Access & Circulation ....................................................................................................... 28 Parking Considerations .............................................................................................................. 31 Benefits to Bicycling ................................................................................................................... 32 Benefits to Pedestrian & Streetscape Environment ................................................................... 35 Neighborhood Quality Considerations ....................................................................................... 37 Overall Ability to Support Project Goals & Objectives ................................................................ 38 IV. Project Development Process ............................................................................................. 39 Community Outreach and Engagement ..................................................................................... 39 V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies .................................. 42 Phasing Plan and Cost Estimates .............................................................................................. 42 Performance Monitoring Program .............................................................................................. 44 Appendix A: Concept Design Plan Sheets Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis Appendix C: Adopting Resolution TABLES Table 1: General Plan Circulation Element Modal Split Objectives ................................................. 8 Table 2: Project Design Elements ................................................................................................. 17 Table 3: Neighborhood Traffic Assessment .................................................................................. 30 Table 4: Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions and Types of Bicyclists ..................................... 33 Table 5: Project Phasing and Planning-Level Cost Estimates ....................................................... 42 Table 6: Performance Monitoring Program ................................................................................... 44 FIGURES Figure 1: Project Study Area ........................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Recommended Traffic Speeds and Volumes for Mixed-Flow Street ................................ 7 Figure 3: Project Summary Map .................................................................................................... 12 Figure 4: Lincoln-to-Ramona Traffic Calming Program ................................................................. 13 Figure 5: Recommended Typical Street Cross Sections ............................................................... 14 Figure 6: Types of Transportation Bicyclists in San Luis Obispo ................................................... 25 Figure 7: Map of Existing On-Street Parking Conditions ............................................................... 31 Figure 8: Level of Traffic Stress Map with and without Project ...................................................... 34 Figure 9: Street Lighting Recommendations ................................................................................. 36 Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Executive Summary 1 August 2018 Executive Summary As originally envisioned in the 2013 City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan, the Anholm Bikeway Plan (the “Plan”) provides a blueprint to develop a low-stress, priority route for bicyclists and pedestrians between the City’s downtown core and Foothill Boulevard. These improvements will help create a vital multimodal link that not only accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians, but prioritizes safety and mobility for users of all ages and ability levels. This plan supports several key City programs, plans and policies, including the Multimodal Transportation Major City Goal, the General Plan objective to achieve 20 percent bicycle mode share citywide, the Climate Action Plan recommendation to increase use of active transportation modes, and Vision Zero initiative to eliminate traffic-related deaths and severe injuries for all the city’s road users by 2030. Project Description The Anholm Bikeway Plan provides recommended bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements to improve the link between Downtown San Luis Obispo and Foothill Boulevard. The proposed route consists of the following primary features, starting from Monterey Street in the downtown: Chorro Street (Monterey to Palm): Class III shared lane markings and route signage Chorro Street (Palm to Lincoln): Buffered bike lanes on each side of the street with potential for future installation of physical separation between bicyclists and motor vehicle traffic Lincoln & Broad Streets (Chorro to Ramona): Bicycle Boulevard with traffic diverter at Ramona/Meinecke to reduce through vehicle traffic, traffic calming measures to reduce vehicle speeds, enhanced markings and route signage Ramona Drive (Broad to Latter-Day-Saints Church property): A two-way protected bikeway in place of on-street parking on the north side of Ramona along frontage of the existing shopping center Multi-Use Path (Ramona to Foothill): Class I bicycle/pedestrian path connecting the two-way protected bikeway on Ramona to the planned Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon crossing at Foothill Boulevard Other key Plan elements include addition of a comprehensive traffic calming program within the Anholm residential neighborhood and revisions to the functional street classification for segments of Chorro, Lincoln, Murray and Meinecke Streets. A summary map of the proposed project improvements is shown in Figure ES-1. Technical Analysis Technical analysis of the Plan includes a traffic impact analysis, assessment of parking conditions, and review of potential benefits to the bicycling and pedestrian environments. Implementation of the Anholm Bikeway Plan will require removal of 17 on-street parking spaces along north side of Ramona to accommodate the two-way protected bikeway and removal of 47 spaces along Broad and Chorro Streets for installation of traffic calming measures and corner sight distance improvements. While the Plan retains street parking along the remainder of the proposed route, and analysis of existing parking conditions finds that there is available street parking nearby to accommodate the proposed parking removal on Ramona, the City supports establishment of a residential parking district—if supported by residents—to address general concerns regarding high demand for parking within the neighborhood. Implementation of the project will create a more comfortable bicycling environment than currently exists and would make significant progress towards establishing a low-stress bicycling corridor with the potential to attract more “interested but concerned riders”. While the improvements proposed in this plan are expected to make significant progress towards increasing bicycle ridership along the corridor, portions of the bikeway route between Lincoln Street and Ramona Drive where cyclists and motorists continue to share travel lanes are likely to remain unattractive to some less confident riders. Project Development Development of this plan included an extensive community-based public engagement effort, focused on understanding the key needs and priorities of residents and stakeholders. Outreach components included public meetings, a project website, and two community surveys. Multiple iterations of the design components were considered before reaching the ultimate design for the Anholm Bikeway.Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Executive Summary 2 August 2018 gg Figure ES-1: Project Summary Map MEINECKEAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Executive Summary 3 August 2018 Figure ES-2: Phase 1 Project Improvements Plan Implementation The Anholm Bikeway Plan will be implemented in three primary phases with the highest-priority features being those at the north end of the corridor—improvements that will support safe routes for families walking and biking to Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary Schools. As the plan is implemented, construction documents will be brought before the Active Transportation Committee (previously Bicycle Advisory Committee) and City Council for Review. Recommended phasing of project improvements is summarized below and illustrated in Figure ES-2, Figure ES-3 and Figure ES-4: Phase 1 – Implementation of the highest-priority features at the north end of the corridor—improvements that will support safe routes for families walking and biking to Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary Schools. Phase 1 includes the following features: Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossing (Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon) at Foothill & Ferrini Class I Pedestrian/Bicycle Path between Foothill & Ramona Removal of street parking on Ramona and installation of two-way Protected Bikeway Initiation of a Residential Parking District (if approved by the neighborhood) Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Executive Summary 4 August 2018 Phase 2 – Installation of the essential bikeway features between Downtown and Ramona Drive: Establish bicycle boulevard between Lincoln and Ramona with enhanced bikeway signage & markings between Lincoln and Ramona Install traffic diverter at Broad/Ramona/Meinecke as one-year pilot for testing prior to permanent installation Implement primary features of neighborhood traffic calming package Streetscape, lighting & artwork improvements at Chorro & Highway 101 Undercrossing Extend buffered bike lanes on Chorro between Lincoln and Palm Class III Shared Street on Chorro from Palm to Monterey Performance Monitoring Report to Council at 12 and 24 months after implementation Figure ES-3: Phase 2 Project Improvements *See Section 2 (Project Description) or the Appendix of this report for detailed traffic calming plan for Lincoln‐to‐Ramona segment. MEINECKEAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Executive Summary 5 August 2018 Figure ES-4: Phase 3 Project Improvements Phase 3 – Consideration for permanent installation of Broad Street traffic diverter, installation of physical separation within Chorro bike lane buffers between Palm and Lincoln, incremental installation of remaining higher-cost project improvements. Incremental installation of ancillary spot improvements such as sidewalks on west side of Broad Street, curb ramps, higher-cost traffic calming elements that cannot be funded in Phase 2, additional street lighting and physical separation within Chorro bike lane buffers between Palm and Lincoln. Consideration of further bikeway improvements on shared street portions of route based on findings of performance monitoring. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan I. Introduction 6 August 2018 I. Introduction About the Plan In early 2016, the City of San Luis Obispo Transportation Public Works Department began working with the community to develop plans for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard project. Identified as a “First Priority” project in the 2013 City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan, the goal of the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard was to provide a safe, convenient, low-stress through route for bicyclists and pedestrians connecting the City’s downtown core through the historic Anholm Neighborhood to Foothill Boulevard. The intent of this project is to take a major step towards achieving the City’s goal of 20% bicycle mode share by not only improving conditions for pedestrians and experienced bicyclists who are already comfortable frequenting the streets within this area, but to also provide high-quality facilities that can attract new users of all ages and ability levels—such as families with small children and less-experienced cyclists who are interested in using a bicycle for transportation, but are uncomfortable sharing the existing streets with busy motor vehicle traffic. After nearly two years of community outreach, detailed technical analysis and refinement of design alternatives, staff is pleased to present the end-product of these efforts—the Anholm Bikeway Plan. The Plan is organized into the following sections: Introduction – Page 6 What is the purpose of this project, why are improvements needed and how does this project relate to other city plans, programs and policies? Project Description – Page 11 This section describes the proposed project, including the proposed route alignment, example street layouts and design elements. Analysis of the Project – Page 28 How does the project support the goal and objectives of this planning effort, and what are the key benefits and trade-offs? This section summarizes the technical analysis conducted for the project, considering potential impacts to traffic and parking, benefits to the bicycling and pedestrian environment, influence on neighborhood quality, and overall ability to support the project goal and objectives. Project Development Process – Page 39 How did we get here? This section documents the community outreach activities conducted to develop this plan and summarizes the alternatives development process leading to refinement of the project. Cost Estimates, Phasing Plan and Performance Monitoring Strategies – Page 42 This section presents planning-level cost estimates and summarizes proposed project phasing and performance monitoring strategies. This plan provides a blueprint to guide transportation improvements to create the low-stress route originally envisioned in the Bicycle Transportation Plan and will help create a vital multimodal link that not only accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians, but prioritizes safety and mobility for users of all ages and ability levels. Figure 1: Project Study Area Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan I. Introduction 7 August 2018 Purpose and Need Broad and Chorro Street are key links to the northern area of the city, serving as primary routes for commuters, students, employees and visitors, connecting Foothill Boulevard to Highway 101 and Downtown San Luis Obispo. With few other north-south route options in this area, these streets carry a greater volume of vehicular through-traffic than typically desired for a residential collector street. Traffic volumes on Chorro currently exceed established maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds and traffic speeds along both Chorro and Broad Street exceed the posted 25 mph speed limit by 20 percent or more.1,2 Traffic conditions within this neighborhood have been an ongoing concern for residents, leading to one of the City’s first traffic calming projects in the 1990’s. While many of the traffic calming features installed along Broad and Chorro Streets in the 1990s were ultimately rejected for various reasons, there remains strong interest for streets that better balance motor vehicle throughput with neighborhood safety and mobility of other street users. High traffic volumes and speeds on Broad and Chorro not only affect neighborhood quality within the Anholm District, but also limit the viability of these streets as attractive routes for bicyclists and pedestrians off all ages and ability levels. While these streets are designated bike routes in the City’s bicycle network and include shared lane markings (“sharrows”) and signage indicating a cyclist’s right to share the road, current traffic conditions create an intimidating environment for many users—particularly families with school-age children, seniors, and less-experienced cyclists who are not comfortable sharing the lane with autos. As Figure 2 shows, existing traffic volumes/speeds exceed the ranges recommended for streets where cyclists and motor vehicles share travel lanes.3 Similarly, the pedestrian infrastructure within this neighborhood requires improvements to meet the needs of users with disabilities and other mobility challenges. Sidewalks are incomplete in several locations, particularly along the west side of Broad Street, accessible curb ramps are missing at several intersections, street lighting is limited, and the desire for intersection crossing enhancements has been expressed by many residents. To meet the City’s goals for increased walk and bike mode share (as discussed later in this section), street modifications are needed to provide an environment that is safe and viable for users who are interested in walking or bicycling more frequently, but are intimidated by the current street environment. 1 The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element designates Broad and Chorro Streets north of Highway 101 as Residential Collector Streets. For the purposes of maintaining neighborhood quality along residential streets, the City establishes maximum Average Daily Traffic (ADT) threshold of 3,000 veh/day for most residential collector streets, with an increased threshold of 5,000 veh/day for Broad and Chorro Streets north of Highway 101. Existing traffic levels on Chorro exceed 6,000 veh/day. 2 Prevailing vehicular traffic speed refers to the 85th percentile speed, or the speed at which 85 percent of observed drivers are traveling at or below. Thus, 15 percent of observed drivers are traveling above the 85th percentile speed. In 2016, prevailing speeds on Broad Street north of Lincoln Street were measured at 26‐30 mph and at 31 mph along Chorro Street. 3 Source of Recommended Traffic Speed and Volume Thresholds: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO). Figure 2: Recommended Traffic Speeds and Volumes for Mixed-Flow Street Cyclists on Broad and Chorro often ride within the narrow parking lane, increasing potential for “door zone” collisions Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan I. Introduction 8 August 2018 Project Goal and Objectives At the start of the planning process for this project, City staff worked with the community to clearly define the overarching project goal and design objectives required to support that goal. While the proposed project does not include development of a continuous bicycle boulevard, as originally envisioned, the initial goal and design objectives remain relevant to the final project. Relationship to Other Plans, Projects and Programs The Anholm Bikeway Plan supports several key City plans, programs and policies: General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements (2014) – The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (adopted 2014) provides the overarching vision, goals, policies, and programs for the city and is implemented through city ordinances, regulations, and guidance documents. The General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) call for investment in a safe, multimodal transportation network that provides viable transportation alternatives to help reduce dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles. As summarized in Table 1, the Circulation Element establishes modal split objectives to increase the use of alternate forms of transportation, including a goal to achieve 20% mode share for bicycles and 18% mode share for walking, car pools, and other forms of non-single occupancy vehicular use. Project Goal: Develop a safe, low-stress through route serving bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and skill levels connecting the City’s Downtown Core north to Foothill Boulevard. Design Objectives: Identity/Branding – Utilize signage, markings and other elements to provide a bicycle route with a look and feel that is unique from surrounding streets to communicate that bicycle travel has a priority on the roadway. These design features should encourage people to walk and bike along this route, while alerting drivers to expect to encounter people walking and bicycling. Traffic Calming – Incorporate design features that bring motor vehicle speeds closer to those of bicyclists, improving the safety and comfort of the bicycle and pedestrian environment, and livability of the neighborhood. Volume Management – Consider measures to separate bicyclists from motor vehicles, and/or explore strategies to reduce/discourage motor vehicle through traffic along a designated route by physically or operationally reconfiguring access along street segments and intersections. Such treatments should consider potential impacts to emergency vehicles and neighborhood access. Pedestrian Safety & Comfort – Incorporate design features along the boulevard that provide a continuous, accessible, low-stress environment for pedestrians of varying ability levels. Where feasible, identify opportunities for streetscape enhancements and green street features to enhance the existing beauty of the neighborhood and improve stormwater management. Crossing Enhancement – Improve accessibility, safety and comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing at intersections. Table 1: General Plan Circulation Element Modal Split Objectives Type of Transportation % of City Resident Trips Motor Vehicles 50% Transit 12% Bicycles 20% Walking, Carpools, and other Forms 18% Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan I. Introduction 9 August 2018 Bicycle Transportation Plan (2013) – The City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) provides for the planning, development, and maintenance of facilities and activities within the city that are safe and convenient for bicyclists of all ability levels, laying out a network of proposed bikeways to connect the city for travel by bike with special emphasis on travel to schools. The BTP includes the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard as a “First Priority” project, and identifies this as the City Bicycle Advisory Committee’s highest ranked bicycle route project in the plan. The BTP includes the overall project in two components: Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard – Ramona to Highway 101 & Highway 101 to Monterey: Create a bicycle boulevard to serve as the primary low traffic impact north/south through route for bicyclists and pedestrians connecting the downtown core to neighborhoods north of the downtown core. The alignment follows Broad Street throughout, from Monterey Street north to Ramona and the plan notes that traffic calming may be required. Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard – Grade-Separated Crossing at Highway 101: Provide a lower traffic route bypassing downtown core congestion with the addition of a pedestrian/bicycle grade-separated crossing of Highway 101 connecting north and south segments of Broad Street. Implementation of the grade-separated crossing will require removal of the Highway 101 ramps at Broad Street by Caltrans. The BTP proposes several other bicycle facility improvements within the vicinity of the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard, including another planned bicycle boulevard on Cerro Romauldo from Patricia to Ferrini, bike lanes on Highland, and intersection enhancements on Foothill at Patricia, La Entrada, and Ferrini. City of San Luis Obispo Major City Goals (2017-19) – As part of each two-year financial plan, the City Council identifies Major City Goals. These represent the most important, highest priority goals for the City to accomplish over the next two years, and as such, the resources to accomplish them are prioritized in the financial plan components. One of the four Major City Goals established in conjunction with the 2017-19 Financial Plan focuses on improving Multi-modal Transportation—specifically, to prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan, pedestrian safety improvements, and the Short-Range Transit Plan. Vision Zero – The message of Vision Zero—adopted as policy by the San Luis Obispo City Council in 2016—is simple: one death on our city streets is too many. Rather than accepting traffic-related deaths as “accidents” and singularly faulting road users, the Vision Zero initiative places the core responsibility for traffic safety on proper street system design, enforcement and public education. The premise is that humans are fallible and will make mistakes—properly designed transportation systems can help minimize the consequences and severity of these mistakes when they do occur. Through data-driven analysis, innovative street improvements, strategic traffic enforcement and education, the City of San Luis Obispo is committed towards a goal of zero traffic-related deaths or severe injuries by 2030. A key focus of the City’s Vision Zero initiative is to prioritize safety improvements for locations with higher potential for collisions involving vulnerable road users, such as bicyclists, pedestrians, small children, the elderly and those with disabilities. WHAT IS A BICYCLE BOULEVARD? A “bicycle boulevard”, also referred to as a “neighborhood greenway” in some cities, is shared roadway that creates an attractive, convenient, and comfortable bicycling environment that is welcoming to cyclists of all ages and skill levels. The low-speed/traffic environment created by bicycle boulevards is not only attractive to bicyclists, but also to pedestrians. Bicycle boulevards are designated and designed to shift priority from vehicles to bicycles. Bicycle boulevards can be designed at different levels depending on the context of the street, and the effects desired by the community. The levels range from basic treatments, such as simple striping and signage, to more significant design elements, such as diverters and closures to reduce vehicle speeds/volumes and improve the safety and comfort of the bicycling environment. Many of the treatments associated with bicycle boulevards not only benefit people on bicycles, but also help create and maintain “quiet” streets that benefit residents and improve safety for all road users. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan I. Introduction 10 August 2018 Safe Routes to School Plan for Bishop’s Peak & Pacheco Elementary Schools – In August of 2017, City Council adopted a Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements Plan for Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary, two schools located in the northern portion of the City. The purpose of the SRTS Plan was to identify specific transportation improvements, education, outreach and enforcement strategies to make walking and bicycling to Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary Schools safe, accessible, and attractive options for children and their families. While the SRTS Plan is separate from this effort, what it envisions is complementary to this plan to improve conditions for pedestrians and cyclists of all ages and ability levels from the downtown to the Anholm District and other neighborhoods to the north. Two of the highest priority projects included in the SRTS Plan provide significant benefits to pedestrian and bicycle mobility by continuing the connection between the route developed in this plan (Anholm Bikeway Plan) and the neighborhoods north of Foothill Boulevard: Foothill Boulevard & Ferrini Road Crossing Enhancement – Addition of a controlled pedestrian/bicycle crossing on Foothill Boulevard at Ferrini. Improvements feature addition of a high visibility crossing markings, warning signage, and installation of a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (a.k.a. “HAWK”) at this intersection to provide a dedicated crossing phase for cyclists and pedestrians. Where warrants prevent the installation of standard traffic signals, the pedestrian hybrid beacon provides an alternative that provides a controlled crossing phase for pedestrians and bicyclists, but stops road traffic only as needed. Ramona Drive to Foothill Boulevard Class I Path – This project is aimed at addressing the difficult walking and bicycling environment along Ramona and Foothill due to high traffic volumes and speeds. Limited bicycle accommodations at the Foothill/Broad intersection and lack of other controlled crossings along Foothill further impact connectivity between the neighborhoods north and south of Foothill. The proposed improvements include construction of a Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path along the eastern edge of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) property between Ramona and Foothill. This will provide a low-volume/low-stress alternative to Broad and Foothill. At the north end, this path will align with the enhanced crossing proposed at Foothill & Ferrini. Implementation of this project would require an agreement between the City and LDS Church for an access easement or right-of-way acquisition. Potential Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Between Foothill and Ramona Potential Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK) at Foothill & Ferrini Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 11 August 2018 II. Project Description A variety of route alignments and design features were considered in developing the final concept for the Anholm Bikeway. The final recommended project includes the following primary features: Route Alignment: Starting from Monterey Street (Mission Plaza) at the south end, the designated route follows Chorro Street north to Lincoln Street; Lincoln Street west from Chorro to Broad Street; Broad Street from Lincoln Street north to Ramona Drive; Ramona Drive west to a proposed SRTS Class I Pedestrian/Bicycle Path, then north to connect with a planned enhanced bicycle/pedestrian crossing at the Foothill Boulevard/Ferrini Drive intersection. The alignment of the designated route is intended to maintain a convenient, direct path for bicyclists and pedestrians, while avoiding the steeper uphill grades on Broad and Chorro where feasible. Bicycle Facilities: The Plan includes a combination of dedicated buffered and/or protected bike lanes and low speed/volume shared streets between Downtown and Ramona Drive, and a dedicated SRTS Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path from Ramona to Foothill Boulevard to complete the continuous low-stress bicycle and pedestrian corridor. Protected bike lanes place a physical barrier between drivers and bike riders to improve safety and comfort for cyclists—particularly for less experienced riders and for the many people who are interested in biking more but have concerns about the safety of sharing the road with busy motor vehicle traffic. For segments of the route without protected bike lanes, elements such as traffic calming, auto traffic diversion, enhanced pavement markings and signage are proposed to clearly communicate that these street segments are prioritized for lower-speed bicycle travel. Traffic Speed/Volume Management: Traffic calming measures are proposed along the bikeway corridor and throughout the Anholm Neighborhood to address speeding issues that currently exist. Potential measures to be considered include, but are not limited to, speed humps/cushions, raised crosswalks, median islands, and bulbouts. A traffic diverter is proposed on Broad at Ramona/Meinecke to restrict through vehicle traffic on Broad. The intent of these measures is to reduce motor vehicle speeds and volumes to a range consistent with the posted speed limits of these streets (25 mph or less) and to a level more conducive to a walkable, bikeable and livable residential neighborhood. As part of this Plan, modifications to street functional classifications are proposed for segments of Chorro Street, Lincoln Street, Meinecke and Murray Streets. See Traffic Access and Circulation section of this Plan for further details regarding traffic circulation with the proposed project. Crossing Enhancements: Crossing enhancements are proposed at several intersections to improve access, safety and comfort for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers. Crossing enhancements include installation of accessible curb ramps, a raised crossing at Broad/Murray, improved crosswalk markings/signage and corner bulbouts. Other Features: Other important features of the proposed project include street lighting enhancements, sidewalk improvements, streetscape enhancements and green street elements, where feasible, to improve stormwater management within the study area. Error! Reference source not found. summarizes the project route alignment and key features, while Figure 4 illustrates the traffic calming program between Lincoln and Ramona. Figure 5 shows the typical street cross sections along the route. Specific design elements are discussed in further detail below and analysis of the project’s advantages and trade-offs is included in Section III of this document. For detailed concept drawings of full Anholm Bikeway Alignment, see Appendix A.Photo Courtesy of Lisa Jouet Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 12 August 2018 Figure 3: Project Summary Map MEINECKEAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 13 August 2018 Figure 4: Lincoln-to-Ramona Traffic Calming Program Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 14 August 2018 Figure 5: Recommended Typical Street Cross Sections NOTE: Street cross section widths represent typical dimensions along designated segments. Details may vary in final designs. Travel Lane 14’ Travel Lane 13’ Sidewalk (Existing) Sidewalk (Existing) *Parking 7’ Chorro Street (Monterey to Palm) *Parking Width Transitions to Left-Turn Lane at Intersections East Side of StreetTravel Lane 10’-11’ Travel Lane 10’-11’ Sidewalk (Existing) Sidewalk (Existing) Buffer w/ Physical Barrier 2.5’-3’ Bike Lane 5’-6’ Bike Lane 5’-6’ Buffer w/ Physical Barrier 2.5’-3’ Chorro Street (Palm to Lincoln) Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 15 August 2018 Figure 5: Recommended Typical Street Cross Sections (cont.) NOTE: Street cross section widths represent typical dimensions along designated segments. Details may vary in final designs. Lincoln Street (Chorro to Broad) & Broad Street (Lincoln to Ramona) Travel Lane 10’-12’ Travel Lane 10’-12’ Parking 7’-10’ Sidewalk (Existing) Sidewalk (Existing) Parking 7’-10’ Travel Lane 10’-11’ Travel Lane 10’ Parking 7’ Sidewalk (Existing) Sidewalk (Existing) Buffer w/ Physical Barrier 2’-3’ Bike Lane 5’ Bike Lane 5’ Ramona Drive (Broad to Safe Routes to School Path) North Side of StreetNorth Side of StreetAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 16 August 2018 Figure 5: Recommended Typical Street Cross Sections (cont.) NOTE: Street cross section widths represent typical dimensions along designated segments. Details may vary in final designs. Safe Routes to School Path (Ramona to Foothill) Bicycle/Pedestrian Path 10’-12’ Shoulder 2’-3’ Shoulder/Lighting 4’-6’ Shopping CenterLDS Church Field Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 17 August 2018 Design Elements The project includes a suite of mobility and safety tools that benefit various road users. Key elements of the project are summarized in Table 2 below, while detailed design features are shown on the plan sheets in Appendix A. Table 2: Project Design Elements Design Element Description Benefits Mode Affected Location SIGNAGE Signs create the basic elements of a priority bikeway. Types of signage often include standard lane/route signs, branded gateway or trailblazer signs, and wayfinding signage to guide users to key destinations and other bicycle routes. Helps brand street segment to differentiate from other streets and reinforce the message of priority for bicycles along a given route. Bicyclists Pedestrians Applied at major street crossings, entry points to the bikeway and at key junctions with other bicycle routes HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSING STRIPING & SIGNS “Ladder” crosswalk striping, dashed bike lanes or shared lane markings through intersections, and other forms of high-visibility striping and signage. Improves visibility of crossings to all roadway users. Can improve driver yield rates compared to standard crossing markings. Bicyclists Pedestrians Motor Vehicles Applied at major street crossings along the designated project corridor, such as Broad/Ramona, Chorro/Lincoln. GREEN PAINT Green roadway surface coloring to mark merging zones and potential conflict areas between bicycles and other roadway users. Can also be used as backing for sharrows and within intersection crossing markings for bicyclists. Increases visibility of bicycle facilities. Alerts drivers and bicyclists to potential conflict areas. Provides branding and wayfinding for cyclists along priority bicycle routes. Bicyclists Motor Vehicles Applied within bicycle-vehicle conflict areas through key intersections. Green backed sharrows provided along shared street segments to indicate priority for bicyclists. Installed at entry points to protected bikeways to prevent accidental motor vehicle entry. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 18 August 2018 Table 2: Project Design Elements Design Element Description Benefits Mode Affected Location PROTECTED BIKE LANES On-street bikeway with physical separation from motor vehicle traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. May be one-way or two-way, and may be at street level or sidewalk level. Physical separation can be provided through a variety of design features, including raised curbs, on-street parking, delineator posts, bollards or planters. Creates a physical barrier between bicycles and motor vehicle traffic lanes. Provides the safety and comfort of off-street bicycle path with the on-street infrastructure and connectivity of a bike lane. Removes slower-moving cyclists from auto travel lanes, simplifying conditions for drivers. Bicyclists Motor Vehicles Proposed on Ramona from Broad to Class I Path along the street segment where high vehicle speeds/volumes create a high-stress environment for bicyclists. Potential installation within bike lane buffer on Chorro between Lincoln and Palm. CURB EXTENSIONS (BULB-OUTS) & MEDIAN ISLANDS Bulbouts include an extension of the sidewalk or curb face into the parking lane at an intersection or mid-block location. Median islands are raised or painted areas in the center of the street that visually and/or physically reduce the width of the roadway. In some cases, median islands include refuge areas at pedestrian crossings Reduces crossing distance and exposure area for pedestrians crossing at intersections. Provides better visibility between pedestrians and motorists. Potential to calm traffic and reduce vehicle turning speeds. Provides area for potential streetscape and/or green street enhancements. Pedestrians Motor Vehicles Proposed at several locations along Broad and Chorro between Lincoln and Ramona, and at Chorro/Walnut. TRAFFIC DIVERTERS Traffic diverters restrict through vehicle movements while providing access for bicycling and walking Reduces vehicle volumes to levels Establishes bicycle priority by restricting through vehicle traffic Improves bicycling and walking comfort by reducing conflicting vehicle volume Bicyclists Pedestrians Motor Vehicles Broad Street at Meinecke and Ramona Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 19 August 2018 Table 2: Project Design Elements Design Element Description Benefits Mode Affected Location STREET LIGHTING Well-designed street lighting provides a continuous, sufficiently lit pathway for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Improves nighttime visibility for all road users and provides perceived safety benefits for neighbors. Bicyclists Pedestrians Motor Vehicles Proposed along Chorro, Broad and Ramona where existing street light spacing does not meet City Engineering Standards. SPEED HUMPS / CUSHIONS Speed humps are traffic calming devices that use vertical deflection (typically 2-4 inches high) to slow motor vehicle traffic. Variations include speed cushions, which include cutouts specifically designed to allow wide-axle emergency vehicles to pass through unimpeded. Provides traffic calming benefits, which enhances neighborhood quality and improves safety for all users. Speed cushions reduces motor vehicle speeds with little impact to emergency vehicles or bicyclists. Bicyclists Pedestrians Motor Vehicles Proposed throughout neighborhood between Lincoln and Ramona. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS & ACCESSIBLE CURB RAMPS Safe, accessible, continuous, and well-maintained sidewalks and curb ramps are necessary to provide an environment that encourages walking for people of all ages and abilities. Improves accessibility and connectivity for pedestrians of all ages and ability levels. Pedestrians ADA-compliant curb ramps proposed at several intersections along Broad and Chorro Streets where currently missing. Sidewalk installation proposed along west side of Broad Street where currently missing. GREEN STREET ELEMENTS Green streets incorporate a variety of design elements, such as street trees, permeable pavements, bioswales or other landscaping and plantings that improve stormwater management. Provides benefits such as improved drainage, filtering of stormwater runoff, reduced heat island effect and a more pleasant and visually appealing environment for walking and biking. Pedestrians Within widened sidewalks, corner bulbouts and to be considered within raised median as part of long-term protected bikeway separation. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 20 August 2018 Chorro Undercrossing Safety & Placemaking Enhancements As part of the community outreach process for this project, staff received several requests from residents for safety and aesthetic improvements along the Chorro Street undercrossing of Highway 101. Although this location serves as a key gateway into Downtown San Luis Obispo, the underpass currently lacks lighting or other amenities needed to provide a comfortable, attractive environment for pedestrians and cyclists at night. This plan recommends installation of safety lighting, public artwork and other streetscape improvements to enhance the environment under the highway. If construction of these improvements is not feasible as part of Anholm Bikeway Plan implementation—which is possible considering the required costs, design challenges, and need for Caltrans approval/participation for work within the State right-of-way—these improvements could potentially be designed and constructed as part of another City program, such as the newly-created New Streetlight Installation Program, or as a stand-alone capital improvement project. The Chorro/Highway 101 underpass lacks lighting and other amenities necessary to provide a quality pedestrian environment. Pedestrian lighting and streetscape enhancements are recommended to improve pedestrian conditions at this key gateway point to Downtown San Luis Obispo. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 21 August 2018 Bicycle and Pedestrian Intersection Crossing Enhancements The project includes focused improvements at several intersections to provide wayfinding guidance for cyclists, and to improve crossing safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Recommended treatments include green pavement markings within potential vehicle-bicycle conflict areas, directional pavement markings to convey the path for bicyclists to follow when entering/exiting the two-way protected bikeway on Ramona, corner bulbouts to shorten crossing exposure for pedestrians, a raised crossing at Broad/Murray, and improved crosswalk markings to improve driver awareness of pedestrians at key crossing locations. Improvements are recommended at Chorro/Walnut to improve crossing safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. A raised crosswalk is proposed at Broad/Murray to improve crossing accessibility and safety for pedestrians Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 22 August 2018 Traffic Diverter The project includes a traffic diverter on Broad Street between Meinecke and Ramona. The intent of this feature is to restrict through movement of motor vehicles on Broad Street, while maintaining access for pedestrians, bicyclists and emergency vehicles. The diverter is proposed for initial installation as a one-year pilot to allow for performance monitoring and review by City Council and community stakeholders prior to approval of a permanent installation. Interim designs will utilize temporary lower-cost elements, like moveable planter boxes and painted/stamped asphalt. Permanent design features are proposed to include concrete bulbouts with landscaping and stormwater management (‘green street”) elements, as well as potential for placemaking amenities like public art and street furniture. In conjunction with the installation, guide signs are proposed to be installed along entry points to the Anholm Neighborhood as well as along Broad Street to direct drivers to use alternate routes, like Santa Rosa Street, to access US 101 and Downtown San Luis Obispo. Proposed traffic diverter on Broad Street at Ramona/Meinecke restricts vehicular through traffic, while maintaining access for bicyclists and pedestrians. Diverter design will provide opportunity for placemaking amenities, such as public gathering space, community artwork and potential for landscaping and green street treatments. CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION OF PERMANENT INSTALLATION Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 23 August 2018 CONCEPT RENDERING OF INITIAL PILOT INSTALLATION A traffic diverter is proposed to be implemented initially as pilot installation using temporary, lower-cost materials such as moveable planter boxes and painted/stamped asphalt to allow for testing and performance monitoring prior to City approval of a permanent installation. If permanent installation is approved, ultimate design features are likely to include bulbouts with landscaped plantings Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 24 August 2018 Traffic Calming and Bicycle Boulevard Features The project will establish a bicycle boulevard, also referred to as “neighborhood greenways” in some communities, along the Lincoln-to-Ramona route segment. This approach retains on-street parking while providing a low traffic volume/speed shared prioritized for bicycling and walking. As shown in Figure 4, a robust traffic calming program is proposed along the bicycle boulevard, as well as along other streets in the neighborhood. Traffic calming measures include, speed humps/cushions, raised crosswalks, median islands, and bulbouts. The intent of these measures is to reduce motor vehicle speeds and volumes to a level more conducive to a walkable, bikeable and livable residential neighborhood. The bicycle boulevard will be accompanied with branded guide signage and pavement markings to convey this route as a low-speed, priority route for cyclists. A bicycle boulevard, or “neighborhood greenway”, will be established along the Lincoln-to-Ramona route segment, with installation of branded guide signage, pavement markings, and traffic calming elements. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 25 August 2018 Designing for Bicyclists All Ages and Ability Levels As mentioned previously, the City has established goals to increase mode share for alternative forms of transportation, including goals to increase bicycle mode share from current levels (6-8%) to 20%. Many community benefits are achieved by increasing mode share for active forms of transportation (walking and biking), from benefits to community health with increased physical activity, to contributions towards reducing parking demand, traffic congestion, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve these mode shift goals, it is important to first understand existing travel behavior within the community and the primary barriers that prevent residents, employees and visitors from bicycling more often. Even in the absence of actual collision trends or safety deficiencies on a given street, surveys show that the perception of risk or unsafe conditions is often the most significant barrier to bicycling for the majority community members. For the purposes of bicycle system planning, the general population of a community can be classified into four types of transportation bicyclists. These four types of users and the corresponding percent of City of San Luis Obispo residents who identify with each classification, as estimated based on local travel survey data, are summarized in Figure 6.4 As shown in Figure 6, 18% of San Luis Obispo residents fall within the “No Way No How” category—they do not currently bicycle and have little interest in doing so. Similarly, 18% fit the “Strong and Fearless” description, and will likely bike regardless of what facilities are provided. The remaining population (64% of all residents) fall into the “Enthusiastic and Confident” or “Interested but Concerned” categories—less experienced riders who are interested in bicycling for transportation, but do not feel comfortable riding in mixed traffic on most streets, or even within painted bike lanes on busier streets. Not all bicycle facilities are created equal—a painted line dividing cyclists from busy motor vehicle lanes, or sharrows placed within a travel lane on a street with high traffic volumes/speeds might be acceptable for “Strong and Fearless” riders, and perhaps some “Enthusiastic and Confident” cyclists. However, the remaining people interested in cycling—somewhere between 31% and 64% of city residents—will generally choose to drive if the type of low-stress bike facilities that they feel safe using—separated trails, protected bikeways and low speed/volume neighborhood streets—are not available. If the City is to meet its goal to reach 20% bicycle mode share, it stands to reason that strategic investments will need to be made in the types of bicycle infrastructure that accommodates users of all ages and ability levels. 4 Source: 2013 Bicycle Use Survey Results, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), October 2013. Figure 6: Types of Transportation Bicyclists in San Luis Obispo Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 26 August 2018 Facilities with physical separation from vehicles, or shared streets with low traffic volumes and speeds, like bicycle boulevards, provide the potential to not only benefit the existing rider population, but expand it significantly by attracting the “Enthusiastic and Confident” and “Interested but Concerned” riders. Why Protected Bike Lanes? While protected bike lanes—also commonly referred to as “cycle tracks” or Class IV Bikeways (per Caltrans standard bikeway classification)—are a new type of facility for the City of San Luis Obispo, their benefits in terms of safety and potential to increase bicycle ridership are well-documented. Protected bike lanes have been a best practice in street planning for decades in many European cities, such as Amsterdam and Copenhagen, where 40 percent or more of citywide trips are made by bicycle. Over the past decade, more and more North American cities have been building these types of facilities, with over 400 protected bike lane installations in over 100 U.S. cities as of 2017. Why are more and more cities building protected bike lanes? The following statistics provide some explanation:5 Increased Bicycle Ridership – New protected bike lanes have been found to boost bike volumes by an average of 75 percent in the first year alone. Following the City of Calgary’s recent rollout of a four-mile network of protected bike lanes as a pilot project, bicycle ridership along these routes doubled in the first three months, including a 30 percent increase in female riders. Throughout the downtown, bicycle ridership increased by 40 percent during the pilot project. Attractive to Less Experienced Riders – Surveys find that 80% or more of “Interested but Concerned” bicyclists would be comfortable riding in protected bike lanes—a significantly higher percent compared to those who would be comfortable riding in standard bike lanes (39%) or streets with no bicycle facilities (8%). They Can Make Biking Safer – Installing a protected bike lane on a street cuts the injury risk per bike trip by 30 percent (two-way bikeway) to 50 percent or more (one-way bikeway). Reduces Some Types Unsafe Behavior – Adding a protected bike lane cuts sidewalk riding by 56 percent on average (sidewalk and wrong-way riding accounts for 16 percent of San Luis Obispo bicycle collisions). Pedestrian Safety – Protected bike lanes can calm traffic and reduce crossing distances for pedestrians. With the installation of protected bike lanes along several streets, New York City reported a reduction in traffic injury rates—mostly reflective of pedestrian injuries—of 12 to 52 percent. The Plan includes installation of protected bikeways at two locations. Physical separation is proposed within the bike lane buffers on Chorro Street between Lincoln and Palm, and a two-way protected bikeway is planned to replace on-street parking on the north side of Ramona between Broad and the planned SRTS Class I Path. 5 Statistics referenced from People For Bikes (www.peopleforbikes.org) and The Green Lane Project (www.greenlaneproject.org). Observed Bicycle Ridership Increase After Installation of Protected Bike Lanes in Various U.S. Cities (Source: The Green Lane Project) Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan II. Project Description 27 August 2018 Future Components There are several improvements that have been requested by the community, presented in other plans, or recommended by staff that relate to the Anholm Bikeway Plan, but due to costs or other constraints, are not recommended at this time. These improvements may be studied further and potentially implemented in the future as part of other City programs or as stand-alone projects. These include the following: Closure of Highway 101/Broad Street Ramps & Grade-Separated Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing of Highway 101 – As discussed previously, the project description for the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard in the 2013 BTP identifies a future grade-separated bicycle/pedestrian crossing of Highway 101 at Broad Street. Implementation of this crossing will require the ultimate closure of the Broad Street ramps by Caltrans, which according to recent studies by the City and Caltrans will not be feasible for the foreseeable future due to resulting impacts to the adjacent interchange at Santa Rosa (Highway 1) and nearby city streets. Major improvements would be needed to address the anticipated impacts at the Santa Rosa (Highway 1) interchange—due to the significant costs associated with these improvements, this is not feasible at this time. In addition, construction of a new grade-separated crossing of Highway 101 at Broad Street—most likely a bridge over the highway—would involve significant costs (estimated at several million dollars in the 2013 BTP), which further limits the feasibility of these improvements at this time. Since the southern portion of the Anholm Bikeway alignment follows Chorro Street into Downtown, including installation of protected bike lanes along this stretch, the ultimate utility and need for a new crossing at Broad Street and Highway 101 is likely reduced. This improvement is not included as part of the Anholm Bikeway Plan at this time, but the City will continue to work with Caltrans to pursue closure of the Broad Street ramps, and will reevaluate the potential for a pedestrian/bicycle crossing at this location in future years if closure of the ramps becomes feasible. Safety Improvements at Chorro & Peach Intersection – The intersection of Chorro and Peach has been identified as a high collision-rate intersection in the City’s annual Traffic Safety Report in several recent years, with a propensity for auto vs. auto broadside collisions due to unsafe east/west turning and through movements from Peach Street onto Broad Street. Several potential safety improvements have been evaluated for this location, such as relocation of a utility pole that impacts sight distance for drivers, installation of a neighborhood traffic circle, or turn restrictions, but due to the challenging constraints at this intersection, improvements have yet to be implemented. While the Anholm Bikeway Plan proposes striping improvements and accessible curb ramps to enhance bicycle and pedestrian crossing safety this intersection, more substantial improvements will need to be implemented as part another program—likely through the City’s Traffic Safety (Vision Zero) program. Gateway Treatments – Ideally, the Anholm Bikeway will serve as a key bicycle and pedestrian gateway into Downtown San Luis Obispo—for residents, students, workers and visitors. With the many proposed downtown revitalization strategies envisioned in the recently-approved Downtown Concept Plan and Mission Plaza Concept Plan, there will likely be additional interest and support for enhancing this northern gateway into Downtown. While not evaluated in detail or included in the project designs or cost estimates as part of the Anholm Bikeway Plan, it is recommended that additional gateway landmarks, such as attractive entry signage and artwork, or a bicycle/pedestrian count display be considered as part of future improvements to further formalize the Anholm Bikeway corridor and visually communicate the importance of this route as a priority street for multimodal travel.Count Totems display real-time bicycle and pedestrian volumes along gateway points to key routes. Displays can be customized and configured to show cumulative totals over the course of a year towards a year-end target. The 2013 City Bicycle Transportation Plan envisions a future grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossing of Highway 101 at Broad Street. This improvement is not feasible currently and will not be considered until closure of the Broad Street/Highway 101 Ramps by Caltrans. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 28 August 2018 III. Analysis of the Project Traffic Access & Circulation The City evaluates vehicular traffic impacts based on adopted thresholds measuring roadway segment and intersection congestion/delays using auto Levels of Service (LOS)6, and using adopted maximum daily traffic volume thresholds for residential streets to assess traffic impacts to neighborhood quality of life. For the purposes of assessing potential traffic impacts in conjunction with the Anholm Bikeway project, convenience of property access, collision trends, and potential impacts to emergency services are also considered. To guide this analysis, traffic data was collected in 2016 and 2017, including intersection and roadway volumes (autos, pedestrians and bicycles), speed survey data and collision reports for the most readily available five-year period. A focused Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was prepared to evaluate potential impacts to traffic circulation with the addition of the proposed project and is provided in Appendix B. A summary of the TIS findings is provided herein. Roadway Segment and Intersection Operations The City has adopted a performance target of LOS D or better for intersections and roadways outside of the downtown. A project-related traffic impact would be triggered if the project would (a) cause a City intersection or roadway segment to degrade to an unacceptable level of service, (b) further degrade operations at a location already operating at unacceptable levels of service, or (c) substantially increase hazards on the roadway system (i.e. cause turn pocket vehicle queues to spill back into through traffic lanes). Because the proposed Project includes the addition of a traffic diverter on Broad Street at Ramona/Meinecke, traffic circulation patterns are anticipated to change within the vicinity of the project. Most prominently, traffic volumes will be diverted from Broad Street to other parallel routes. While a comprehensive traffic calming program is proposed for the Anholm Neighborhood to minimize potential speeding and cut-through traffic concerns, the majority of the traffic diverted from Broad Street is projected to simply shift to Chorro Street. To analyze the potential impacts associated with these changes, traffic operations were analyzed along Chorro Street and at other intersections and roadway segments within the vicinity of the proposed project. The City plans to optimize signal timings at the Foothill/Broad and Foothill/Chorro intersections with installation of the diverter. Analysis of intersection and roadway segment levels of service and queueing for conditions with existing (2016) and future (General Plan Horizon Year 2035) traffic levels found that no traffic impacts were triggered with the traffic redistribution caused by the proposed project. Neighborhood Traffic The City evaluates potential neighborhood traffic impacts by comparing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes and speeds along residential streets with the corresponding maximum ADT and speed targets established in the City General Plan Circulation Element.7 A proposed project would potentially trigger a neighborhood traffic impact if it would cause residential street traffic volumes or speeds to exceed these established thresholds, or if the project further increases traffic volumes on a street that already exceeds the maximum thresholds under existing conditions. The Plan proposes the following General Plan functional classification changes to streets within the project study area: Chorro Street (Palm to Foothill) – Amend classification from Residential Collector (Major) to Residential Arterial Lincoln Street (Broad to Chorro) – Amend classification from Residential Collector (Minor) to Residential Arterial Meinecke Street (Broad to Santa Rosa) – Amend classification from Local Street to Residential Collector (Minor) 6 Level of Service (LOS) is a standard qualitative measure used to describe traffic conditions in terms of speed, travel time, delays and driver convenience. LOS is defined using letter grades “A” through “F”, with LOS A representing free-flow conditions, and LOS F representing heavy congestion with traffic demands exceeding capacity. 7 City General Plan Maximum ADT Targets: Local Streets (1,500 veh/day); Residential Collectors (3,000 veh/day), except Broad/Chorro north of Lincoln and Margarita (5,000 veh/day). Desired maximum speeds for residential streets are 25 mph. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 29 August 2018 Murray Street (Broad to Santa Rosa) – Amend classification from Local Street to Residential Collector (Minor) Chorro (Foothill to Palm) & Lincoln (Chorro to Broad) are both currently classified as Residential Collectors. At these current classifications, the maximum desirable daily volume per General Plan policy is 5,000 on Chorro and 3,000 on Lincoln. However, Chorro Street volumes currently exceed this threshold and review of available historical traffic data going back to the 1960’s shows that Chorro has not carried volumes within those thresholds in 50 years or more. Chorro (Foothill to Palm) has had daily volumes that ranged between 10,000 and 20,000 up until the early 2000s when the median at Highland and Ferrini/Chorro was installed deterring traffic from using the Chorro Street as a Bypass to Highway 1. Since the 2000’s Chorro Street has had daily volumes ranging from 6,000 to 7,000. Lincoln (Chorro to Broad) has consistently had daily volumes ranging between 4,000 and 5,000 since the earliest counts on record from the 1980’s. With the proposed diverter on Broad Street and neighborhood wide traffic calming the worst case forecasted daily volume on Chorro (Foothill to Palm) will rise to approximately 8,500 and Lincoln (Broad to Chorro) will rise to approximately 5,300 without assuming any mode shift. With or without the Anholm Bikeway Plan City staff is recommending that these segments of Chorro & Lincoln be reclassified to Residential Arterials to reflect the actual conditions under which they operate. Meinecke & Murray (Broad to Santa Rosa) are both currently classified as local streets, the maximum desirable daily volume under this classification is 1,500. However, historical records show that both of these streets were above that threshold with daily volumes ranging from 2,000 to 3,000 up until the early 2000’s when the median at Highland and Ferrini/Chorro was installed. Since that time both streets have daily volumes in the range of 1,300 with projections that indicate both streets are likely to reach or exceed the 1,500 vehicle/day threshold with build-out of the City through General Plan Horizon Year 2035. With the proposed diverter on Broad Street and neighborhood wide traffic calming, the worst case forecasted daily volume for these street segments will rise to a range of approximately 1,500 to 1,600. Due to forecasted rise in volume on these streets staff is recommending that they be reclassified to Residential Collector (Minor). Table 3 shows neighborhood traffic volumes and speeds with and without the proposed project compared to adopted thresholds. As shown in the table, with the proposed street classification amendments, all roadway segments within the study area are projected to operate within the adopted neighborhood traffic volume thresholds. The traffic calming measures proposed throughout the Anholm Neighborhood are expected to reduce prevailing vehicle speeds within the neighborhood to levels near or below the established neighborhood traffic speed thresholds. Property Access and Emergency Service Operations With addition of the proposed traffic diverter on Broad at Ramona/Meinecke, vehicular through traffic on Broad Street is restricted to right- or left-turn only movements in order to divert auto trips from Broad Street to other routes. With these measures, local trips with origins or destinations along Broad Street beyond this diverter will need to travel via other routes and the cross street nearest to their destination. In most instances, this will require drivers to travel an additional 2-4 blocks beyond the shortest route currently available, which could be described as a moderate inconvenience to these individuals. With the projected increase in traffic volumes along Chorro Street, some residents on Chorro may have more difficulty entering/exiting their driveways during peak traffic periods. As described previously in this report, prior to the installation of a raised median on Highland Drive, historic volumes on Chorro regularly exceeded the levels projected with the addition of the proposed project. Although guide signage will be incorporated into final project designs, the proposed access restrictions at Broad/Meinecke/Ramona may have potential to add some confusion for visitors and drivers unfamiliar with the local street network, leading to some circuitous traffic maneuvers and inconvenience to these motorists. Chorro Street is designated as the primary north-south emergency response route through this area of town, serving as the main connection between the downtown and Fire Station #2 on North Chorro Street. The bikeway treatments, volume and speed management features in the proposed project are specifically designed to minimize potential impacts to emergency service providers. For example, speed cushions are proposed along Chorro Street in lieu of traditional speed humps. Speed cushions provide vertical deflection to slow passenger vehicle speeds while providing wheel cut-outs for large-axle vehicles, like fire trucks and ambulances, to pass through unimpeded. In addition, the proposed traffic diverter on Broad at Ramona/Meinecke would be designed to maintain access for emergency vehicles by using easily removable bollards for access control. Conceptual designs for proposed project features have been reviewed with City Fire and Police Departments to ensure that there are no concerns with regards to emergency response activities. Construction designs for any permanent project improvements will also be provided for City Fire and Police review prior to installation. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 30 August 2018 Table 3: Neighborhood Traffic Assessment ExistingThresholdExisting VolumeProposedThresholdProjectVolumeDesiredMaxExisting SpeedsProjectSpeedsBroad Street(Ramona to Meinecke)5,000 3,609 5,000 0 25 26‐27 20‐25Broad Street(Meinecke ‐ Mission)5,000 4,211 5,000 1,865 25 26‐27 20‐25Broad Street(Mission ‐ Lincoln)5,000 3,429 5,000 1,625 25 30 20‐25Chorro Street(Foothill ‐ Meinecke)Residential Collector (Major) Residential Arterial 5,000 5,090 N/A 8,410 25 31 25Chorro Street(Meinecke ‐ Mission)Residential Collector (Major) Residential Arterial 5,000 5,816 N/A 8,414 25 31 25Chorro Street(Mission ‐ Lincoln)Residential Collector (Major) Residential Arterial 5,000 6,315 N/A 7,831 25 31 25Meinecke Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)Local Residential Residential Collector (Minor) 1,500 1,277 3,000 1,499 25 N/A‐Murray Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)Local Residential Residential Collector (Minor) 1,500 1,353 3,000 1,54425N/A‐Mission Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)1,500 477 1,500 65725N/A‐Center Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)1,500 217 1,500 39725N/A‐Mountain View Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)1,500 170 1,500 35025N/A‐Lincoln Street(Broad ‐ Chorro)Residential Collector (Minor) Residential Arterial 3,000 4,589 N/A 5,305252620‐25Lincoln Street(Chorro ‐ West)1,500 417 1,500 417253025Local ResidentialLocal ResidentialLocal ResidentialVehicle Speeds (mph)Notes:‐ Volume and Speed Thresholds established in City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Circulation Element.‐ Speed values reflect 85th percentile speeds. "CVC" shown as max speed Arterial Streets, as no speed Threshold is established in the General Plan. Instead, posted speeds are set per California Vehicle Code requirements.‐ No ADT Threshold is established for Arterial Streets. Acceptable volumes based on traffic operations as measured by auto levels of service.‐ Locations that exceed the City's Maximum ADT and Speed Thresholds are highlighted.‐ Based on case studies and available data at other installations, project traffic calming measures projected to reduce prevailing speeds by 20‐25%.SegmentStreet Type (Existing)Average Daily TrafficStreet Type (Proposed)Residential Collector (Major)Residential Collector (Major)Residential Collector (Major)Local Residential Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 31 August 2018 Parking Considerations Potential parking concerns related to the Plan are evaluated by analyzing on-street parking supply and demand with and without the parking removal proposed by the project. Although the final number of on-street parking spaces impacted by the project may change slightly with final design, based on review of preliminary concepts, on-street parking loss is estimated as follows: Ramona Drive – 17 spaces removed on north side from Broad to proposed SRTS Class I Path to provide two-way protected bikeway and pedestrian/bicycle access to the path. Chorro Street – 20 spaces removed between Mission and Lincoln with installation of median islands and bulbouts. No parking removal required for median islands/bulbouts at Chorro/Rougeot. Broad Street – 10 spaces removed between Mission and Lincoln with installation of median islands and bulbouts. It should be noted that the street parking along the affected segment of Ramona fronts a commercial shopping center and a senior living facility—both are fully parked on-site per City requirements. The current parking demand along this segment of Ramona predominantly reflects spillover from a nearby student apartment complex and regular use of Ramona Drive as a pseudo park-and-ride lot by university students who park here and take the nearby bus service to Cal Poly. To better understand existing on-street parking conditions along and within the vicinity of streets where parking removal is proposed, parking surveys were conducted in fall of 2017 for various days of the week and times of day during a period when local schools and Cal Poly were in session. Parking surveys included inventory of existing on-street parking supply and occupancy during various times of day throughout the vicinity of the proposed Anholm Bikeway. Parking surveys found late evening on a weeknight (12-2 AM) to be the period where on-street parking demand is typically highest—both along Chorro, Broad and Ramona, as well as within the surrounding neighborhood. This peak period was used as a baseline for evaluating project-related parking impacts. Existing parking conditions are mapped visually in Figure 7, with street segments color-coded based on percent occupancy and labels showing the number of available parking spaces on each block. Street segments are highlighted red where peak occupancy exceeds 85%. A parking occupancy rate of 85%-90% is typically considered the “practical capacity” of a street, meaning that there could be a few on-street parking spaces available, but drivers may have a difficult time finding them. When parking demand exceeds the practical capacity, this can lead to drivers “cruising” around the block and increases temptation to park illegally, which could impact neighborhood quality for residents. Because the segment of Ramona where parking removal is proposed is near 100% occupancy currently, parking removal is anticipated to create a deficit of 13 spaces. The displaced parking demand of 13 spaces is likely to shift to the nearby streets during peak periods—most likely Broad, Meinecke and further west on Ramona. As shown in Figure 7, there is generally available on-street parking along these nearby streets and along the segments of Broad and Chorro EXISTING CONDITIONSFigure 7: Map of Existing On-Street Parking Conditions Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 32 August 2018 Streets where parking removal is required to construct median islands and bulbouts. However, street parking demand is already a sensitive topic within this neighborhood, with increasing concerns related to the upcoming construction of two new multifamily residential developments in the area. Residents have already expressed interest in pursuing implementation of a residential parking district within the Anholm neighborhood to better manage parking demand. Residential parking districts help manage excess on-street parking demand by requiring a city-issued parking permit to park on-street during designated hours. A limit of two permits are made available to the property owners or residents of each home within the established district. Vehicles parked on street without a permit in these areas are subject to citation. The City is supportive of this effort and will assist with initiating the process for developing a district if sufficient support exists within the neighborhood. See Appendix B for detailed parking occupancy data. Benefits to Bicycling As mentioned in the Purpose and Need section, and as illustrated in Figure 2, existing traffic volumes and speeds along Broad and Chorro Streets exceed the levels recommended for mixed-flow conditions, where bicyclists and motor vehicles share travel lanes. While some bicyclists are comfortable riding under these conditions—over 300 bicyclists per day travel Broad, Chorro or Lincoln Streets between downtown and Foothill Boulevard—these conditions do not provide the type of bicycling environment conducive to attracting new riders of all ages and ability levels, which is needed to achieve the City’s bicycle mode share objectives. Specific features of the Recommended Project that are expected to contribute to a high-quality, low-stress bicycling environment include: Protected Bike Lanes – Existing buffered bike lanes on Chorro are planned to be extended between Palm to Lincoln, with potential for physical separation in the future. A two-way protected bikeway is proposed on Ramona from Broad to the planned SRTS Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path by removing on-street parking on the north side of Ramona. Protected facilities have been found to offer the greatest potential to attract new ridership. Safe Routes to School Class I Path – A Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path is proposed between Ramona and Foothill, completing the continuous low-stress bicycle connection between downtown and Foothill Boulevard. The new path will align with the planned SRTS bicycle/pedestrian crossing at Foothill & Ferrini, linking the Anholm Bikeway with the neighborhoods and destinations north of Foothill, including Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary Schools and Cal Poly. It should be noted that completion of this path is contingent on the City establishing an easement or right-of-way agreement with the LDS Church. Bicycle Boulevard – A bicycle boulevard, a shared street prioritized for walking and bicycling, is proposed along the bikeway route section between Lincoln and Ramona. This segment of Broad Street includes traffic calming and traffic diversion to reduce motor vehicle volumes and speeds to a level conducive to a quality low-stress bicycling environment. Branded Route Signage & Pavement Markings – Bicycle route signs and pavement markings are proposed at entry points to the Anholm Bikeway and along the route to provide wayfinding for cyclists and to brand the route as a priority bicycle street. Dashed roadway centerlines are proposed along Broad Street and Chorro Street to allow drivers to safely (and legally) pass cyclists. Enhanced Crossing Markings & Green Paint – Enhanced crossing markings and green paint are proposed through key intersection crossings, where appropriate, to help bicyclists navigate the designated Anholm Bikeway route and to increase visibility of bicycle-vehicle conflict areas. Traffic Calming Elements – Traffic calming elements are proposed along the bicycle boulevard portion of Broad Street, as well as along several other neighborhood streets between Lincoln and Ramona to reduce speeding and improve conditions on segments where bicyclists and motor vehicles share travel lanes. Traffic calming elements provide the secondary benefit of improving safety for pedestrians and neighborhood quality for residents. Features include speed humps/cushions, median islands, bulbouts and a traffic diverter. See Figure 4 for a summary map of neighborhood traffic calming measures. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 33 August 2018 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) To evaluate the bicycling environment along the Anholm Bikeway, a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)8 analysis was conducted for street segments along the proposed corridor. “Traffic stress” is the perceived sense of danger associated with riding in or adjacent to vehicular traffic and is one of the greatest deterrents to bicycling. A bicycle LTS analysis is an objective, data-driven approach to evaluating bikeways that correlates measurable factors such as roadway design, traffic volumes and motor vehicle speeds to typical bicyclist perceptions of comfort and willingness to use a given facility. LTS scoring is designed to correspond with the “Four types of Bicyclists” categories (referenced previously in Figure 6), with a range of LTS 1 to LTS 4 representing conditions from lowest stress (LTS 1) to highest stress (LTS 4). In general, bikeways are considered low stress where there is little interaction between cyclists and motor vehicles (i.e. a shared low-volume/speed local street), or where greater degrees of physical separation are provided between a bikeway and motor vehicle traffic (i.e. protected bike lanes or off-street path). LTS scores are defined in Error! Reference source not found. and LTS scores are mapped for the proposed Anholm Bikeway route in Figure 8 for conditions with and without the proposed project. 8 LTS analysis applied using methodology developed by the Mineta Transportation Institute Report II‐19: Low‐Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity (2012). Table 4: Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions and Types of Bicyclists Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 34 August 2018 Figure 8: Level of Traffic Stress Map with and without Project As shown above, under existing conditions, most of the proposed bikeway route scores as LTS 3 or LTS 4—the higher levels of traffic stress. These streets will likely be comfortable advanced and experienced adult cyclists, but present an intimidating environment for children, seniors and many less-experienced adult cyclists. With the ultimate implementation of the proposed project improvements, a significant portion of the Anholm Bikeway route will provide options with route scores at LTS 1 or LTS 2, which proves a low-stress bicycling environment that should appeal to “interested but concerned” riders and many young or inexperienced cyclists. With the proposed traffic diversion and calming elements, the bicycle boulevard segment along Broad Street is projected to carry approximately 1,600-1,800 vehicles per day, within the upper limits of the acceptable range for a bicycle boulevard, but still above the level required for LTS 1 (comfortable for all ages and abilities). With the potential future closure of the EXISTING CONDITIONSPROJECT CONDITIONSTypes of Bicyclists in San Luis Obispo Strong and Fearless (18%) – Willing to ride a bicycle on any roadway regardless of traffic conditions. Comfortable taking the lane and riding in a vehicular manner on major streets without designated bicycle facilities. Enthusiastic and Confident (33%) – Bicyclists who are comfortable sharing the roadway with automotive traffic in some instances, but prefer to ride in their own designated bike lane or off-street facility. Interested but Concerned (31%) – Infrequent bicyclists with some inclination towards bicycling more regularly if they felt safer on the roadways. Not very comfortable sharing the road with cars, or riding on major streets, even with a bike lane. Prefer separated pathways or low-traffic neighborhood streets. No Way No How (18%) – Residents who simply aren’t interested in bicycling, for reasons of topography, inability, or simply complete and utter lack of interest. Unlikely to adopt bicycling in any way. Segment remains at LTS 3 until ultimate installation of physical bike lane separation Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 35 August 2018 Braod/US 101 Ramps, the volumes along these segments of Broad and Lincoln Streets may one day drop within the ideal thresholds for a quality bicycle boulevard. The short stretch of bikeway route along Lincoln Street between Broad and Chorro will remain at LTS 4 with volumes that remain above recommended levels for a shared street. Further, cyclists looking to avoid the uphill segment along northbound Broad Street between Center and Mission will have the options to either (a) remain northbound on Chorro Street (LTS 4), or (b) take a less-direct, but low-stress detour via Lincoln Street east of Chorro, before cutting back over to the Broad Street bicycle boulevard at Center or Mission Streets. The segment of Chorro between Downtown and Lincoln will remain at LTS 3 until the ultimate upgrade to protected bike lanes. Benefits to Pedestrian & Streetscape Environment Connectivity, accessibility, safety and comfort are all important components of a quality pedestrian environment. While many of the primary features of the Anholm Bikeway project focus on improving conditions for bicyclists, the recommended project designs also include substantial elements to improve the quality of the pedestrian environment between downtown and Foothill Boulevard. The project includes the following features to improve the pedestrian environment: Elimination of Sidewalk Gaps – The project recommends installation of sidewalks along Broad where gaps currently exist in the pedestrian network, particularly on the west side of Broad Street. Accessible Curb Ramps – ADA-compliant curb ramps are currently lacking at several intersections along Broad and Chorro Streets. The project includes the ultimate construction of new ADA curb ramps at each intersection along the designated route where they are currently lacking. Intersection Crossing Enhancements – The project includes elements intended to improve pedestrian crossing safety and comfort at intersections. High-visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at key crossing locations, such as at the raised crossing at Broad/Murray. Corner bulbouts are proposed at several intersections along the Anholm Bikeway route where funding permits. Bulbouts provide several benefits to pedestrian safety and comfort, including potential to slow motor vehicle turning speeds, shorten pedestrian crossing distances and increase visibility of pedestrians waiting to cross. Potential for Streetscape Enhancements and Green Street Elements – The project includes potential to improve the streetscape aesthetics and incorporate green street elements at several locations. Locations where bulbouts are proposed, such as within the Broad/Ramona/Meinecke traffic diverter, there will be additional sidewalk area available to incorporate landscaping and/or drainage improvements to reduce demand on the stormwater system during rain events, which is particularly important considering the proximity of Brizzolara and Old Garden Creeks. Where protected The Recommended Project provides opportunities for streetscape and green street enhancements to beautify the corridor and improve stormwater management benefits during rainy seasons. Design elements considered as part of the project include landscaped corner bulbouts, and bioswales within widened sidewalks and within the potential long-term raised median separating the protected bikeways from motor vehicle traffic. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 36 August 2018 bike lanes are proposed, physical separation may include features like planter boxes or landscaping strips that not only provide physical separation from motor vehicle traffic, but provide opportunities to further beautify the Anholm Neighborhood, where attractive landscaping and lush, well-maintained gardens are commonplace. Buffer from Motor Vehicle Traffic – The protected bike lanes proposed for Chorro and Ramona have potential to improve not only the bicycling environment, but the pedestrian environment as well. Protected bike lanes create a continuous buffer between sidewalks and motor vehicle travel lanes—a buffer that improves pedestrian comfort that can be lacking along streets where on-street parking lanes do not exist or have low utilization. Protected bike lanes can also visually narrow the perceived roadway width for drivers, which can help reduce motor vehicle speeds. Because the potential risk for severe injury or death in pedestrian vs. motor vehicle collisions increases exponentially as vehicle speeds increase, it is important to endeavor to achieve speeds within the project study area conducive to a walkable, residential district (25 mph or less). Street Lighting – The project recommends installation of new streetlighting at the Highway 101/Chorro undercrossing, and at several locations along Broad, Chorro and Ramona where existing lighting does not meet City standards. Pedestrian-scaled street light poles are proposed for the Highway 101/Chorro undercrossing, while an additional seven (7) cobra-head LED street lights are proposed to be mounted to existing power poles throughout the neighborhood so that the corridor lighting is consistent with City standards. Existing and proposed street lighting are shown in Figure 9. The risk of pedestrian fatality increases significantly when speeds exceed 30 mph. Source: Smart Growth America, Dangerous by Design 2014.Figure 9: Street Lighting Recommendations Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 37 August 2018 Neighborhood Quality Considerations When evaluating the potential benefits and trade-offs of the Anholm Bikeway project, it is important to not only assess the effects of the project on users traveling through the planned route, but to also consider the specific effects—both positive and negative—on the neighborhood that the proposed bikeway travels through. Potential positive and negative impacts on neighborhood quality associated with the Anholm Bikeway are summarized as follows: Potential Benefits to Neighborhood Quality Improved Safety Lighting – To address concerns with lack of night lighting within the Anholm neighborhood, the Recommended Project includes addition of pedestrian-scaled street lighting at the Highway 101/Chorro undercrossing, as well as addition of several energy efficient LED street lights on Chorro, Broad and Ramona to fill in the gaps in the lighting network and provide a continuously lit path that bicyclists, pedestrians and drivers can feel safe navigating at night. The new street lights will be spaced consistent with City standards for residential streets and will provide a level of illumination consistent other streetlights within the existing neighborhood. Traffic Calming – High motor vehicle traffic volumes and speeds can negatively impact the neighborhood quality along a residential street. As shown previously in the Neighborhood Traffic Assessment section, the proposed project includes traffic calming features to reduce speeding along several street segments. In addition, a monitoring plan will be implemented after installation of the initial project elements to observe traffic volumes and speeds within the study area to identify if additional traffic calming measures are warranted in the future. Most On-Street Parking Retained – The Project includes removal of 47 on-street parking stalls along Ramona, Broad and Chorro for traffic calming measures, which represents about 13% of the 360 existing street parking supply along those segments. This retains the majority of the existing on-street parking fronting the residential homes on Broad and Chorro Street, which was identified as a high priority for residents of the neighborhood. With the proposed project, peak on-street parking occupancy along these affected streets is projected to remain at approximately 60% or less. Safer Passing of Cyclists – Currently, Chorro Street, Broad Street and Ramona Drive feature continuous double-yellow centerlines, which prohibit drivers from crossing into the opposing lane to pass other road users. This can lead to frustration for both motorists and bicyclists sharing the travel lanes. Motorists are inconvenienced when following slower-moving bicyclists, and bicyclists are uncomfortable getting tail gated or passed closely faster-moving traffic. The Project replaces the solid center lines with a dashed single stripe along the mixed-flow segments of the bikeway route to allow drivers to cross into the opposing lane (when safe to do so) to pass cyclists safely, courteously, and legally. Improved Walkability – The Project includes the ultimate installation of accessible curb ramps, enhanced intersection crossings, reduced sidewalk gaps and other amenities to contribute to a quality walkable neighborhood environment. Benefits of a Walkable, Bikeable Neighborhood – The benefits of high-quality pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are well-documented, from community health benefits associated with increased opportunity for physical activity, to reduced traffic congestion and improved safety for all road users. Investment in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure has also been found to provide economic benefits for properties located within proximity of these facilities. Current studies on the economic impacts of active transportation infrastructure have found that homes in walkable neighborhoods and within close proximity to high-quality separated bicycle facilities have higher sale prices on average than homes located in areas without these features. Further, corridors where protected bike lanes have been installed have seen either no change or increases in retail sales.9 9 Sources: How Much is a Point of Walk Score Worth, Redfin.com. August 3, 2016. Property Value/Desirability Effects of Bike Paths Adjacent to Residential Areas, Racca, et al., Delaware Center for Transportation, University of Delaware. November 2016. Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets. New York City Department of Transportation. 2012. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan III. Analysis of the Project 38 August 2018 Aesthetics – The residents of the historic Anholm District clearly take pride in their neighborhood, with attractive street trees, landscaping and beautiful gardens lining each street. The design of the proposed project will include elements that are intended to compliment the unique aesthetics of the existing neighborhood. Sidewalk improvements and corner bulbouts will provide potential to install additional landscaping and/or green street treatments and the City will consider the aesthetic context of the neighborhood when considering new guide signage and treatments/materials for physical separation along the protected bikeways. The City plans to install a raised concrete median within the bike lane buffers, providing the opportunity for attractive low-maintenance hardscape, or higher-maintenance planter beds, bioswales or other green street features if sufficient funds and maintenance resources are available. With the addition of the traffic diverter at Broad/Ramona/Meinecke, additional street space will be available to utilize for additional landscaping, street trees, public art and other placemaking amenities. If there is interest among community groups or neighborhood residents, planter boxes or other landscaping areas may be considered within these installations with potential for an “adopt a planter” program where residents can apply to install and maintain their own unique plantings, including flowers or vegetables. Potential Negative Effects on Neighborhood Quality Traffic Diversion – The project includes traffic diversion at Broad/Ramona/Meinecke, which will shift much of the existing through traffic off Broad Street to other parallel routes—predominantly Chorro Street. The projected increase in traffic volumes on Chorro Street and potential side-streets like Lincoln, Murray and Meinecke, will likely be unappealing to residents and other street users along those routes. In addition to restricting through vehicle traffic on Broad Street, the placement of the diverter will also affect residents who live on Broad Street when attempting to drive between their homes and the shopping center at Broad/Foothill, requiring these drivers to travel and additional 3-4 blocks to drive to these locations. Overall Ability to Support Project Goals & Objectives The Anholm Bikeway Plan supports the project goal to create a safe, low-stress route that serves bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and skill levels connecting the City’s downtown core north to Foothill Boulevard. The specific design elements identified in this plan are generally consistent with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan and the design objectives initially established for this project, with unique features that brand the Anholm Bikeway as a priority bicycle corridor, traffic calming and volume management measures to reduce motor vehicle speeds and through volumes, features that reduce conflicts between bicyclists and motor vehicles, and elements that improve accessibility and safety for pedestrians. For the southern segment of Chorro between Downtown and Lincoln, and along Ramona west of Broad, the addition of protected bike lanes provides substantial potential to attract less confident cyclists and support the City’s mode share and sustainability goals. In addition, the diverter at Broad/Ramona/Meinecke combined with traffic calming measures on Broad between Ramona and Lincoln has the potential to significantly lower vehicular volumes and speeds to attract more interested but concerned bicyclists, therefore providing a continuous through route from the downtown to the Foothill Blvd. Bicycling Means Business: How Cycling Enriches People and Cities, StreetsblogUSA.com. March 8, 2013. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 39 August 2018 IV. Project Development Process Community Outreach and Engagement Development of this plan included an extensive community-based public engagement effort, focused on understanding the key needs and priorities of residents and stakeholders. Major components of this community outreach effort include: Public Meetings Community Meetings – Five (5) community meetings were held at the City/County Library over the course of the two-year long project planning process. This process included an initial project kick-off meeting, a preliminary interactive design charrettes to allow attendees to draw up their desired plans for the street improvements, a meeting to present preliminary project alternatives, and a neighborhood meeting to present plans and invite feedback on the final recommendations for the Anholm Bikeway Plan, and then a supplementary interactive design charrette to gather feedback for refinement of the ”middle section” between Lincoln and Ramona . Informal Field Visits – In addition to formal public meetings, City Transportation Staff also conducted several in-person site visits to tour the study area and answer questions from residents, business owners and other stakeholders who may not have been able to attend prior community meetings. Staff also joined a group of Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary School parents and students for a bicycle tour following their typical routes to/from school along Broad and Chorro Streets. Active Transportation Committee Meetings – The Active Transportation Committee (ATC), formerly known as the Bicycle Advisory Committee, consists of seven members who must be residents of the City and provides oversight and policy decisions on matters related to bicycle and pedestrian transportation. The ATC received presentations from staff on the Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard/Anholm Bikeway Plan during the preliminary alternatives development stage, and again with submittal of the final concept plan. The ATC solicited public comments from meeting attendees and ultimately provided staff with feedback and recommendations to carry forward to the City Council. City Council Hearings – During the alternatives development stage, a City Council Study Session was held to present several design options considered for the proposed bikeway. The Study Session was well-attended and provided an opportunity for the Council and the public to learn more about the project and provide input on the benefits and trade-offs associated with various project alternatives. Likewise, a City Council hearing was held to adopt the first iteration of the Plan, where the Council adopted alternatives for the north and south ends of the project. Project Website A project website (www.peakdemocracy.com/3444) was created at the onset of this planning process and has been used throughout development of the plan to provide updates, access to project materials, and to serve as an open forum for community members to leave feedback. As of July 2018, the project website has received over 1,600 unique visitors and has 190+ comments in the online forum. In developing this plan, public outreach efforts included community meetings, in-person site tours, bike to school ride-a-longs, an interactive design charrette, and an online comment forum via the project website. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 40 August 2018 Alternatives Development The road to the final concept plan for the Anholm Bikeway project is long and involved development and analysis of many potential project alternatives and variants. During the spring and summer of 2017, three preliminary project alternatives were presented to the community, BAC and City Council for consideration. The alternatives provided three distinct options for the most challenging portion of the bikeway between Lincoln Street and Ramona Drive, each with its own unique benefits, challenges and trade-offs. Alternatives included (Alt 1) a traditional bicycle boulevard with traffic diverters and a continuous route along Broad Street, (Alt 2) conversion of Broad and Chorro Streets to single-lane, one-way couplets to provide width for protected bike facilities, and (Alt 3) a “low-impact” alternative that included only minor route markings, signage and traffic calming elements. Each alternative was defined and analyzed in detail and the findings were shared in an Alternatives Screening Report (available on the project website). To supplement the input provided at previous community meetings and via the project’s web forum during the alternatives development process, Transportation Staff conducted surveys of residents to gauge support for any of the three proposed project alternatives and to better understand the specific features that the community liked or disliked. 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, nearly 500 survey responses were received. The results of this survey, which are shown below, were presented during the City Council Study Session referenced above. Based on the survey responses, Alternative 1 (traditional bicycle boulevard with traffic diversion) received the least support both citywide and within the Broad/Chorro neighborhood. Per the online citywide survey, Alternative 2 (two-way conversion with protected bikeways) was the most popular option, receiving 44% of the total votes—nearly double that of the second ranking option. Within the neighborhood, there was not a clear consensus for a preferred option, with 37% of participants indicating that “No Project Alternative is Acceptable”, 30% of participants indicating support for Alternative 3 (markings, signage and traffic calming only), and 27% supporting Alternative 2. Upon review of the preliminary alternatives, the Alternative 2 was identified as the BAC’s preferred alternative—primarily because this alternative included protected bicycle facilities, which the group believed would provide the greatest potential to improve bicycling within the city. After reviewing the various project options and receiving input from the community at a well-attended Council Study Session, the City Council ultimately recommended that staff carry forward two variants of the preliminary alternatives for refinement. Public comments received from Anholm Neighborhood residents during the Council Study Session reflected a general theme of opposition to any project features that would impact vehicular traffic access/circulation or street parking within their neighborhood; thus, the two alternatives to be carried forward did not include features that would significantly change traffic circulation or access: Preferred Alternative – An option that includes partial removal of on-street parking on segments of Chorro and Broad Streets to provide dedicated/protected bike lanes without removing vehicular travel lanes or impacting traffic circulation. Secondary Alternative – A “low-impact” option that utilizes Lincoln Street east of Chorro and establishes a bicycle route with features such as enhanced markings, signage and minor traffic calming that can be easily implemented and does not impact street parking or traffic circulation. Based on City Council input, staff developed more refined concepts for the two alternatives as well as analysis on traffic and parking impacts and presented them to the Active Transportation Committee (formerly known as the BAC) for input. The Active Transportation Committee (ATC) was unanimously in support of the Preferred Alternative based on the fact Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Project – Alternatives Analysis Community Preference Survey Results (as of 8/1/17) Community surveys were distributed both citywide and to the Anholm Neighborhood within vicinity of the proposed bikeway to gauge support for preliminary project alternatives. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 41 August 2018 that it provided the most protection and encouragement for new bicycle riders. The two alternatives were then presented to the City Council for a well-attended public hearing. After hearing public input, the City Council adopted the Anholm Bikeway Plan in April 2018 with the preferred alternative for the north segment (Ramona from Broad Street to the Class I Path) and the south segment (Chorro from downtown to Lincoln). For the “middle segment” from Lincoln to Ramona, the City Council directed staff to continue working with the community to find an alternative that achieved the necessary lower volumes and speeds for a low stress bicycle route with diversion but without the significant removal of parking. Following adoption of the Plan, a design charrette was held to gain community input on the “middle section.” City staff received the input and combined it with analysis and a refined design concept represented in this Plan as a final proposal for the “middle segment”. Attendees of a design charrette for the Anholm Bikeway Plan identify preferred forms of traffic calming for the Lincoln-to-Ramona portion of the bikeway route. The highest-ranked elements, which include median islands, bulbouts and speed humps/cushions are reflected in the final recommendations in this Plan. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 42 August 2018 V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies Phasing Plan and Cost Estimates Project improvements are expected to be implemented in phases, with each series of improvements prioritized based on several factors, including overall benefit to bicycle and pedestrian safety and mobility, desire for each improvement based on community input, and costs. Planning-level cost estimates were developed for the improvements identified in each phase and are summarized in Table 5 below. Note that costs and phasing plans are preliminary and are subject to refinement in design stages. Table 5: Project Phasing and Planning-Level Cost Estimates CITY TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH CALTRANS TO PURSUE CLOSURE OF THE HIGHWAY 101/BROAD STREET RAMPS PhaseImprovementsCostConstructionYearPHASE 1‐ Safe Routes to School Linkage• SRTS Class I Path (Ramona to Foothill)‐‐ROW & Construction• SRTS Crossing at Foothill/Ferrini• Ramona Drive Protected Bike Lanes (Broad to SRTS Path)• Establish Residential Parking District (if approved by neighborhood)$996,000(2)2018‐19PHASE 2‐ Bikeway Improvements: Downtown‐to‐Ramona‐ US 101/Chorro Undercrossing Enhancements• US 101/Chorro Undercrossing Lighting & Gateway Enhancements• Chorro Buffered Bike Lane Extension (Downtown to Lincoln)• Bicycle Boulevard (Lincoln to Ramona): Traffic Diverter (Pilot Install) and Traffic Calming Program• Bikeway Route Signage, Markings & Crossing Enhancements$800,000 2019‐22$1,796,000PHASE 3‐ Protected Bike Lanes on Chorro w/o Lincoln‐ Incremental Installation of Remaining Pedestrian Features & High‐Cost Civil Improvements• Chorro Protected Bike Lanes: (Downtown to Lincoln)• Permanent Diverter Installation (if approved) Lincoln‐to‐Ramona• New Sidewalk Installations (west side of Broad)• Bulbouts & Pedestrian Crossing Improvements• ADA Curb Ramps (Remaining Locations)• Revisit strategies for Lincoln‐to‐Ramona segment if multi‐modal goals are not achievedTBD 2020 & BeyondTOTAL (Phase 1‐2)Notes:1. Costs and phasing are preliminary and represent planning‐level estimates. Final project costs and timing of improvements subject to refinement in design stage. 2. Phase 1 includes improvements planned as part of the Bishop's Peak/Pacheco Elementary Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Plan. Phase 2 improvements funded through combination of Anholm Bikeway and Safe Routes to School CIP Project funds.2. City of SLO 2017‐19 Financial Plan includes $558,000 allocated for Anholm Bikeway (Broad St. Bike Boulevard) and $343,000 allocated for Safe Routes to School project implementation through FY2019‐20. A suplemental budget request will be required to fully fund all Phase 1‐2 improvements.3. Phase 3 improvements are anticipated to remain unfunded within the current 5‐year funding horizon. Remaining components will be implemented incrementally based on availability of future grant and CIP funds.Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 43 August 2018 Phase 1 will include implementation of the highest-priority features at the north end of the corridor—improvements that will support safe routes for families walking and biking to Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco Elementary Schools. This includes construction of the planned bicycle/pedestrian crossing of Foothill Boulevard at Ferrini, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the Class I Bicycle/Pedestrian Path between Ramona and Foothill, and construction of the proposed two-way protected bikeway along Ramona between the Safe Routes to School Path and Broad Street. Protected bike lane separation is proposed to be installed using raised concrete curbs, with potential for landscaping or planter boxes if sufficient funding is available for ongoing maintenance, or if there is community interest in a public-private partnership to assist with planting and maintenance of landscaping (i.e. adopt-a-planter box programs). Improvements for this phase are expected to be funded through a combination of SRTS and Anholm Bikeway project funds. Opportunities for public input will be provided with development of designs for this segment and final improvements strategies will be brought to the City Council for approval. Also in Phase 1, it is recommended that the City work with residents of the Anholm Neighborhood to pursue formation of a Residential Parking District if sufficient support exists within the neighborhood. A planning-level estimate of construction costs for Phase 1 improvements totals $996,000. Example photos of potential protected bike lane treatments are shown below. Phase 2 will include installation of safety lighting, public art and streetscape enhancements at the Highway 101/Chorro Street undercrossing, and implementation of essential features required to establish the Anholm Bikeway between Downtown and Ramona Drive. This phase would include development of the bicycle boulevard between Lincoln and Ramona, with a traffic diverter installed at Broad/Ramona/Meinecke, speed humps/cushions installed throughout the neighborhood, a raised crossing at Broad/Murray, and permanent installation of the proposed median islands/bulbouts on Chorro Street at Rougeot and Mountain View. The traffic diverter is proposed to be installed as a one-year pilot installation with temporary materials to allow for monitoring prior to approval of a permanent installation. The remaining median islands and bulbouts will be installed incrementally based on available funds. A planning-level estimate of construction costs for Phase 2 improvements totals $800,000. Protected bike lane separation is proposed to include raised concrete curbing, with potential for landscaping, planter boxes, or attractive hardscape such as stamped concrete or colored pavers. Final treatment demands on funding and maintenance resources. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 44 August 2018 Phase 3 includes incremental installation of the remaining higher-cost project features over many years, such as installation of permanent physical separation within Chorro buffered bike lanes (Downtown to Palm), concrete sidewalks, permanent installation of the traffic diverter and remaining median islands and bulbouts, curb ramps, and additional street lighting. City Council will have the discretion in future years to consider further bikeway improvements to portions of the route that do not accomplish the City’s multi-modal goals. Additional opportunities for community input will be provided if further improvements are pursued. Ultimately, the Phase 3 features cannot be funded within the budget currently available to this project. The total cost to implement all of these features is anticipated to range between $2-3 million. The City may seek additional funds for remaining project features through grant opportunities or as individual capital improvement projects based on available funding over time. While not included as a component of this project, it is important to note that the City will continue to work with Caltrans to pursue the closure of the Highway 101/Broad Street ramps. Performance Monitoring Program This plan recommends initial implementation of the Anholm Bikeway traffic diversion on Broad at Ramona/Meinecke as a pilot phase during Phase 2, allowing the opportunity for staff to monitor, evaluate, and refine designs as needed prior to requesting approval from the City Council for permanent features. This section outlines the recommended components of a Performance Monitoring Program to be conducted in conjunction with Phase 2, the pilot phase for the traffic diversion: Table 6: Performance Monitoring Program Monitoring Program Component Description & Purpose Timing/Frequency TRAFFIC VOLUME & SPEED DATA Collect roadway segment Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts in order to identify potential shifts in traffic patterns associated with the project. Conduct vehicle speed surveys to identify potential changes in motor vehicle speeds associated with the project. Traffic counts and speed surveys will be conducted along Broad and Chorro Streets between Lincoln and Mission, as well as along nearby streets where potential shifts in traffic may occur. Before Construction After Construction o 12 & 24 months after Phase 2 Improvements BICYCLE RIDERSHIP & PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY Collect bicycle and pedestrian counts to evaluate potential increases/shifts in bicycle ridership and pedestrian activity in conjunction with the project. Where feasible, counts will include distribution of cyclists by age (adult vs. children) and gender to study potential shifts in user demographics. Daily bicycle and pedestrian volumes to be collected for roadway segments along Anholm Bikeway route and along parallel bicycling routes. Before Construction After Construction o 12 & 24 months after Phase 2 Improvements SAFETY Analyze reported collision data (autos, bikes, pedestrians) to identify potential safety concerns and/or trends in conjunction with the project. Collision totals and rates will be tallied for segments along the Anholm Bikeway route and compared for conditions before and after project implementation. Before Construction (summarize data for most recent 3-year average) After Construction o 12 & 24 months after Phase 2 Improvements Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan V. Cost Estimates, Phasing and Performance Monitoring Strategies 45 August 2018 Monitoring Program Component Description & Purpose Timing/Frequency USER SURVEYS Survey Types o Online Survey – available to all residents o Intercept Surveys – in-person survey of bicyclists and pedestrians traveling along bikeway o Resident Surveys – surveys mailed directly to residents living within vicinity of bikeway Survey Topics o Bicyclist perceived comfort/safety, route preference, changes to cycling frequency, observed issues and suggestions for improvement o Pedestrian perceived comfort/safety, route preference, changes to walking frequency, challenges and suggestions for improvement o Driver experience and perception navigating route after project implementation o Resident perception of project features, parking impacts, benefits/impacts to neighborhood quality Purpose of surveys is to study user perception of project features and identify areas for potential design refinement and needs for additional focused education/outreach. After Construction o 12 & 24 months after Phase 2 Improvements PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORTING Submit staff report to City Council summarizing findings of the project Performance Monitoring Program After Construction o 12 & 24 months after Phase 2 Improvements *Additional performance reporting can be conducted in conjunction with Phase 1 and/or Phase 3 improvements, if requested by the City Council. Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix A: Concept Design Plan Sheets A-1 August 2018 Appendix A: Concept Design Plan Sheets Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
SUMMARY MAP
SHEET TITLE:AUGUST 2018Attachment d
BROADFOOTHILL CHORROLINCOLNBROADRAMONA
SERRANO
MEINECKEMURRAY
WEST
VENABLEMISSIONMISSIONCENTERLINCOLNMOUNTAIN VIEWCENTERALMONDBENTONROUGEOT NNTS
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
SHEET TITLE:EXISTING SPEED HUMPSNEW SPEED HUMPSLEGENDSUMMARY MAP
MIDDLE SEGMENT IMPROVEMENT PLANS (LINCOLN TO RAMONA)EXISTING ALL-WAY STOPCORRIDOR-WIDE FEATURES·DASHED CENTERLINES ALONG BROAD ANDCHORRO TO ALLOW SAFE/LEGAL PASSING OFCYCLISTS·BIKEWAY BRANDING SIGNAGE & MARKINGS·ADDITIONAL STREET LIGHTING·INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKSON WEST SIDE OF BROAD STREET (WHEREMISSING CURRENTLY)·INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLECURB RAMPS AT INTERSECTIONS (WHEREFEASIBLE, BULBOUTS WILL BE CONSTRUCTEDAS PART OF CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS)MEDIAN ISLANDS & LANDSCAPED BULBOUTSRAISED CROSSINGDIAGONAL DIVERTER**TO BE INSTALLED ASTEMPORARY MEASURE FORTESTING PRIOR TO APERMANENT INSTALLATION**NEW SPEED CUSHIONSAttachment d
STOPXINGPEDCHURCH OF LATTER DAYSAINTS PROPERTYRAMONASTOPBUMPBUMP
RAMONAPED
XING
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:N1" = 30'MATCH LINE 1MATCH LINE 2MATCH LINE 1
RAMONA BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LIMITS (FOOTHILL BLVD)CHANNELIZATION TO PROVIDE BIKE"EXIT/MERGE" ONTO RAMONASRTS BIKE PATH CONNECTINGRAMONA TO FOOTHILL BLVDUSE GREEN PAVEMENT TOINCREASE VISIBILITY OF BIKEFACILITY ACROSS DRIVEWAYSanholmCity of San Luis ObispobikewayTWO-WAY PROTECTED BIKEWAYTWO-WAY PROTECTED BIKEWAYON-STREET PARKINGON-STREET PARKINGUSE GREEN PAVEMENT TOINCREASE VISIBILITY OF BIKEFACILITY ACROSS DRIVEWAYSSTOP FOR BIKEWAYSTOP FOR BIKEWAYANHOLM BIKEWAY PLANFEBRUARY 2018NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONanholmCity of San Luis ObispobikewayCONCRETE CURBINGSEPARATIONONLYON-STREET PARKINGEXISTING RAISED CROSSINGSHOPPING CENTERDRIVEWAYSHOPPINGCENTERDRIVEWAYAttachment d
STOPMEINECKE
RAMONASTOP STOPSTOPBROADSTOP BROADCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
N1" = 20'ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
BROAD & RAMONA & MEINECKEEXAMPLE PHOTOS OF PERMANENT BULBOUTSDESIGNED FOR STORMWATER TREATMENTNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONEXAMPLE PHOTO OF DIAGONAL TRAFFIC DIVERTERPERMANENT INSTALLATIONREMOVABLE BOLLARDSRESTRICT ROADWAY ACCESS TOBICYCLES AND EMERGENCYVEHICLES ONLYBULBOUTS WITH BIORETENTION PLANTERS TREAT AND MANAGESTORMWATER RUNOFF WHILE PROVIDING SPACE FORATTRACTIVE LANDSCAPINGDIAGONAL DIVERTER SHIFTSMOTOR VEHICLE THROUGHTRAFFIC OFF OF BROAD BETWEENRAMONA AND MEINECKE, WHILEALLOWING PEDESTRIANS ANDBICYCLES TO CONTINUEUNIMPEDEDCONVENIENT CONNECTIONTO PLANNED PROTECTEDBIKEWAY ON RAMONA DRIVE(ANHOLM BIKEWAY PHASE 1)AREA BETWEEN RAMONA AND MEINECKE PROVIDES POTENTIALFOR PLACEMAKING ENHANCEMENTS (I.E. STREET FURNITURE,PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING, COMMUNITY ARTWORK,ATTRACTIVE HARDSCAPE, ETC.)ADA CURB RAMPSGREEN-BACKED SHARROWMARKINGS AND GUIDE SIGNSCONVEY ANHOLM BIKEWAYROUTE ALONG BROAD TOTHE SOUTHPILOT INSTALLATION TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH MOVEABLE PLANTER BOXES,STAMPED/PAINTED ASPHALT AND OTHER LOWER-COST TEMPORARY TREATMENTS**NOTE: DIVERTER TO BE INSTALLED AS TEMPORARY MEASURE FOR TESTING PRIOR TO A PERMANENT INSTALLATION. ILLUSTRATIONS OF PERMANENT INSTALLATION SHOWN ABOVE ARE CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY IN NATURE. ULTIMATEDESIGN ELEMENTS ARE TO BE REFINED IN FURTHER DETAIL AND WILL CONSIDER SITE CONSTRAINTS AND FUNDING AVAILABILITY.**Attachment d
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
BROAD & RAMONA & MEINECKE Attachment d
BROADMOUNTAI
N
VIEWSTOPBROAD
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
N1" = 20'ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
BROAD & MOUNTAIN VIEW BULBOUTS WITH BIORETENTION PLANTERS TREATAND MANAGE STORMWATER RUNOFF WHILEPROVIDING SPACE FOR ATTRACTIVE LANDSCAPINGRAISED COBBLESTONE MEDIAN ISLANDS& BULBOUTS HELP REDUCE TRAFFICSPEEDS BY NARROWING WIDTH OFROADWAYMEDIAN ISLANDS & BULBOUTSDESIGNED TO RETAIN ACCESS TOINTERSECTIONS AND PRIVATEDRIVEWAYSADA CURB RAMPSEXAMPLE PHOTOS OF BULBOUTS DESIGNED FORSTORMWATER TREATMENTROADWAY CENTERLINE DASHEDON BROAD & CHORRO TO ALLOWFOR RESPECTFUL/LEGALPASSING OF CYCLISTSEXAMPLE PHOTO OF CITY STANDARDCOBBLESTONE MEDIAN ISLANDGREEN-BACKEDSHARROW MARKINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONNOT ATHROUGHFOOTHILL BLVDUSE ALTERNATEROUTESSTREETSIGNAGE POSTED ALONG BROADWARNING THROUGH TRAFFIC TOUTILIZE ALTERNATE ROUTESSPEED HUMPS POSITIONEDBETWEEN RAISED ISLAND ANDBULBOUTS TO REDUCE TRAFFICSPEEDSSTOPAttachment d
STOPWEST
CHORROCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
N1" = 20'ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
CHORRO & WEST NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONEXAMPLE PHOTO OF SPEED CUSHIONSSPEED CUSHIONS SLOW MOTOR VEHICLE SPEEDS,SIMILAR TO SPEED HUMPS, BUT INCLUDE CUTOUTS THATALLOW WIDE WHEELBASE EMERGENCY RESPONSEVEHICLES AND BICYCLES TO PASS THROUGH UNIMPEDEDADA CURB RAMPSSPEED CUSHIONS TO BECONSTRUCTED IN ASPHALT ANDLOCATED TO AVOID CONFLICTSWITH DRIVEWAYS & INTERSECTIONSNOTE: CUSHIONS SHOWN IN EXAMPLE IMAGE ARE CONSTRUCTED OF MODULAR RUBBER. DEVICESPROPOSED FOR CHORRO WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH ASPHALTGREEN-BACKEDSHARROW MARKINGSEXAMPLE PHOTO OF SPEED CUSHIONSAttachment d
STOPVENABLE
CHORROCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
N1" = 20'ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLAN
CHORRO & VENABLE BULBOUTS WITH BIORETENTION PLANTERS TREATAND MANAGE STORMWATER RUNOFF WHILEPROVIDING SPACE FOR ATTRACTIVE LANDSCAPINGRAISED COBBLESTONE MEDIAN ISLANDS & BULBOUTS HELPREDUCE TRAFFIC SPEEDS BY NARROWING WIDTH OF ROADWAYMEDIAN ISLANDS & BULBOUTS DESIGNED TO RETAINACCESS TO INTERSECTIONS AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAYSINSTALL ADA CURBRAMPSROADWAY CENTERLINE DASHEDON BROAD & CHORRO TO ALLOWFOR RESPECTFUL/LEGALPASSING OF CYCLISTSEXAMPLE PHOTOS OF BULBOUTS DESIGNED FORSTORMWATER TREATMENTEXAMPLE PHOTO OF CITY STANDARDCOBBLESTONE MEDIAN ISLANDGREEN-BACKEDSHARROW MARKINGSAttachment d
CHORROWALNUTSTOPSTOP
PEACH
STOPSTOPSTOPCHORROCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:5ofSHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:MATCH LINE 7MATCH LINE 6 1" = 20'NSHORTEN LEFT TURNPOCKET TO 50' TOPROVIDE WIDTH FORBUFFERED BIKE LANESGREEN THROUGH INTERSECTION7HI-VIS CROSSWALKTIGHTEN CORNER RADIUS TOREDUCE TURNING SPEEDS ANDIMPROVE CROSSING(LINCOLN TO PALM)TIGHTEN CORNER RADIUS TO REDUCETURNING SPEEDS AND IMPROVE CROSSINGWATCHFOR BICYCLESSTOPANHOLM BIKEWAY PLANFEBRUARY 2018NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONMATCH LINE8MATCH LINE 7 1" = 20'N
GREEN PAINTTHROUGH INTERSECTIONWATCHFOR BICYCLESSTOPWATCHFOR BICYCLESSTOPHI-VIS CROSSWALKINTERIM: BUFFERED BIKE LANESULTIMATE: CONCRETE CURB SEPARATIONGAPS TO BE PROVIDED FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESSFUTURE SAFETY IMPROVMENTS TOCHORRO/PEACH INTERSECTION WILLBE DONE UNDER THE CITY'S TRAFFICSAFETY PROGRAM.NEW CURB RAMPanholmCity of San Luis ObispobikewayanholmCity of San Luis ObispobikewayINTERIM: BUFFERED BIKE LANESULTIMATE: CONCRETE CURB SEPARATIONGAPS TO BE PROVIDED FORDRIVEWAY ACCESSAttachment d
CHORROMILLSTOPSTOPSTOP CHORROCITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:MATCH LINE 101" = 20'N
INSTALL GREEN PAINT THROUGH INTERSECTIONWATCHFOR BICYCLESSTOPINTERIM: BUFFERED BIKE LANESULTIMATE: CONCRETE CURB SEPARATIONGAPS TO BE PROVIDED FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESS(LINCOLN TO PALM)NEW CURB RAMPNEW CURB RAMPACTIVATED FLASHING BEACONTO IMPROVE CROSSINGYIELD LINESYIELD LINESSTRIPED CROSSWALKWATCHFOR BICYCLESSTOPANHOLM BIKEWAY PLANFEBRUARY 2018NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION1" = 20'N
MATCH LINE 9MATCH LINE 8MATCH LINE 9
Attachment d
PALMCHORRO
MONTEREYCHORRO
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PROJECT TITLE:
SHEET TITLE:
MATCH LINE 10 1" = 20'N1" = 20'N
MATCH LINE 11PROJECT LIMITSMATCH LINE 11
SHARROWS UP TO INTERSECTIONSHARROWS BETWEEN PALM AND MONTEREYLINCOLN TO PALM)
ANHOLM BIKEWAY PLANFEBRUARY 2018NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. FINAL PLANS WILLBE PREPARED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTIONBIKE LANEENDBIKE LANEBEGINMAY USEFULL LANEMAY USEFULL LANEAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis B-1 August 2018 Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis B-2 August 2018 Traffic Data Volume Data Existing (2016) roadway segment and intersection traffic data (auto, bike and pedestrian volumes) were collected for streets within the vicinity of the Anholm Bikeway. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes were collected for roadway segments, while AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes were collected for intersections. All traffic data was collected during typical weekdays, avoiding school holidays, construction impacts, inclement weather or other unusual events. Existing traffic volume data is summarized in Figure B1 and Figure B2. Vehicle Speed Data City Transportation Staff collects traffic speed data regularly for the purposes of setting speed limits, investigating neighborhood traffic concerns and for studying traffic safety issues at various locations throughout the city. A typical speed survey involves the use of Lidar or Radar equipment to measure vehicle speeds along a selected corridor. Speeds are recorded for vehicles in free-flow conditions (avoiding congested locations or platoons of vehicles grouped tougher) and a sample of at least 100 vehicles is recorded in each survey. Speed data is most often used to determine the prevailing (85th percentile) speeds for a given street. Early in the project planning process, speed data was collected along streets that has potential to be considered for the Anholm Bikeway route alignment. For the purposes of this project, existing vehicle speed data was used evaluate whether conditions are appropriate for mixed-flow traffic, where bicyclists and drivers share travel lanes, and where traffic calming may be warranted to reduce vehicle speeds to a level conducive to a quality neighborhood environment. Collision History As part of the City’s Vision Zero/Traffic Safety Program, collision reports are collected from the San Luis Obispo Police Department and analyzed on an annual basis to identify collision trends throughout the City. The City’s Annual Traffic Safety Report documents citywide trends by collision type (total collisions, fatal/injury collisions, pedestrian & bicycle collisions) and identifies mitigation strategies for high-collision rate locations, with a focus on locations with high rates of collisions involving pedestrians, bicyclists and injuries. Potential mitigation recommendations may include physical improvements, as well as targeted education and enforcement strategies. As part of the analysis for the Anholm Bikeway Plan, collision data from the most recent five-year period was reviewed for intersections and streets within the project study area. This assessment included a focused investigation of locations with a documented history of pedestrian or bicycle collisions to identify potential trends that could be addressed through improvement strategies as part of this plan. A summary of pedestrian and bicycle collisions reported within the most recent five-year period (2012-2016) available is provided in Table B1. Solo vs. VehChorroMonterey 44 221Chorro Mill 2 2 1 1ChorroWest 111ChorroMurray 33111Chorro Foothill 1 1 1Broad Mill 2 2 1 1Broad Peach 2 2Broad Center 1 1Broad Serrano 1 1Broad Ramona 2 2Broad Foothill 2 2 2Ramona Broad to Palomar 3 1 2 1Foothill Ferrini* 1 1 1Lincoln Mountain View 1 116 26 9 10 7 2BikePed vs. Veh Severe Inj.TOTAL*Data represents 5‐year total (2012‐2016). A fatal vehicle vs. bicycle collision occurred at Foothill/Ferrini in 2017, outside of the range of this dataset.Street Nearest Cross StreetAt IntersectionTotalTable B1: Study Area Bicycle/Pedestrian Collision History (2012-2016) Attachment d
Existing Traffic Volumes - North SegmentBroad Street Bicycle Boulevard PlanBROAD STFOOTHILL BLVDCHORRO STMEINECKE AVEMURRAY AVEMISSION STCENTER STMOUNTAINLINCOLN STLINCOLN STVIEW STRAMONA DRWEST STNOT TO SCALEBROAD STXXX(YYY)[ZZZ]Daily(AM Peak Hour)[PM Peak Hour] Auto Segment VolumesXXX(YYY)[ZZZ]Daily(AM Peak Hour)[PM Peak Hour] Bike Segment VolumesStop Controlled IntersectionSignalized IntersectionSERRANOBENTON WY85th Percentile Vehicle SpeedsXX mphLEGEND1445(191
)
[121
]22(3
)
[5
]3068(255
)
[296
]51(9
)
[5
]1082(75
)
[122
]2347(238
)
[226
]1445(191)[121]3068(255)[296]2322(228)[230]1287(114)[132]2467(187)[190]2762(211)[210]105(16
)
[15
]105(11
)
[12
]2829(215
)
[302
]3240(335
)
[275
]3715(262)[386]2600(256)[220]3399(275)[340]2414(230)[226]2967(253)[301]2123(217)[196]30 mph30 mph27 mph26 mph31 mph31 mph22(23)202(169)9(13)25(39)3(10)96(98)Broad St810(4)7(9)2(1)4(0)10(6)176(153)2(3)6(7)0(1)13(22)5(2)1(0)1(3)65(89)0(0)Broad StAM(PM)AM(PM)AM(PM)AM(PM)6(4)222(177)6(3)5(8)Broad St109(8)1(0)1(1)1(1)2(3)216(166)2(3)1(1)2(1)1(2)2(2)5(2)4(4)0(3)59(88)0(0)Broad St115(10)2(0)2(1)0(1)63(51)175(116)2(3)83(164)5(16)35(87)7(4)10(8)3(0)140(69)38(35)1(2)Broad St122(0)0(1)1(2)1(6)0(0)222(168)27(21)19(9)7(4)0(2)213(134)3(5)6(1)4(28)258(324)94(172)Chorro StLincoln St6 2(4)8(11)2(2)1(2)AM(PM) Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement VolumesAM(PM) Peak Hour Pedestrian Crossing VolumesXX(YY)XX(YY)NMurray Ave
Mission St
Center St
Mountain View
Lincoln St3(2)2(6)46(54)37(39)23(37)51(59)336(684)35(38)137(64)620(481)23(40)62(52)45(41)133(182)Chorro StFoothill Blvd1 9(25)13(48)15(34)5(5)202(166)2(2)19(25)19(33)12(11)12(14)19(22)3(3)16(21)231(288)12(34)Murray Ave2 3(5)5(8)1(2)1(4)5(5)232(171)5(5)2(6)5(2)2(5)17(9)2(5)3(4)249(323)12(28)Mission St3 3(6)5(13)1(2)2(0)3(2)228(192)2(6)1(2)1(1)3(2_10(9)0(1)3(3))232(325)1(6)Center St
4AM(PM)AM(PM)AM(PM)4(2)265(187)3(5)3(4)2(0)2(1)6(9)0(0)2(3)256(381)3(3)Mountain View
54(7)6(19)0(0)0(2)Chorro StChorro StChorro StChorro St2(5)1(6)1(2)0(0)0(0)5(2)61(141)441(738)6(2)91(77)704(441)2(3)81(145)3(0)50(57)Broad StFoothill Blvd14(35)12345678910111212(13)22(30)87(14)[9]73(17)[8]9761(85)(7)[8](4)[5](14)[13](7)[12]91(13)[9]83(20)[9]MISSION LN101BROAD STAM(PM)(13)[13](10)[13]956(79)[91]758(70)[76]865(54)[83]613(41)[55]
275(12)[27]
202(14)[22]89(10)[7]128(11)[9]70(6)[3]100(5)[9](222)[140](128)[197]Note: Traffic count data collected during a typical weekday (Tues, Wed, Thurs) with schools in session during 2016 and 2017. Peak hour volumes reflect the highest hourly volume during the AM (7-9 AM) and PM (3:30-6:00 PM) periods.219(25)[24]30 mph30 mph198(34)[14]31(3)[2]11(1)[0]Attachment d
Existing Traffic Volumes - South SegmentBroad Street Bicycle Boulevard PlanNOT TO SCALENPeach StChorro St
14151617XXX(YYY)[ZZZ]Daily(AM Peak Hour)[PM Peak Hour] Auto Segment VolumesXXX(YYY)[ZZZ]Daily(AM Peak Hour)[PM Peak Hour] Bike Segment VolumesStop Controlled IntersectionSignalized Intersection85th Percentile Vehicle SpeedsXX mphLEGENDAM(PM) Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement VolumesAM(PM) Peak Hour Pedestrian Crossing VolumesXX(YY)XX(YY)PEACH ST101MILL
STWALNUT STPALM STMONTEREY STCHORRO STMORRO STOSOS STLINCOLN STHIGUERA
STBROAD STMISS
ION
PLAZAMONTEREY STNIPOMO STBROAD ST35 mph36 mph1128(89)[118](0)[0]1551(203)[296](0)[5]88(16)[9]103(12)[8]2694(203)[274]3080(288)[260]PEACH ST
1
1
9
9
(
1
0
5
)
[
1
2
8
]98
7
(
7
3
)
[
1
0
9
]
1
4
7
7
(
1
2
7
)
[
1
5
8
]
6
82
(45
)
[
72
]131614171588(129)7(11)19(16)14(4)338(255)113(69)5(4)205(342)24(10)11(37)12(11)1(3)53(16)4(2)7(7)37(6)21(11)13(7)42(19)250(233)17(9)11(23)159(234)4(3)28(85)29(30)14(17)9(11)4(12)6(8)4(4)44(50)84(76)145(136)39(42)185(196)67(23)28(22)138(169)12(24)11(25)38(110)3(12)3(4)3(3)10(8)15(5)15(12)29(43)6(12)62(56)76(76)73(88)38(95)62(66)22(9)91(175)9(22)42(50)1(3)1(1)0(0)0(2)Mill StChorro StPalm StChorro St
Palm StBroad St 21(28)26 mph28 mphWalnut StChorro St
130(0)1(4)1(0)2(0)44(16)382(325)1(0)10(12)237(514)0(1)70(143)1(1)6(19)17(9)0(0)5(11)88(15)[27]103(31)[20]Note: Traffic count data collected during a typical weekday (Tues, Wed, Thurs) with schools in session during 2014 and 2016. Peak hour volumes reflect the highest hourly volume during the AM (7-9 AM) and PM (3:30-6:00 PM) periods.Attachment d
Prepared By:
City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department
July 2018
Anholm Bikeway Plan
(Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
II.Technical Analysis Parameters .................................................................................................... 4
III. Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 13
IV.Existing Plus Project Conditions ................................................................................................. 18
V. Cumulative (2035) Conditions .................................................................................................... 27
VI.Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Conditions ................................................................................ 33
VII.Assessment of Other Project Alternatives .................................................................................. 41
Appendices (Available Upon Request)
List of Tables
Table ES-1: Transportation Impact Significance of Proposed Project ................................................. 1
Table 1: Intersection Level of Service Criteria ..................................................................................... 7
Table 2: Roadway Segment Level of Service Criteria ......................................................................... 7
Table 3: Street Volumes and Speed Thresholds ................................................................................. 8
Table 4: Existing Intersection Auto Levels of Service ........................................................................ 13
Table 5: Existing Vehicle Queues ...................................................................................................... 14
Table 6: Existing Roadway Segment Levels of Service ..................................................................... 15
Table 7: Existing Neighborhood Traffic Assessment ......................................................................... 16
Table 8: Existing Plus Project Intersection Auto Levels of Service .................................................... 20
Table 9: Existing Plus Project Vehicle Queues .................................................................................. 21
Table 10: Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Levels of Service .............................................. 23
Table 11: Existing Plus Project Neighborhood Traffic Assessment ................................................... 24
Table 12: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Intersection Auto Levels of Service ................................... 28
Table 13: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Vehicle Queues ................................................................. 29
Table 14: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Roadway Segment Levels of Service ................................ 30
Table 15: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Neighborhood Traffic Assessment .................................... 31
Table 16: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Intersection Auto Levels of Service ................................. 34
Table 17: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Vehicle Queues ............................................................... 35
Table 18: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Roadway Segment Levels of Service .............................. 37
Table 19: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Neighborhood Traffic Assessment .................................. 38
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 ii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area Map .................................................................................................................. 10
Figure 2: Study Intersections ............................................................................................................. 11
Figure 3: Study Roadway Segments ................................................................................................. 12
Figure 4: Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................... 17
Figure 5: Existing Plus Project – Broad Street Traffic Redistribution ................................................. 25
Figure 6: Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................................. 26
Figure 7: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Traffic Volumes .................................................................. 32
Figure 8: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project – Broad Street Traffic Redistribution ................................ 39
Figure 9: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................ 40
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 1
Executive Summary
This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts of the proposed Anholm Bikeway Plan
update. As adopted in February 2018, the Anholm Bikeway Plan recommends that City Staff conduct
additional public outreach and analysis to develop detailed recommendations for the middle segment
of the proposed bikeway corridor (between Lincoln Street and Ramona Drive). As adopted, the Plan
dictates that designs for the middle segment should focus on development of a traditional bicycle
boulevard along Broad Street, providing a shared street (motorists and bicyclists share travel lanes)
with traffic speeds and volumes conducive to a low-stress walking and biking environment. The
proposed Plan update, referred herein as “the Project”, identifies specific recommendations for
installation of a traffic diverter on Broad Street near Ramona/Meinecke and traffic calming throughout
the Anholm Neighborhood to support this vision. This proposed Project also includes the
recommendation to modify the City’s General Plan street classification designation for certain
segments of Chorro Street, Lincoln Street, Meinecke Street and Murray Street to more properly reflect
the transportation context of these routes. Because the traffic diversion proposed for Broad Street as
part of the Project is expected to modify existing traffic circulation and shift volumes to other routes—
predominantly Chorro Street—this transportation impact study (TIS) has been prepared to identify
potential project-related impacts related to these changes.
This study includes the analysis of traffic operations at selected intersections and roadway segments
that are most likely to experience shifts in traffic in conjunction with the proposed Project. Conditions
were analyzed based on existing (2016) traffic levels, and based on projected future (2035) traffic
levels for conditions with and without the proposed Project. Based on analysis using review of existing
traffic patterns, forecasts developed with the City’s Travel Demand Forecasting Model, and
engineering judgement, existing traffic volumes are projected to shift within the study area as follows:
The equivalent of approximately 8% of the existing vehicular traffic volume on Broad Street is
projected to shift from either Broad or Chorro to Santa Rosa Street (1% increase in Santa Rosa
traffic volume) with the addition of traffic diversion on Broad and traffic calming measures
throughout the neighborhood.
The projected shift in Broad Street vehicular traffic to Chorro Street ranges from approximately
92% of existing Broad Street traffic at the northern end between Foothill and Meinecke, to
approximately 50% at the south end near Lincoln Street. Existing (2016) traffic levels along
Broad Street are projected to decrease to approximately 1,800 vehicles per day between
Lincoln and Ramona. Along Chorro Street, volumes are projected to increase to 7,800 to 8,400
vehicles per day along this stretch.
Local traffic shifting from Broad Street to Chorro Street is anticipated to travel between the two
routes via side streets, including Lincoln, Mountain View, Center, Mission, Murray, and
Meinecke, with the greatest proportion on Murray, Meinecke and Lincoln. However, the
projected increase in traffic along these three streets is partially offset by elimination of some
existing cut-through activity. Regional traffic is forecasted to re-route via Santa Rosa (Highway
1) and Foothill Boulevard.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 2
It should be noted that this analysis includes the inherently conservative assumption that no mode
shift occurs from motor vehicle to bicycle trips along the proposed bikeway corridor with the proposed
improvements. Addition of physically protected bike lanes in particular, as proposed for the Anholm
Bikeway Corridor segments north of Ramona Drive and south of Lincoln Street, has been shown to
generate significant increases in bicycle ridership. For every one percent (1%) shift in mode share
from automobile to bicycle trips along this corridor, there would be approximately 100 fewer motor
vehicles per day on Broad and Chorro Streets. If the City’s General Plan target of 20 percent bicycle
mode share was met along this corridor alone, motor vehicle volumes along Broad and Chorro Street
could be reduced by up to 1,700 vehicles per day.
Based on City transportation impact analysis standards and policies, and as summarized in the table
below, the Project would not trigger any significant transportation impacts.
Figure ES-1: Transportation Impact Significance of Proposed Project
Would the Project:
Existing
Plus Project
Cumulative (2035)
Plus Project
Yes No Yes No
Conflict with an applicable local or regional plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation
including mass transit and nonmotorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle
paths, and mass transit. Specifically,
X X
Intersections (not downtown) operating at acceptable LOS D or better
degrade to unacceptable LOS E or F; or X X
Intersections operating at deficient levels of service experience increase
in critical Volume‐to‐Capacity Ratio of 0.01 or more with project; or X X
Roadway segments (not downtown) operating at LOS D or better
degrades to LOS E or F with project; or X X
Roadway segments operating at deficient levels of service experience
decrease in average segment travel speed by at least 1 mph with
project.
X X
Increase Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Collector and Local Street
segments to levels that exceed applicable General Plan Maximum
Neighborhood Traffic Volume Thresholds.
X X
Increase Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Collector and Local Street
segments where traffic levels already exceed applicable General Plan
Maximum Neighborhood Traffic Volume Thresholds.
X X
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 3
Would the Project:
Existing
Plus Project
Cumulative (2035)
Plus Project
Yes No Yes No
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment). Specifically,
X X
Cause 95th percentile turning movement queues at intersections to
exceed available turn pocket capacity. X X
Increases 95th percentile queues by at least one vehicle length at
locations where queues already exceed available storage capacity for
No Project conditions.
X X
Result in inadequate emergency access. X X
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the
performance or safety of such facilities.
X X
With addition of the proposed Project, including modifications to the functional street
classifications of segments of Chorro, Lincoln, Meinecke and Murray, this study finds that the
Project is found to be consistent with adopted City policies, plans and programs.
Refer to the body of this report for additional details.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 4
I. Introduction
This report presents a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) for the improvements proposed for the
middle segment of the Anholm Bikeway project (Lincoln Street to Ramona Drive). The Anholm
Bikeway Plan—adopted by the San Luis Obispo City Council in February 2018—identifies
transportation improvement recommendations to develop a low-stress corridor for bicyclists and
pedestrians connecting the city’s downtown core with Foothill Boulevard and neighborhoods to the
north. As adopted, the Plan identifies specific design recommendations for the northern segment
(Ramona Drive to Foothill Boulevard) and southern segment (Downtown to Lincoln Street) of the
proposed corridor. For the middle segment of the corridor (Lincoln Street to Ramona Drive), the Plan
calls for further analysis and community outreach to develop specific design recommendations to
support the general concept of a bicycle boulevard (shared street) along Broad Street, with traffic
diversion on Broad Street and traffic calming throughout the entire Anholm Neighborhood.
After conducting additional public outreach and analysis, the City has developed specific design
recommendations for the middle segment (Lincoln Street to Ramona Drive), which include the
proposed addition of one traffic diverter at Broad Street between Ramona and Meinecke, as well as
traffic calming measures along Broad Street, Chorro Street and several side streets. Additional project
components include enhanced bikeway markings and signage, sidewalk and curb ramp improvements
additional street lighting, and proposed modifications to the functional classifications of several street
segments within the study area. Herein, the combination of these elements is referred to as the
proposed “Project”. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and document potential traffic operations
impacts associated with the anticipated changes in traffic circulation associated with the proposed
Project.
A general study area map identifying the Project is shown in Figure 1 and a more detailed project
description is provided in Section of this report.
II. Technical Analysis Parameters
The following section outlines the analysis methodology and technical parameters used to quantify
traffic operations in this TIS.
Analysis Scenarios
Potential Project impacts are evaluated for the following traffic analysis scenarios:
Existing Conditions – Reflects 2016/2017 traffic volumes and the existing transportation
network.
Existing Plus Project Conditions – Existing Conditions with the addition traffic redistribution
associated with the proposed Project.
Cumulative (2035) Conditions – Represents future traffic conditions reflective of land use
and transportation network changes projected with buildout of the current City of San Luis
Obispo General Plan (horizon year 2035).
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Conditions – Cumulative (2035) Conditions with the addition
of traffic redistribution associated with the proposed Project.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 5
Study Facilities
This analysis evaluates conditions at study intersections and roadway segments within the vicinity of
the proposed Project. Study facilities are identified as follows:
Intersections
1. Broad Street / Foothill Boulevard
2. Broad Street / Meinecke Street
3. Broad Street / Murray Street
4. Broad Street / Mission Street
5. Broad Street / Center Street
6. Broad Street / Mountain View Street
7. Broad Street / Lincoln Street
8. Chorro Street / Foothill Boulevard
9. Chorro Street / Meinecke Street
10. Chorro Street / Murray Street
11. Chorro Street / Mission Street
12. Chorro Street / Center Street
13. Chorro Street / Mountain View Street
14. Chorro Street / Lincoln Street
15. Santa Rosa Street / Foothill Boulevard*
16. Santa Rosa Street / Murray Street*
17. Santa Rosa Street / Olive Street*
18. Santa Rosa Street / Walnut Street*
Roadway Segments
Level of Service Analysis:
1. Santa Rosa Street (State Route 1) (Foothill to Walnut)*
Neighborhood Traffic Analysis:
1. Broad Street (Foothill to Ramona)
2. Broad Street (Ramona to Meinecke)
3. Broad Street (Meinecke to Mission)
4. Broad Street (Mission to Lincoln)
5. Chorro Street (Foothill to Meinecke)
6. Chorro Street (Meinecke to Mission)
7. Chorro Street (Mission to Lincoln)
8. Meinecke Street (Broad to Chorro)
9. Murray Street (Broad to Chorro)
10. Mission Street (Broad to Chorro)
11. Center Street (Broad to Chorro)
12. Mountain View Street (Broad to Chorro)
13. Lincoln Street (Broad to Chorro)
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 6
14. Lincoln Street (Chorro to West)
*Denotes facility under Caltrans jurisdiction.
Study intersection locations are shown in Figure 2 and study roadway segments are shown in
Figure 3.
Analysis Methodology
The analysis approach utilized in this study was developed based on the City of San Luis Obispo and
Caltrans standards and policies. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element
establishes level of service (LOS)1 policies for all modes of transportation. Outside of the downtown,
the City sets an automobile level of service objective City intersections and roadway segments of LOS
C, with a minimum acceptable standard of LOS D.
In addition to the City's policies, Caltrans has also established the measure of effectiveness (MOE)
for the evaluation of impacts in CEQA level projects on State facilities. Caltrans' Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002) contains the following policy pertaining to the
LOS standards within Caltrans jurisdiction:
The Level of Service (LOS) for operating State highway facilities is based upon measures of
effectiveness (MOEs). These MOEs describe the measures best suited for analyzing State highway
facilities (i.e., freeway segments, signalized intersections, on- or off-ramps, etc.) Caltrans endeavors
to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities,
however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead
agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. If an existing State highway
facility is operating at less than the appropriate target LOS, the existing MOE should be maintained.
Consistent with Caltrans policy, the study considers LOS D as the standard acceptable threshold for
State highway facilities, such as State Route 1 (Santa Rosa Street).
Intersection Analysis
The level of service analysis for study intersections was conducted based on the methodologies of the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition and using Synchro 10 analysis software. Where the HCM
6th Edition methods do not support a specific lane or signal phasing configuration, the 2000 HCM
methods are applied. For the purposes of this study, intersection levels of service are analyzed for AM
(7-9 AM) and PM (4-6 PM) peak hour periods. The level of service thresholds for intersections are
summarized as follows:
1 Level of Service (LOS) is a standard qualitative measure used to describe conditions for transportation
modes. For auto modes, level of service reflects typical speed, travel time, delays and driver convenience. For
other modes, level of service may reflect the quality and comfort of the travel experience. LOS is defined using
letter grades “A” through “F”, with LOS A representing free-flow conditions, and LOS F representing heavy
congestion with traffic demands exceeding capacity for auto modes.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 7
Table 1: Intersection Level of Service Criteria
Signalized Intersections All‐Way Stop‐Controlled
Intersections
Two‐Way Stop‐Controlled
Intersections
Control Delay
(sec/veh) Level of Service Control Delay
(sec/veh) Level of Service Control Delay
(sec/veh) Level of Service
≤ 10 A ≤ 10 A ≤ 5 A
> 10 ‐ 20 B > 10 ‐ 15 B > 5 ‐10 B
> 20 ‐ 35 C > 15 ‐ 25 C > 10 ‐ 20 C
> 35 ‐ 55 D > 25 ‐ 35 D > 20 ‐ 30 D
> 55 ‐ 80 E > 35 ‐ 50 E > 30 ‐ 45 E
> 80 F > 50 F > 45 F
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition.
Review of intersection operations also included analysis of 95th percentile vehicle queues at turn
pockets, as calculated using Synchro software.
Roadway Segment Analysis
Roadway Levels of Service
The level of service analysis for the study segment Santa Rosa Street was conducted based on the
methodologies of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition and using Synchro 10 analysis
software. For automobile mode, level of service for urban street segments is based on travel speed
as a percentage of the Base Free-Flow Speed. The level of service criteria for roadway segments are
summarized as follows:
Table 2: Roadway Segment Level of Service Criteria
Automobile Mode
Travel Speed as a Percentage of
Base Free‐Flow Speed (%) Level of Service
> 85 A
> 67 ‐ 85 B
> 50 ‐ 67 C
> 40 ‐ 50 D
> 30 ‐ 40 E
≤ 30 F
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition.
Neighborhood Traffic Impacts
Potential neighborhood traffic impacts are evaluated by comparing Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Volumes for Collector and Local Streets with the maximum ADT targets established in the General
Plan Circulation Element. Applicable ADT thresholds by street type are summarized as follows:
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 8
Table 3: Street Volumes and Speed Thresholds
Street Type Max Max
ADT Speed (mph)
Local Residential 1,500 25
Residential Collector (Minor) 3,000 25
Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 25
Residential Arterial Not Applicable CVC*
Arterial Streets Not Applicable CVC*
Source: City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Circulation Element (Amended October, 2017)
*Max targeted speeds on arterial streets established per California Vehicle Code.
It should be noted that these maximum neighborhood traffic volume thresholds are not necessarily
based on the actual traffic capacity or operational limits of these roadway types, but are established
as City policy to convey approximate levels of traffic desired for these street types when considering
context of adjacent land uses.
Thresholds of Significance
A project is considered to have a significant vehicular traffic impact if any of the following criteria are
met:
Signalized Intersections
Project traffic causes minimum level of service standards to be exceeded or further degrades
already exceeded LOS standards and the Volume-to-Capacity (V/C) ratio for the critical
movement is increased by 0.01 or more.
Project traffic causes 95th percentile turning movement queues to exceed available turn
pocket capacity, or increases queues by at least one vehicle length (25 feet) at locations
where queues already exceed available storage capacity for No Project conditions. Queuing
impacts are evaluated in the context of potential to impact to traffic safety, considering
probability of vehicles spilling back into through travel lanes, vehicles occluding minimum
sight distance requirements, etc.
Unsignalized Intersections
Project traffic causes minimum LOS standards to be exceeded or further degrades already
exceeded LOS standards, the V/C ratio is increased by 0.01 or more, and a traffic signal
warrant analysis is satisfied.
Roadway Segments
Project traffic causes minimum LOS standards to be exceeded or further degrades already
exceeded LOS standards and the average segment speed decreases by one (1) mph or
more.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 9
Neighborhood Traffic Thresholds
Project traffic causes ADTs or speeds on study roadway segments to exceed the maximum
thresholds established in the General Plan (as shown in Table 3), or results in further
increases in traffic volumes or speeds on a street that already exceeds these thresholds.
All intersection and roadway analysis output worksheets are included in the Appendix for reference.
Attachment d
Figure 1
Study Area Map
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln StAnholm Bikeway Route
Proposed Traffic Calming
Diagonal Traffic Diverter
ACCESS RESTRICTED TO
BICYCLES AND EMERGENCY
VEHICLES ONLY
Attachment d
Figure 2
Study Intersections
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln St5
6
7
12
13
14
3
4
9
10
11
1
2
8 15
16
17
18
Attachment d
Figure 3
Study Roadway Segments
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln St1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1
14
Level of Service Analysis Roadway Segment
Neighborhood Traffic Analysis Roadway Segment
2
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 13
III. Existing Conditions
This section describes existing traffic operations within the study area. Existing traffic count data was
collected in 2016 and 2017 for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians within the study area. Existing daily
traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4, while AM and PM peak hour volumes are provided in the
analysis output sheets in the Appendix.
Intersection Operations
Existing peak hour intersection levels of service are summarized in Table 4 below.
Table 4: Existing Intersection Auto Levels of Service
# Intersection Traffic
Control
Existing Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 18.7 B 13.0 B
2 Broad Street & Meinecke Street SSSC 9.7 A 10.1 B
3 Broad Street & Murray Street SSSC 10.1 A 10.1 B
4 Broad Street & Mission Street AWSC 8.1 A 7.9 A
5 Broad Street & Center Street AWSC 8.4 A 8.0 A
6 Broad Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 10.9 B 10.4 B
7 Broad Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 10.5 B 10.2 B
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 18.9 B 22.6 C
9 Chorro Street & Meinecke Street AWSC 10.5 B 9.8 A
10 Chorro Street & Murray Street AWSC 10.4 B 11.4 B
11 Chorro Street & Mission Street AWSC 10.3 B 11.0 B
12 Chorro Street & Center Street AWSC 9.9 A 10.8 B
13 Chorro Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 14.1 B 15.0 C
14 Chorro Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 15.5 C 12.6 B
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 48.3 D 46.4 D
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street Signal 21.8 C 30.3 C
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street Signal 12.6 B 10.6 B
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street Signal 28.8 C 27.7 C
1. Signal ‐ Signalized Control; SSSC ‐ Side‐Street Stop Control; AWSC ‐All‐Way Stop Control
2. Intersection delay and LOS calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology. For
locations where HCM 6th Edition does not support lane/signal configuration, HCM 2000 methods used.
3. For signalized and AWSC intersections, delay and LOS based on intersection average. For SSSC intersections,
delay and LOS reported for worst approach.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 14
All intersections currently operate acceptably at LOS C or better. Table 5 presents existing queues
for study intersections.
Table 5: Existing Vehicle Queues
# Intersection Movement Storage
(ft)
95th Percentile Queue
(ft)
AM Peak PM Peak
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBR 100 30 56
EBL 55 27 <25
WBL 40 <25 <25
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 170 122 160
NBR 80 <25 <25
SBL 60 107 89
EBL 50 <25 <25
WBL 200 37 37
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 250 170 235
NBR 210 <25 59
SBL 330 167 217
SBR 500 <25 45
EBL 260 256 200
WBL 160 103 177
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street
NBL 150 34 34
SBL 190 52 30
WBR 85 <25 <25
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street
NBL 70 48 98
SBL 110 <25 21
SBR 100 404 37
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street
NBL 80 <25 <25
SBL 100 46 88
WBR 70 475 547
1. 95th percentile queues reported above.
2. Queues reported at left‐ and right‐turn pockets only.
3. Locations where queues exceed available storage capacity are shown in bold.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 15
As shown in the table, vehicle queues are calculated to spill back beyond available turn pocket
storage at the following locations:
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Southbound left-turn (AM & PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Northbound left-turn (PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Southbound right-turn (AM)
Roadway Segment Operations
Table 6 below shows the existing roadway segment operations along Santa Rosa Street for AM and
PM peak hour conditions.
Table 6: Existing Roadway Segment Levels of Service
# Segment Dir.
Existing Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS (%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS (%0
LOS
1 Santa Rosa Street (Foothill to Walnut)
NB 13.9 34.8%E 12.6 31.3%E
SB 16.7 41.6% D 17.7 44.2% D
1. Travel speeds determined based on arterial travel times calculated using Synchro analysis software. Base Free‐Flow
Speeds (BFFS) calculated based on HCM methodology.
2. Locations where LOS exceeds established thresholds are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, Santa Rosa Street currently operates at unacceptable LOS E in the
northbound direction during AM and PM peak hours.
Table 7 below summarizes the existing residential street ADTs in comparison to the maximum
thresholds established in the General Plan.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 16
Table 7: Existing Neighborhood Traffic Assessment
# Segment Street Type
Max
ADT
Threshold
Existing
ADT
1 Broad Street (Foothill ‐ Ramona) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 5,229
2 Broad Street (Ramona ‐ Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 3,609
3 Broad Street (Meinecke ‐ Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 4,211
4 Broad Street (Mission ‐ Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 3,429
5 Chorro Street (Foothill ‐ Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 5,090
6 Chorro Street (Meinecke ‐ Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 5,816
7 Chorro Street (Mission ‐ Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 6,315
8 Meinecke Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 1,277
9 Murray Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 1,353
10 Mission Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 477
11 Center Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 217
12 Mountain View Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 170
13 Lincoln Street3 (Broad ‐ Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor) 3,000 4,589
14 Lincoln Street (Chorro ‐ West) Local Residential 1,500 417
1. Maximum ADT Thresholds established in SLO City General Plan Circulation Element.
2. Locations that exceed the City's Maximum ADT Thresholds are highlighted.
3. ADT estimated based on existing AM/MID/PM peak period volumes.
As shown in the table above, the following roadway segments currently carry ADTs that exceed the
established maximum thresholds in the General Plan:
Broad Street (Foothill to Ramona)
Chorro Street (Foothill to Meinecke; Meinecke to Mission; Mission to Lincoln)
Lincoln Street (Broad to Chorro)
Attachment d
Figure 4
Existing Traffic Volumes
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln St5,229XX Daily Traffic Volume4,2111,277
1,3533,609Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 18
IV. Existing Plus Project Conditions
This section evaluates the impacts of the proposed Project on the study area transportation network.
Project Description
As mentioned previously, the proposed Project includes the addition of improvements along the middle
segment of the Anholm Bikeway corridor (Lincoln Street to Ramona Drive) to develop a low-stress
route for bicycles and pedestrians. Components of the Project relevant to this TIS include:
Addition of a diagonal traffic diverter on Broad Street, which eliminates through auto traffic
between Ramona and Meinecke while allowing access for pedestrians, bicycles and
emergency service vehicles. Signage is also proposed to be posted along Broad Street and
Chorro Street directing through traffic to utilize alternate routes.
Addition of traffic calming measures to reduce speeds along the designated Anholm Bikeway
route on Broad Street:
o Installation of a raised pedestrian crossing at the Broad/Murray intersection
o Installation of speed humps along Broad Street between Mission and Lincoln
o Installation of median islands and corner bulbouts to reduce the perceived width of the
roadway on Broad Street between near Mountain View.
Addition of traffic calming measures along Chorro Street and other neighborhood streets within
the vicinity of Broad to reduce the attractiveness of these routes for cut-through traffic:
o Installation of speed cushions on Chorro between Meinecke and Murray and between
Murray and Mission.
o Installation of median islands and corner bulbouts to reduce the perceived width of the
roadway on Chorro Street near Rougeot, Venable and Mountain View.
Installation of speed humps on Lincoln between Broad and Chorro and between Chorro and
West; on West between Chorro and Lincoln; on Meinecke between Broad and Chorro; and on
Mission between Broad and Chorro.
Installation of “KEEP CLEAR” markings within the two-way left-turn lane on Chorro Street south
of Foothill Boulevard at the 22 Chorro Street access driveway.
Optimization of existing signal timings at Foothill/Broad and Foothill/Chorro based on changes
in traffic patterns with addition of Project.
The Project also includes the proposed reclassification of several streets within the study area as
follows:
Reclassify the following Residential Collector streets to Residential Arterials:
o Chorro Street (Foothill to Palm)
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 19
o Lincoln Street (Chorro to Broad)
Reclassify the following Local streets too Residential Collector (Minor):
o Meinecke Street (Broad to Santa Rosa)
o Murray Street (Broad to Santa Rosa)
A summary of the proposed Project area is shown Figure 1 and a detailed project overview map is
included in the Appendix.
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Existing Plus Project traffic volumes were developed by adjusting existing traffic volumes to reflect
anticipated redistribution in vehicular traffic with addition of the proposed Project. The San Luis Obispo
Citywide Travel Demand Model was used as an initial tool to develop forecasts of traffic shifts between
Broad Street, Chorro Street and Santa Rosa Street with the proposed elimination of vehicular through
traffic on Broad between Ramona and Meinecke, and considering anticipated reduction in travel
speeds along Broad, Chorro and other neighborhood streets with the proposed traffic calming
program. A more detailed manual redistribution of existing traffic volumes was then prepared for daily,
AM and PM peak hour conditions using the initial Travel Demand Model projections, with additional
consideration for existing circulation patterns and travel behavior and based on engineering
judgement. With the proposed addition of traffic diversion on Broad Street, traffic volumes are
anticipated to be redistributed as follows:
The equivalent of approximately 8% of the existing vehicular traffic volume on Broad Street is
projected to shift from either Broad or Chorro to Santa Rosa Street (1% increase in Santa Rosa
traffic volume).
The projected shift in Broad Street vehicular traffic to Chorro Street ranges from approximately
92% of existing Broad Street traffic at the northern end between Foothill and Meinecke, to
approximately 50% at the south end near Lincoln Street.
Local traffic shifting from Broad Street to Chorro Street connects between the two routes via
side streets, including Lincoln, Mountain View, Center, Mission, Murray, and Meinecke, with
the greatest proportion on Murray, Meinecke and Lincoln. However, the projected increase in
traffic along these three streets is partially offset by elimination of some existing cut-through
activity. Regional traffic is forecasted to re-route via Santa Rosa (Highway 1).
It should be noted that this analysis conservatively assumes no mode shift from auto to bicycle in
conjunction with the proposed Project. Shifts in travel mode use from motor vehicle use to bicycling,
which has been accomplished to varying degrees in similar bicycle improvement projects, would be
expected to offset some of the projected traffic increases along Chorro and other streets.
The projected redistribution in Broad Street traffic volumes for the Existing Plus Project scenario is
shown in Figure 5. Corresponding daily roadway segment volumes for Existing Plus Project conditions
are summarized in Figure 6 and are shown for AM and PM peak hour conditions within the analysis
sheets in the Appendix.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 20
Intersection Operations
Existing Plus Project peak hour intersection levels of service are summarized in Table 8 below.
Table 8: Existing Plus Project Intersection Auto Levels of Service
# Intersection Traffic
Control
Existing Conditions Existing+Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 18.7 B 13.0 B 16.7 B 11.2 B
2 Broad Street & Meinecke Street SSSC 9.7 A 10.1 B 8.9 A 8.7 A
3 Broad Street & Murray Street SSSC 10.1 A 10.1 B 9.5 A 9.8 A
4 Broad Street & Mission Street AWSC 8.1 A 7.9 A 7.4 A 7.3 A
5 Broad Street & Center Street AWSC 8.4 A 8.0 A 7.5 A 7.4 A
6 Broad Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 10.9 B 10.4 B 9.6 A 9.4 A
7 Broad Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 10.5 B 10.2 B 10.1 B 10.3 B
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 18.9 B 22.6 C 19.1 B 20.1 C
9 Chorro Street & Meinecke Street AWSC 10.5 B 9.8 A 16.7 C 15.2 C
10 Chorro Street & Murray Street AWSC 10.4 B 11.4 B 13.3 B 14.2 B
11 Chorro Street & Mission Street AWSC 10.3 B 11.0 B 12.0 B 12.7 B
12 Chorro Street & Center Street AWSC 9.9 A 10.8 B 11.5 B 12.5 B
13 Chorro Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 14.1 B 15.0 C 16.1 C 17.2 C
14 Chorro Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 15.5 C 12.6 B 18.8 C 14.0 B
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 48.3 D 46.4 D 48.6 D 47.4 D
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street Signal 21.8 C 30.3 C 21.9 C 30.7 C
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street Signal 12.6 B 10.6 B 12.3 B 10.5 B
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street Signal 28.8 C 27.7 C 29.1 C 32.4 C
1. Signal ‐ Signalized Control; SSSC ‐ Side‐Street Stop Control; AWSC ‐All‐Way Stop Control
2. Intersection delay and LOS calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology. For
locations where HCM 6th Edition does not support lane/signal configuration, HCM 2000 methods used.
3. For signalized and AWSC intersections, delay and LOS based on intersection average. For SSSC intersections, delay
and LOS reported for worst approach.
As shown above, all intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service. Table 9
presents vehicle queues for Existing Plus Project conditions.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 21
Table 9: Existing Plus Project Vehicle Queues
# Intersection Movement Storage
(ft)
Existing Conditions Existing+Project
95th Percentile
Queue (ft)
95th Percentile
Queue (ft)
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBR 100 30 56 30 <25
EBL 55 27 <25 27 <25
WBL 40 <25 <25 <25 <25
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 170 122 160 123 138
NBR 80 <25 <25 77 68
SBL 60 107 89 90 64
EBL 50 <25 <25 <25 <25
WBL 200 37 37 73 171
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 250 170 235 176 244
NBR 210 <25 59 <25 59
SBL 330 167 217 167 217
SBR 500 <25 45 <25 45
EBL 260 256 200 256 200
WBL 160 103 177 111 196
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street
NBL 150 34 34 34 34
SBL 190 52 30 51 29
WBR 85 <25 <25 <25 <25
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street
NBL 70 48 98 49 98
SBL 110 <25 21 <25 <25
SBR 100 404 37 406 31
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street
NBL 80 <25 <25 <25 <25
SBL 100 46 88 46 88
WBR 70 475 547 485 565
1. 95th percentile queues reported above.
2. Queues reported at left‐ and right‐turn pockets only.
3. Locations where queues exceed available storage capacity are shown in bold.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 22
As shown in the table, vehicle queues are calculated to spill back beyond available turn pocket
storage at the following locations:
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Southbound left-turn (AM & PM)
o Southbound left-turn queues are projected to extend beyond available turn-pocket
storage. While the queue length exceeds the turn pocket length, the roadway width is
sufficient to allow through and right-turning traffic to pass the queue, effectively
lengthening the turn pocket. The Project is not projected to extend the queue length
for this movement, thus, no project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard (#15): Westbound left-turn (PM)
o Westbound left-turn queues are projected to exceed available turn pocket storage for
PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project. The Project is
projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length. This turn pocket is
preceded by a two-way left-turn lane, which vehicles can utilize to effectively extend
the turn pocket without impeding through movements. Based on this information, the
no project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Northbound left-turn lane (PM)
o The northbound left-turn lane queues are projected to extend beyond available turn
pocket storage for PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project.
The Project is not projected to extend the queue length for this movement, thus, no
project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Southbound right-turn lane (AM)
o The southbound right-turn lane is projected to extend beyond available turn pocket
storage for AM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project. The
Project is not projected to extend the queue length for this movement and field
observations of existing traffic operations at this location indicate that right-turn
queues infrequently extend beyond the turn pocket length, as southbound through
movement queues typically block entry to the right-turn lane. Based on this
information, the no project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Walnut Street (#18): Westbound right-turn lane (AM and PM)
o The northbound right-turn lane queues are projected to extend beyond available turn
pocket storage for AM and PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed
Project. The Project is projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length;
thus, no project-related impacts are triggered.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 23
Roadway Segment Operations
Table 10 below shows the Existing Plus Project roadway segment operations along Santa Rosa
Street for AM and PM peak hour conditions.
Table 10: Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Levels of Service
# Segment Dir.
Existing Conditions Existing+Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS (%0
LOS
1
Santa Rosa
Street
(Foothill to
Walnut)
NB 13.9 34.8% E 12.6 31.3% E 13.9 34.7% E 12.5 31.3% E
SB 16.7 41.6% D 17.7 44.2% D 16.5 41.2% D 17.6 43.9% D
1. Travel speeds determined based on arterial travel times calculated using Synchro analysis software. Base Free‐Flow Speeds
(BFFS) calculated based on HCM methodology.
2. Locations where LOS exceeds established thresholds are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, Santa Rosa Street is anticipated to operate at unacceptable LOS E in the
northbound direction during AM and PM peak hours with and without the proposed Project. Because
the addition of the Project does not cause the level of service grade to degrade further and does not
result in a reduction in the average roadway travel speeds of one (1) mph, no Project-related
impacts are triggered.
Table 11 below summarizes the Existing Plus Project residential street ADTs in comparison to the
maximum thresholds established in the General Plan.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 24
Table 11: Existing Plus Project Neighborhood Traffic Assessment
# Segment Existing+Project
Street Type1
Max
ADT
Threshold
Existing+
Project ∆ from
Existing
ADT
1 Broad Street (Foothill ‐ Ramona) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 3,260 ‐1,969
2 Broad Street (Ramona to Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 0 ‐3,609
3 Broad Street (Meinecke ‐ Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 1,865 ‐2,346
4 Broad Street (Mission ‐ Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 1,625 ‐1,805
5 Chorro Street (Foothill ‐ Meinecke) Residential Arterial2 N/A 8,410 3,320
6 Chorro Street (Meinecke ‐ Mission) Residential Arterial2 N/A 8,414 2,598
7 Chorro Street (Mission ‐ Lincoln) Residential Arterial2 N/A 7,831 1,516
8 Meinecke Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor)2 3,000 1,499 222
9 Murray Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor)2 3,000 1,544 191
10 Mission Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 657 180
11 Center Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 397 180
12 Mountain View Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 350 180
13 Lincoln Street (Broad ‐ Chorro) Residential Arterial2 N/A 5,305 716
14 Lincoln Street (Chorro ‐ West) Local Residential 1,500 417 0
1. Maximum ADT Thresholds established in SLO City General Plan Circulation Element.
2. Street typologies revised as part of proposed project.
3. Locations that exceed the City's Maximum ADT Thresholds are highlighted.
As shown in the table above and within the volume map in Figure 6, with the addition of the
proposed Project, daily traffic volumes on Broad Street between Lincoln and Ramona are projected
to decrease to below 1,900 vehicles per day, while traffic volumes on Chorro Street increase to
roughly 7,800 to 8,400 vehicles per day. This represents a noticeable increase in traffic levels on
Chorro Street compared to existing conditions; however, it should be noted that as recently as 2001,
daily traffic volumes on this stretch of Chorro exceeded 12,000 ADT prior to the installation of a
raised median at Highland Drive, which substantially reduced through traffic on Chorro Street
between to/from the Downtown. With the addition of the Project, including proposed modifications to
street classification types for several segments, no study roadway segments carry ADTs above the
maximum established thresholds.
Attachment d
Figure 5
Existing Plus Project –Broad Street Traffic Redistribution
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Broad StLincoln St-3,609 (-100%)
VOL (%)Redistribution of Daily Broad Street Traffic Volume
(Blue = Decrease; Red = Increase)
VOL Existing Daily Broad-Chorro Cut-Through Traffic
Eliminated with Broad Street Traffic Diverter
Diagonal Diverter
(Through vehicle traffic shifted off Broad St.)--2,346 (-65%)-1,805 (-50%)
+3,320 (+92%)
-1,969 (-55%)*
+1,696 (+47%)
+1,515 (+42%)
+1,516 (+42%)
*Traffic redistribution on Broad Street north of Ramona includes shift in
Ramona traffic that currently travels Broad south to/from US 101 &
Downtown (apx. +1,640 veh/day). These trips will now travel north of
Ramona using Broad/Foothill/Chorro to get to/from US 101 & Downtown.
Attachment d
Figure 6
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln St3,2601,8651,499
1,544722
XX Daily Traffic Volume
Diagonal Diverter
(Through vehicle traffic shifted off Broad St.)
0
8,414Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 27
V. Cumulative (2035) Conditions
Cumulative Conditions represent build-out of the land uses in the City and region consistent with the
City’s adopted General Plan Horizon Year (2035). This section describes traffic operations within the
study area under this analysis scenario.
Cumulative Traffic Forecasts
Cumulative (2035) Conditions traffic volume forecasts, as shown in Figure 7, were developed using
the City’s Travel Demand Model, which includes planned transportation network and land use changes
anticipated upon buildout of the City’s General Plan. The City’s 2014 General Plan Circulation Element
identified two relevant transportation network changes within the vicinity of the study area, including
the potential future realignment of Chorro Street north of Foothill Boulevard (and reconfiguration of the
Foothill/Broad and Foothill/Chorro intersections), as well as potential closure of the Highway 101
ramps at Broad Street. Each of these potential improvements involves significant constraints and
costs, and funding has yet to be identified for either; thus, neither of these improvements are assumed
to be in place for the Cumulative (2035) Conditions analysis in this study. AM and PM peak hour
volumes under this scenario are provided in the analysis output sheets in the Appendix.
Intersection Operations
Cumulative (2035) Conditions peak hour intersection levels of service are summarized in Table 12
below.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 28
Table 12: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Intersection Auto Levels of Service
# Intersection Traffic
Control
Cumulative (2035) Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 23.1 C 13.4 B
2 Broad Street & Meinecke Street SSSC 10.1 B 10.8 B
3 Broad Street & Murray Street SSSC 10.6 B 12.5 B
4 Broad Street & Mission Street AWSC 8.8 A 8.3 A
5 Broad Street & Center Street AWSC 9.0 A 8.3 A
6 Broad Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 11.6 B 11.1 B
7 Broad Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 12.1 B 12.1 B
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 23.2 C 24.1 C
9 Chorro Street & Meinecke Street AWSC 12.5 B 12.4 B
10 Chorro Street & Murray Street AWSC 10.9 B 15.6 C
11 Chorro Street & Mission Street AWSC 12.6 B 15.9 C
12 Chorro Street & Center Street AWSC 11.8 B 15.6 C
13 Chorro Street & Mountain View Street SSSC 17.0 C 18.9 C
14 Chorro Street & Lincoln Street AWSC 20.7 C 25.2 D
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard Signal 52.2 D 55.6 E
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street Signal 23.0 C 39.2 D
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street Signal 15.8 B 17.0 B
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street Signal 24.1 C 48.7 D
1. Signal ‐ Signalized Control; SSSC ‐ Side‐Street Stop Control; AWSC ‐All‐Way Stop Control
2. Intersection delay and LOS calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology. For
locations where HCM 6th Edition does not support lane/signal configuration, HCM 2000 methods used. Signal
timings optimized for signalized intersections for Cumulative (2035) Conditions.
3. For signalized and AWSC intersections, delay and LOS based on intersection average. For SSSC intersections, delay
and LOS reported for worst approach.
4. Locations that exceed established LOS thresholds shown in bold.
As shown above, all intersections are projected to operate at acceptable LOS D or better, which the
exception of the Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard intersection (#15), which is projected to
operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour.
Table 13 presents Cumulative (2035) Conditions queues for relevant study intersections.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 29
Table 13: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Vehicle Queues
# Intersection Movement Storage
(ft)
95th Percentile Queue (ft)
AM Peak PM Peak
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBR 100 61 53
EBL 55 <25 <25
WBL 40 30 <25
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 170 186 221
NBR 80 55 <25
SBL 60 165 123
EBL 50 <25 49
WBL 200 55 44
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 250 166 271
NBR 210 26 66
SBL 330 162 306
SBR 500 <25 45
EBL 260 253 231
WBL 160 182 266
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street
NBL 150 61 30
SBL 190 44 66
WBR 85 <25 <25
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street
NBL 70 42 268
SBL 110 <25 <25
SBR 100 191 63
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street
NBL 80 <25 <25
SBL 100 270 292
WBR 70 49 294
1. 95th percentile queues reported above.
2. Queues reported at left‐ and right‐turn pockets only.
3. Locations where queues exceed available storage capacity are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, vehicle queues are calculated to spill back beyond available turn pocket
storage at the following locations:
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Northbound left-turn (AM & PM)
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Southbound left-turn (AM & PM)
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 30
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard (#15): Northbound left-turn (PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard (#15): Westbound left-turn (AM & PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Northbound left-turn lane (PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Southbound right-turn lane (AM)
Santa Rosa Street/Walnut Street (#18): Southbound left-turn lane (AM & PM)
Santa Rosa Street/Walnut Street (#18): Westbound right-turn lane (PM)
Roadway Segment Operations
Table 14 below shows the Cumulative (2035) Conditions roadway segment operations along Santa
Rosa Street for AM and PM peak hour conditions.
Table 14: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Roadway Segment Levels of Service
# Segment Dir.
Cumulative (2035) Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel Speed /
BFFS (%0 LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel Speed /
BFFS (%0 LOS
1 Santa Rosa Street (Foothill to Walnut)
NB 14.0 35.0% E 11.0 27.5% F
SB 13.7 34.2% E 16.4 40.9% D
1. Travel speeds determined based on arterial travel times calculated using Synchro analysis software. Base Free‐Flow Speeds
(BFFS) calculated based on HCM methodology.
2. Locations where LOS exceeds established thresholds are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, Santa Rosa Street is projected to operate at unacceptable LOS E or F in the
northbound (AM and PM) and southbound directions (AM).
Table 15 below summarizes the projected Cumulative (2035) Conditions street ADTs in comparison
to the maximum thresholds established in the General Plan.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 31
Table 15: Cumulative (2035) Conditions Neighborhood Traffic Assessment
# Segment Street Type
Max
ADT
Threshold
2035
ADT
1 Broad Street (Foothill - Ramona) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 6,327
2 Broad Street (Ramona - Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 4,594
3 Broad Street (Meinecke - Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 5,348
4 Broad Street (Mission - Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 4,375
5 Chorro Street (Foothill - Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 7,889
6 Chorro Street (Meinecke - Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 8,525
7 Chorro Street (Mission - Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 9,877
8 Meinecke Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 1,419
9 Murray Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 1,859
10 Mission Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 477
11 Center Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 217
12 Mountain View Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 170
13 Lincoln Street (Broad - Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor) 3,000 5,443
14 Lincoln Street (Chorro - West) Local Residential 1,500 417
1. Maximum ADT Thresholds established in SLO City General Plan Circulation Element.
2. Locations that exceed the City's Maximum ADT Thresholds are highlighted.
As shown in the table above, the following roadway segments are projected to carry ADTs that
exceed the established maximum thresholds in the General Plan:
Broad Street (Foothill to Ramona; Mission to Meinecke)
Chorro Street (Foothill to Meinecke; Meinecke to Mission; Mission to Lincoln)
Murray Street (Broad to Chorro)
Lincoln Street (Broad to Chorro)
Attachment d
Figure 7
Cumulative (2035) Conditions Traffic Volumes
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Broad StLincoln St6,327XX 2035 Daily Traffic Volume5,3481,419
1,8594,594Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 33
VI. Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Conditions
This section evaluates the impacts of the proposed Project on the Cumulative (2035) Conditions study
area transportation network.
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project traffic volumes were developed using the methodology described
previously for the Existing Plus Project analysis scenario, except that for this scenario, Cumulative
(2035) Conditions volume forecasts were utilized as the baseline volumes to be redistributed within
the study area network with the addition of the proposed Project. Similar to Existing Plus Project
Conditions, for the Cumulative (2035) Plus Project analysis scenario, the proposed addition of traffic
diversion on Broad Street is projected to redistribute traffic volumes within the study area as follows:
The equivalent of approximately 8% of the existing vehicular traffic volume on Broad Street is
projected to shift from either Broad or Chorro to Santa Rosa Street (1% increase in Santa Rosa
traffic volume).
The projected shift in Broad Street vehicular traffic to Chorro Street ranges from approximately
92% of existing Broad Street traffic at the northern end between Foothill and Meinecke, to
approximately 50% at the south end near Lincoln Street.
Local traffic shifted from Broad Street to Chorro Street connects between the two routes via
side streets, including Lincoln, Mountain View, Center, Mission, Murray, and Meinecke, with
the greatest proportion on Murray, Meinecke and Lincoln. However, the projected increase in
traffic along these three streets is partially offset by elimination of some existing cut-through
activity. Regional traffic is forecasted to re-route via Santa Rosa (Highway 1).
The projected redistribution in Broad Street traffic volumes for this scenario is shown in Figure 8.
Corresponding daily roadway segment volumes for Cumulative (2035) Plus Project conditions are
summarized in Figure 9 and are shown for AM and PM peak hour conditions within the analysis sheets
in the Appendix.
Intersection Operations
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project peak hour intersection levels of service are summarized in Table 16
below.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 34
Table 16: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Intersection Auto Levels of Service
# Intersection Traffic
Control
Cumulative (2035) Conditions Cumulative (2035) + Project Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C4 Delay LOS V/C4 Delay LOS V/C4 Delay LOS V/C4 Delay LOS
1 Broad Street & Foothill
Boulevard Signal 23.1 C 13.4 B 22.2 C 12.1 B
2 Broad Street & Meinecke
Street SSSC 10.1 B 10.8 B 9.0 A 9.0 A
3 Broad Street & Murray
Street SSSC 10.6 B 12.5 B 9.8 A 10.3 B
4 Broad Street & Mission
Street AWSC 8.8 A 8.3 A 7.6 A 7.4 A
5 Broad Street & Center
Street AWSC 9.0 A 8.3 A 7.6 A 7.4 A
6 Broad Street & Mountain
View Street SSSC 11.6 B 11.1 B 9.9 A 9.7 A
7 Broad Street & Lincoln
Street AWSC 12.1 B 12.1 B 10.6 B 11.8 B
8 Chorro Street & Foothill
Boulevard Signal 23.1 C 24.1 C 40.0 D 24.7 C
9 Chorro Street & Meinecke
Street AWSC 12.5 B 12.4 B 32.9 D 29.9 D
10 Chorro Street & Murray
Street AWSC 10.9 B 15.6 C 16.4 C 25.5 D
11 Chorro Street & Mission
Street AWSC 12.6 B 15.9 C 16.8 C 22.6 C
12 Chorro Street & Center
Street AWSC 11.8 B 15.6 C 15.6 C 21.5 C
13 Chorro Street & Mountain
View Street SSSC 17.0 C 18.9 C 20.2 C 22.7 C
14 Chorro Street & Lincoln
Street AWSC 20.7 C 25.2 D 31.2 D 33.2 D
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill
Boulevard Signal 52.2 D 1.02 55.6 E 53.4 D 1.02 56.7 E
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray
Street Signal 23.0 C 39.2 D 23.2 C 40.1 D
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive
Street Signal 15.8 B 17.0 B 16.1 B 16.9 B
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut
Street Signal 24.1 C 48.7 D 24.9 C 54.4 D
1. Signal ‐ Signalized Control; SSSC ‐ Side‐Street Stop Control; AWSC ‐ All‐Way Stop Control
2. Intersection delay and LOS calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology. For locations where HCM 6th Edition does
not support lane/signal configuration, HCM 2000 methods used.
3. For signalized and AWSC intersections, delay and LOS based on intersection average. For SSSC intersections, delay and LOS reported for worst
approach.
4. Volume‐to‐Capacity (v/c) Ratio reported for worst movement.
5. Locations that exceed established LOS thresholds are shown in bold.
As shown above, all intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service, except the
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard intersection, which operates at unacceptable LOS E for the
PM peak hour. The addition of the proposed Project does not degrade the level of service further
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 35
and does not increase the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio for the critical intersection movement; thus,
no project-related impact is triggered.
Table 17 presents vehicle queues for Cumulative (2035) Plus Project conditions.
Table 17: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Vehicle Queues
# Intersection Movement Storage
(ft)
Cumulative (2035) Cumulative (2035) +
Project
95th Percentile
Queue (ft)
95th Percentile
Queue (ft)
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
1 Broad Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBR 100 61 53 <25 31
EBL 55 <25 <25 <25 <25
WBL 40 30 <25 <25 <25
8 Chorro Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 170 186 221 173 234
NBR 80 55 <25 73 80
SBL 60 165 123 134 89
EBL 50 <25 49 <25 50
WBL 200 55 44 152 200
15 Santa Rosa Street & Foothill Boulevard
NBL 250 166 271 174 288
NBR 210 26 66 26 66
SBL 330 162 306 162 306
SBR 500 <25 45 <25 44
EBL 260 253 231 253 231
WBL 160 182 266 190 288
16 Santa Rosa Street & Murray Street
NBL 150 61 30 60 30
SBL 190 44 66 45 66
WBR 85 <25 <25 <25 <25
17 Santa Rosa Street & Olive Street
NBL 70 42 268 43 268
SBL 110 <25 <25 <25 <25
SBR 100 191 63 194 64
18 Santa Rosa Street & Walnut Street
NBL 80 <25 <25 <25 <25
SBL 100 270 292 271 294
WBR 70 49 294 50 316
1. 95th percentile queues reported above.
2. Queues reported at left‐ and right‐turn pockets only.
3. Locations where queues exceed available storage capacity are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, vehicle queues are calculated to spill back beyond available turn pocket
storage at the following locations:
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Northbound left-turn (AM & PM)
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 36
o Northbound left-turn queues are projected to exceed available turn pocket storage for
AM and PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project. The Project
is projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length for AM and PM peak
hour conditions. This turn pocket is preceded by a two-way left-turn lane, which
vehicles can utilize to effectively extend the turn pocket without impeding through
movements. The proposed Project includes addition of “KEEP CLEAR” pavement
markings on Chorro approximately 200 feet south of Foothill Boulevard to minimize
potential for vehicle queues to impede ingress/egress to the access driveway at the
22 Chorro site. Because there is available storage within the two-way left-turn lane
south of Foothill Boulevard, no project-related impacts are triggered.
Chorro Street/Foothill Boulevard (#8): Southbound left-turn (AM & PM)
o Southbound left-turn queues are projected to extend beyond available turn-pocket
storage. While the queue length exceeds the turn pocket length, the roadway width is
sufficient to allow through and right-turning traffic to pass the queue, effectively
lengthening the turn pocket. Addition of the Project does not increase projected
queue lengths.
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard (#15): Northbound left-turn lane (PM)
o The northbound left-turn lane queues are projected to extend beyond available turn
pocket storage for PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project.
The Project is projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length; thus, no
project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Foothill Boulevard (#15): Westbound left-turn (AM & PM)
o Westbound left-turn queues are projected to exceed available turn pocket storage for
AM and PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project. The Project
is projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length. This turn pocket is
preceded by a two-way left-turn lane, which vehicles can utilize to effectively extend
the turn pocket without impeding through movements. Based on this information, the
no project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Northbound left-turn lane (PM)
o The northbound left-turn lane queues are projected to extend beyond available turn
pocket storage for PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project.
The Project is not projected to extend the queue length for this movement, thus, no
project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Olive Street (#17): Southbound right-turn lane (AM)
o The southbound right-turn lane is projected to extend beyond available turn pocket
storage for AM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project. The
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 37
Project is not projected to extend the queue length for this movement; thus, no
project-related impacts are triggered.
Santa Rosa Street/Walnut Street (#18): Westbound right-turn lane (PM)
o The northbound right-turn lane queues are projected to extend beyond available turn
pocket storage for PM peak hour conditions with and without the proposed Project.
The Project is projected to increase queues by less than one (1) car length; thus, no
project-related impacts are triggered.
Roadway Segment Operations
Table 18 below shows the Cumulative (2035) Plus Project roadway segment operations along Santa
Rosa Street for AM and PM peak hour conditions.
Table 18: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Roadway Segment Levels of Service
# Segment Dir.
Cumulative (2035) Conditions Cumulative (2035) + Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%)
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%0
LOS
Travel
Speed
(mph)
Travel
Speed /
BFFS
(%)
LOS
1
Santa Rosa
Street
(Foothill to
Walnut)
NB 14.0 35.0% E 11.0 27.5% F 14.0 35.0% E 11.0 27.4% F
SB 13.7 34.2% E 16.4 40.9% D 13.3 33.1% E 16.2 40.4% D
1. Travel speeds determined based on arterial travel times calculated using Synchro analysis software. Base Free‐Flow Speeds
(BFFS) calculated based on HCM methodology.
2. Locations where LOS exceeds established thresholds are shown in bold.
As shown in the table, Santa Rosa Street is anticipated to operate at unacceptable LOS E or F in the
northbound direction (AM and PM) and southbound direction (AM) both with and without the
proposed Project. Because the addition of the Project does not cause the level of service grade to
degrade further and does not result in a reduction in the average roadway travel speeds of one (1)
mph or more, no Project-related impacts are triggered.
Table 19 below summarizes the Cumulative Plus Project residential street ADTs in comparison to
the maximum thresholds established in the General Plan.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 38
Table 19: Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Neighborhood Traffic Assessment
# Segment Existing+Project
Street Type1
Max
ADT
Threshold
2035+
Project
∆ from
2035
No
ProjectADT
1 Broad Street (Foothill - Ramona) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 3,373 -2,954
2 Broad Street (Ramona - Meinecke) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 0 -4,594
3 Broad Street (Meinecke - Mission) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 2,362 -2,986
4 Broad Street (Mission - Lincoln) Residential Collector (Major) 5,000 2,078 -2,297
5 Chorro Street (Foothill - Meinecke) Residential Arterial2 N/A 12,115 4,227
6 Chorro Street (Meinecke - Mission) Residential Arterial2 N/A 11,832 3,308
7 Chorro Street (Mission - Lincoln) Residential Arterial2 N/A 11,807 1,930
8 Meinecke Street (Broad - Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor)2 3,000 1,783 364
9 Murray Street (Broad - Chorro) Residential Collector (Minor)2 3,000 2,068 209
10 Mission Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 707 230
11 Center Street (Broad - Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 447 230
12 Mountain View Street (Broad -
Chorro) Local Residential 1,500 400 230
13 Lincoln Street (Broad - Chorro) Residential Arterial2 N/A 6,422 980
14 Lincoln Street (Chorro - West) Local Residential 1,500 417 0
1. Maximum ADT Thresholds established in SLO City General Plan Circulation Element.
2. Street typologies revised as part of proposed project.
3. Locations that exceed the City's Maximum ADT Thresholds are highlighted.
As shown in the table above and within the volume map in Figure 9, with the addition of the
proposed Project, daily traffic volumes on Broad Street between Lincoln and Ramona are projected
to decrease to below 2,400 vehicles per day, while traffic volumes on Chorro Street increase to
roughly 11,800-12,100 vehicles per day. This represents a noticeable increase in traffic levels on
Chorro Street compared to Cumulative (2035) Conditions without the Project; however, it should be
noted that as recently as 2001, daily traffic volumes on this stretch of Chorro exceeded 12,000 ADT
prior to the installation of a raised median at Highland Drive, which substantially reduced through
traffic on Chorro Street between to/from the Downtown. With the addition of the Project, including
proposed modifications to street classification types for several segments, no study roadway
segments carry ADTs above the maximum established thresholds.
Attachment d
Figure 8
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project –Broad Street Traffic Redistribution
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Broad StLincoln St-4,594 (-100%)
VOL (%)Redistribution of Daily Broad Street Traffic Volume
(Blue = Decrease; Red = Increase)
VOL 2035 No Project Daily Broad-Chorro Cut-Through
Traffic Eliminated with Broad Street Traffic Diverter
Diagonal Diverter
(Through vehicle traffic shifted off Broad St.)--2,986 (-65%)-2,297 (-50%)
+4,226 (+92%)
-2,954 (-64%)*
+2,159 (+47%)
+1,929 (+42%)
+1,929 (+42%)
*Traffic redistribution on Broad Street north of Ramona includes shift in
Ramona traffic that currently travels Broad south to/from US 101 &
Downtown (apx. +1,640 veh/day). These trips will now travel north of
Ramona using Broad/Foothill/Chorro to get to/from US 101 & Downtown.
Attachment d
Figure 9
Cumulative (2035) Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Improvements) Transportation Impact Study
Lincoln St3,3732,3621,783
2,068919
XX Daily Traffic Volume
Diagonal Diverter
(Through vehicle traffic shifted off Broad St.)
0
11,832Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 41
VII. Traffic Assessment of Other Project Alternatives
In addition to the proposed Project, several other conceptual designs have been considered during
the project development process for the middle segment (Lincoln to Ramona) of the Anholm Bikeway.
While some of these alternative concepts presented minimal potential to affect traffic operations within
the vicinity of the project, there were other design concepts presented that included addition of traffic
diverters on Broad and/or Chorro Streets, with potential to substantially modify traffic circulation within
the study area. While potential traffic impacts for these alternatives have not been evaluated at the
same level of detail as the proposed Project, traffic operations have been reviewed at a planning level
for several alternative concepts. This section provides a summary of the qualitative conclusions
developed upon a planning-level review of traffic operations under the following two conceptual
alternatives:
Alternative Project – Multiple Diverters on Broad Street
Alternative Project – Diverters on Broad Street and Chorro Street
Alternative Project – Multiple Diverters on Broad Street
City Transportation Staff explored other potential configurations for a traditional “bicycle boulevard”
with traffic diversion and calming along Broad Street before refining plans for the final proposed
concept (the proposed Project). One design concept that was evaluated, but ultimately not
recommended for further development, included the installation of two diagonal traffic diverters on
Broad Street: one between Ramona and Meinecke (as included in the final Project proposal), and one
at Mountain View Street. Like the proposed Project, this alternative also included a comprehensive
traffic calming package along Broad Street, Chorro Street and other side streets within the study area.
A summary map for this alternative project is provided in the Appendix for reference.
While concerns expressed by some neighborhood residents regarding the concept of traffic diversion
in general provided some motivation to explore a single-diverter concept, a preliminary traffic
circulation assessment of the two-diverter option using the City’s Travel Demand Forecasting Model
provided additional justification for rejecting this alternative project. A review of model forecasts under
this alternative provided the following conclusions:
With two traffic diverters installed along Broad Street, essentially all of the existing through
traffic is projected to shift off Broad Street, with a reduction in overall volumes reaching 85%-
90%.
The majority (>90%) of the traffic shifted off Broad Street is projected to use Chorro Street,
resulting in an increase in Chorro Street traffic of approximately 90% to the north near Foothill
Boulevard, and 60% to the south nearing Lincoln Street.
The equivalent of approximately 8% of existing Broad Street traffic is projected to shift from
Broad and Chorro Street to Santa Rosa Street, resulting in about a 1% increase in Santa Rosa
Street traffic. This shift is similar to the projections for the proposed Project.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 42
Under this alternative, daily traffic volumes along Chorro would be expected to near 10,000
vehicles per day for existing conditions, with potential to exceed 14,000 vehicles per day for
Cumulative (2035) Conditions.
Compared to the proposed Project, this alternative project would be expected to result in similar traffic
operations along Santa Rosa Street, but would present greater potential for intersection and/or
roadway operations along Chorro Street to degrade to unacceptable levels of service.
Alternative Project – Diverters on Broad Street and Chorro Street
A group of Anholm Neighborhood residents developed their own conceptual improvement
recommendations for the Anholm Bikeway middle segment and have presented these plans to City
Staff for consideration. This alternative project concept includes the addition of two traffic diverters on
Broad Street—a one-way (southbound) diverter at Ramona and a diagonal two-way diverter at
Mountain View—a two-way traffic diverter on Chorro Street at Murray, and a comprehensive traffic
calming package along Broad, Chorro and other side streets within the neighborhood. The primary
intent of this concept plan is to not only calm traffic within the neighborhood and shift through traffic
off Broad Street, but to shift through traffic out of the neighborhood all together and onto alternate
arterial routes (i.e. Santa Rosa Street). A summary map for this alternative project is provided in the
Appendix for reference.
A preliminary traffic circulation assessment of the resident-suggested alternative was conducted,
incorporating preliminary traffic projections using the City’s Travel Demand Forecasting Model. This
assessment produced the following pertinent findings:
While the primary intent of this alternative is to divert most through traffic away from Broad and
Chorro Street to Santa Rosa Street, model forecasts indicate that the configuration of diverters
on Broad and Chorro Street will not accomplish this effectively. The equivalent of
approximately 8% of existing Broad Street traffic is projected to shift from Broad and Chorro
Streets to Santa Rosa Street, resulting in about a 1% increase in Santa Rosa Street traffic.
This shift is similar to the projections for the proposed Project. The remainder of existing Broad
and Chorro through traffic is projected to continue traveling through the Anholm Neighborhood,
albeit with altered distribution patterns.
By retaining northbound Broad Street access at Ramona, model forecasts indicate that most
northbound Chorro Street drivers will simply bypass the proposed diverter at Chorro/Murray
by shifting to Broad Street at Center and/or Mission Streets. Similarly, forecasts indicate that
most southbound Chorro Street drivers will bypass the proposed diverter at Chorro/Murray
by turning west onto Meinecke, south onto Benton, and east onto Murray before continuing
southbound on Chorro.
Model forecasts project an average decrease in Chorro Street volumes of approximately
35%, with an increase in average Broad Street volumes of approximately 40%. While the
resulting volumes on Chorro Street would drop below the current max ADT thresholds for this
street type, Broad Street volumes would be projected to exceed the established ADT
thresholds for segments north of Mission Street. Similarly, cut-through traffic using side
streets between Broad and Chorro Street to avoid traffic diverters is projected to increase to
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan (Lincoln to Ramona Segment)
Transportation Impact Study
July 2018 43
the point where ADTs on Meinecke, Benton, Mission and Center Streets are expected to
reach levels that exceed the adopted thresholds for those street segments.
Compared to the proposed Project, this alternative fails to provide a continuous low-volume/speed
bicycle boulevard, as the projected traffic volumes on Broad and Chorro Streets are likely to remain
above the levels recommended for a shared street environment. This fails to achieve the overarching
goals of the Anholm Bikeway Plan to develop a continuous low-stress route for pedestrians and
bicyclists along this corridor. Additional traffic volume management measures could be considered as
part of this project alternative to minimize the potential for drivers to bypass the traffic diverters on
Broad and Chorro (i.e. additional diverters or turn restrictions at side streets). While this could more
effectively shift through traffic out of the neighborhood, as shown in the detailed operational analysis
presented in this study, there are intersections and roadway segments on Santa Rosa Street that are
projected to operate at deficient levels of service even without a significant shift in traffic volume from
Broad and Chorro Streets. If a more substantial portion of the traffic from Broad and Chorro were to
be shifted to Santa Rosa Street, it is likely that project-related traffic impacts would be triggered.
Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis B-5 August 2018 Parking Analysis Potential parking impacts related to the Project are evaluated by analyzing on-street parking supply and demand with and without the parking removal proposed by the project. Although the final number of on-street parking spaces impacted by the project may change slightly with final design, based on review of existing on-street parking supply and preliminary project designs, on-street parking at the following locations is proposed for removal to provide width for dedicated bike lanes and crossing improvements at intersections: Ramona Drive – 17 spaces eliminated on north side from Broad to proposed SRTS Class I Path. Chorro Street – 20 spaces removed between Mission and Lincoln with installation of median islands and bulbouts. No parking removal required for median islands/bulbouts at Chorro/Rougeot. Broad Street – 10 spaces removed between Mission and Lincoln with installation of median islands and bulbouts. To better understand existing on-street parking conditions near these street segments, parking surveys were conducted in fall of 2017 for both weekday and weekend conditions during a period when local schools and Cal Poly were in session. Parking surveys included inventory of existing on-street parking supply and occupancy during various times of day along Chorro and Broad Streets, as well as along other streets within the vicinity of the proposed Anholm Bikeway. Figure B1 shows the parking study area and summarizes the existing on-street parking occupancy by time of day. As shown below, of the various periods observed, late evening on a weeknight was found to be the period where on-street parking demand is typically highest—both along the proposed route, as well as within the surrounding neighborhood. This peak period is used in the following analysis as a baseline for evaluating project-related parking impacts. 49%44%40%53%44%30%22% 22%35%25%31%35%37%29%41%31%58%50%40%64%44%60%54%48%60%60%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%WEEKDAYEARLY AM(5‐6 AM)WEEKDAYMID DAY(12‐1 PM)WEEKDAYEVENING4‐ 5 PMWEEKDAYLATE NIGHT(12‐1 AM)SATURDAYLATE NIGHT(12‐1 AM)THURSDAYFARMERS MARKET(6‐7 PM)ON‐STREET PARKING OCCUPANCY %Chorro (Lincoln to Foothill)Chorro (Lincoln to Mission)Broad (Lincoln to Foothill)Broad (Mission to Ramona)Total Anholm Neighborhood Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis B-6 August 2018 A summary of existing on-street parking supply, spaces expected to be lost due to the project, and peak on-street demand is provided in Table B2. Table B2: On-Street Parking Conditions with and without Project ParkingSupplyPeak Period DemandSurplus/ DefecitPeak Period % OccupancyParkingLossParkingSupplySurplus (+) or Defecit (‐)Peak Period % OccupancyLincoln to Mountain View16115 6%‐511109%Removed for median & bulboutMountain View to Center21714 33%‐516 9 44%Removed for median & bulboutCenter to Mission St601743 28%604328%Mission to Murray28199 68%28968%Murray to Ramona20137 65%20765%Ramona to Foothill651 83%6183%Subtotal Broad Street151 6289 41%‐101417944%Lincoln to Mountain View16511 31%‐511 6 45%Removed for median & bulboutMountain View to Center231013 43%‐518 8 56%Removed for median & bulboutCenter to Venable21138 62%‐516 3 81%Removed for median & bulboutVenable to Mission21021 0%‐516160%Removed for median & bulboutMission to West251312 52%251252%West to Murray19514 26%191426%Murray to Meinecke2631‐5 >100%*26‐5>100%*Meinecke to Foothill1192 82%11282%Subtotal Chorro Street162 8676 53%‐20 1425661%Broad to Chorro33102330%332330%Subtotal Mission Street331023 30%0332330%Broad to Palomar47434 91%‐17 30‐13143% North side parking removed for bike lanes.Subtotal Ramona Drive47434 91%‐17 30‐13143%MissionRamonaNotes:1. Parking data collection conducted September‐October 2017. Period of peak observed parking demand was a weekday (Wednesday) 1‐2 AM.2. Above table only includes streets along the proposed bikeway. Detailed parking occupancy data for other streets available upon request.3. Street segments highlighted red represent locations where parking demand exceeds practical capacity (85‐90% occupancy). When demand exceeds practical capacity, there is technically parking available, but it may be difficult to find.4. At segments marked with an asterisk (*), existing parking occupancy exceeds number of available standard parking spaces (i.e. vehicles parked closely together or illegally parked).Chorro StreetBroad StreetSTREET SEGMENTEXISTING CONDITIONS PROJECT CONDITIONSReason for Parking LossAttachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix B: Traffic Impact Study & Parking Analysis B-7 August 2018 Existing parking conditions are mapped visually in Figure B4, with street segments color-coded based on percent occupancy and labels showing the number of available parking spaces on each block. Street segments are highlighted red where peak occupancy exceeds 85%. A parking occupancy rate of 85%-90% is typically considered the “practical capacity” of a street, meaning that there could be a few on-street parking spaces available, but drivers may have a difficult time finding them. When parking demand exceeds the practical capacity, this can lead to drivers “cruising” around the block and increases temptation to park illegally, which could impact neighborhood quality for residents. Because this segment of Ramona is near 100% occupancy currently, the displaced parking demand from Ramona is likely to extend to the adjacent streets during peak periods—likely Broad, Meinecke and further west on Ramona. As shown in Figure B4, there is generally available on-street parking within a short walk (1-2 blocks) of the section of Ramona Drive where parking removal is proposed to accommodate this displaced demand. Similarly, the parking removal for the segments on Chorro to provide area for traffic calming treatments is not anticipated to significantly affect parking conditions or availability of parking within the neighborhood. EXISTING CONDITIONSFigure B4: Map of Existing On-Street Parking Conditions Attachment d
Anholm Bikeway Plan Appendix C: Adopting Resolution C-1 August 2018 Appendix C: Adopting Resolution Attachment d
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment d