Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/07/1991, 1 - BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS I�IHII� I�IIIII�IIII III (� MEEf1NG DATE uf�ll� cityO san �u�s oBispo Maw 7 1991 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMe6i: FROM: Dave Romero, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Bikeway Improvements CAO RECOMMENDATION: After receiving public testimony, Adopt a resolution approving the installation of a bike path on California Blvd. , and bike lanes on California Blvd. , Grand Avenue and Foothill Blvd. , granting the project a negative declaration subject to mitigation measures A and B, which will permit night parking on portions of California Blvd. and Grand Ave. , and directing staff to proceed with desired improvements. REPORT IN BRIEF: During the 1989-91 budget review the City Council adopted a work program objective as follows: "Create a continuous network of bikeways throughout the City that encourages bicycle use as an alternative to the automobile. " Phase I of the objective was to implement bicycle projects outlined in the current (1985) Bicycle Facilities Plan. Phase II was to update the Plan to reflect a more urgent emphasis. A committee, consisting of bicycle advocates and City staff, was formed. After several meetings the committee decided that the top City bicycle priority should be the development of class II- B bike lanes (adjacent to the curb with no car parking) on 6 arterial streets on commuter routes leading to Cal Poly. The increased safety and convenience is expected to encourage additional bike useage. The recommendation implies removal of 1126 on street parking spaces which have an average occupancy rate of 48%. Due to the substantial effect on the neighborhoods, staff determined to bring the matter forward in two phases. Phase I involves California Blvd. , Foothill Blvd. and Grand Ave. , implying removal of 416 on-street parking spaces which have an average occupancy rate of 46%. The City Council reviewed the matter as a business item on August 21, 1990 (Attachment I) and directed staff to obtain an environmental determination and set the matter for public hearing while school was in session. In December the Community Development Department issued a mitigated negative declaration (Attachment II) which calls for the following mitigation: - r : 1Jlli,il'lilllll�l l��lll city Of Sall L.AS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Improvements Page Two A. Construction of a bike path along the railroad west of the palm trees on California Blvd. , between Foothill and Hathway, to provide for southbound bicyclists; remove 23 parking spaces along the east side of California Blvd. during the day for a bike lane and allow nighttime parking, or reserve bike lanes for the entire length of California Blvd. (67 parking spaces affected) during the day, with night parking. B. Reserve bike lanes on the east side of Grand Avenue (63 parking spaces affected) during the day with night parking. By implication those portions of California, Grand and Foothill not included for mitigation would have parking removed at all times to provide for bike lanes. RECOMMENDATION: Based on discussions with other cities, particularly Santa Barbara, staff feels that daytime bike lanes with nightime parking represents an acceptable middle ground between conflicting priorities. Problems with this approach relate to enforcement of parking restrictions after 7 AM and lack of bike lanes between 7 and 10 PM when the safety hazard for a bike rider is great. After receipt of public testimony and project modification as deemed appropriate, staff recommends that the Council adopt the resolution. I i i i 0 � »��I;;I!Iillli►�u,.,;,', MY Of San LUIS OBISPO HftZa COUNCIL AGENDA DEPORT Bikeway Improvements Page Three BACKGROUND: I i At its meeting of August 21, 1990 the City Council directed staff to obtain an environmental determination, and after this to schedule a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed projects for Phase I bike lane improvements, which call for type i B bike lanes (no parking) on Foothill Blvd. , Grand Avenue and California Blvd. On December 6, 1990 the Community Development i Department approved the mitigated negative declaration. Environmental Documentation together with Public works response i and maps is attached (Attachment II) as is the original agenda report previously considered by the Council (Attachment I) . DISCUSSION - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Mitigation measures called for are as follows: (see first page of mitigated declaration - Attachment II) i A. California Blvd. - between Foothill and Hathway (see sketch - Attachment II-s) Place southbound bike lane west of the Palm trees along the railroad right-of-way; remove parking for a type B (no parking) bike lane on the east side of California to accommodate northbound bicycle riders, or allow vehicle parking at night with type B bike lanes during the day. B. Grand Avenue (see sketch - Attachment II-u) Reserve bike lanes on east side for daytime use; allow nightime parking. The mitigation represents a relaxation of the recommendations of i the Bike Committee, and the current bike plan, in order to ease the effect on the neighborhood. DISCUSSION - NEW INFORMATION: Subsequent to the meeting when this item was previously discussed by the Council, two additional possibilities have been raised; 1) development of a bike path along the Southern Pacific right-of-way and, 2) development of a j bike path between Madonna Rd. and Foothill Blvd. through Laguna Lake Park. Neither of these are on the adopted Bike Plan, nor could they be implemented quickly. Southern Pacific Railroad Bike Path: (Attachment III-A) The SPRR is now divesting itself of surplus right-of-way and has indicated that it would be willing to sell surplus property within the city to the City Government. Appraisals have been received, but serious negotiations with SPRR have not yet commenced. 1 -3 Cl ty of sal') L__JS os15po COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Improvements Page Four I If the City is successful in finding funds and acquiring the I SPRR property, it is possible (but not easy) to develop a bike path along this route. A staff estimate is that net acquisition and development of this path will cost in excess of $10 million and that it cannot be accomplished in less than 5 years. Staff will have a wall exhibit for the meeting and is prepared to discuss this in more detail if the Council wishes. I Laguna Lake Park Bike Path: (Attachment III-B) A highly attractive bike path could be developed from Madonna Rd. to Foothill Blvd. This would traverse Laguna Lake Park, thence through private property along the upper portion of i Laguna Lake, connecting to Foothill Blvd. near O'Conner Way. This will require acquisition of right-of-way over approximately two-thirds of the route. No appraisals have been obtained. Staff estimates that construction will cost aproximately $600, 000. plus right-of-way costs, and that the entire project cannot be accomplished in less than 5 years. i ALTERNATIVES: Removal of all on-street parking will create an inconvenience for the residents. If the City is interested in providing the safest and most convenient routes to Poly, thereby encouraging use of bicycles, then it must call for the removal of parking at all hours on these streets. The one exception would be the west side of California Blvd. between Foothill Blvd. and Hathway where the city can build a separate bike path on the west side of the palm trees ($40, 000. ) . I If the Council feels that the on-street parking needs of the residents are the primary concern and bicyclists can travel outside of parked cars either in bike lanes or vehicle travel lanes, it need take no action, thus continuing the current status. If the Council feels that a middle ground approach is preferable thus allowing daytime use of some of the curb lane by bikes and nighttime use for parking, it should adopt the program outlined in the mitigated declaration. This is staff recommendation. PUBLIC NOTICE• In order to obtain maximum public participation, notices of The Public Hearing were mailed to approximately 900 occupants and owners of property fronting the 3 streets being considered for bikeway improvement. Modified reports-in-brief were mailed to members of the bike committee and Cal Poly Administration. A i Public Hearing Notice will be published by the Telegram Tribune, City Of Sar) LIAIS OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Improvements Page Five and requests will be made that news items will be printed in the Telegram Tribune and Mustang Daily. COMMUNICATION WITH OTHER CITIES During research for this project, staff consulted with several other communities which have extensive bike lanes. A summary of ! information obtained is shown on Attachment IV. Most of the bike i programs encounter some degree of difficulty in accommodating the needs of bike riders, parkers and motorists but are eventually worked out at some acceptable level. BICYCLE COORDINATOR: It has become increasingly evident that if the City is going to pursue an aggressive and responsive bike program, considerable staff time and effort will be required. Eventually, therefore, it may be necessary to create a "Bicycle Coordinator" position in the City. Such a position was considered by staff in preparing the preliminary 1991-93 Financial Plan and Budget. However, the Budget Review Team and the CAO concluded that such a position should not be recommended for the next two year period. This conclusion was based on fiscal constraints and a determination that existing staff is adequate to support planned bicycle related activities over the next two years. In this regard, a Community Development staff person has already been assigned primary responsibility for pursuing the SPRR Bike Path Project and is progressing. Existing Public Works staff will implement other approved program activities. Staff recommends deferring consideration of such additional staffing for another two years, particularly in light of our present financial position and budget constraints. However, this issue can be reconsidered by Council in light of other City needs during the current budget process, if desired. I I i I i city O� san 'L .As OBIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Improvements Page six I RECOMMENDATION• i i Staff recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the installation of a bike path on California Blvd. and bike lanes on California Blvd. , Foothill Blvd. and Grand Avenue, granting the project a Negative Declaration subject to mitigation measures A & B. which will permit night parking on portions of California Blvd. and Grand Ave. , and directing staff to proceed with the desired improvements. l Attachments: Resolution Attachments I - Council Agenda Report 8-21-90 II - Mitigated Negative Declaration III - Brief report regarding development of bike path along SPRR and through Laguna Lake Park j IV - Summary of Communication with other cities bikeway/dfr#28 i I I 1 I RESOLUTION NO. (1991 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF A BIKE PATH ON CALIFORNIA BLVD. AND BIKE LANES ON CALIFORNIA BLVD. , GRAND AVE. AND CALIFORNIA BLVD. AND GRANTING THE PROJECT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION SUBJECT TO MITIGATION MEASURES A & B WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo adopted a Bicycle Facilities Plan in 1985, and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a work program objective to "create a continuous network of bikeways throughout the City that encourages bicycle use as an alternative to the automobile, and WHEREAS, Phase I of the objective is to implement projects outlined in the Bicycle Facilities Plan, and WHEREAS, a City appointed committee recommends that implementation begin on commuter routes leading to Cal. Poly, specifically California Blvd. , Grand Ave. and Foothill Blvd. , and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that adverse environmental impacts can be mitigated, and WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing in order to receive imput and to consider the concerns of all interested parties; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the San Luis Obispo City Council as follows: 1. Approves the installation of a bike path on California Blvd. and Class II-B bike lanes on California Blvd. , 1 - 7 Resolution No. (1991 Series) 2. Grants the project a negative declaration subject to mitigation measures A & B , which will permit night parking on p.o.rtio.ns of. California Blvd . and Grand Ave . 3. Directs staff to proceed with desired improvements. Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following roll vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1991. MAYOR RON DUNIN ATTEST: PAM VOGES, CITY CLERK APPROVED: CITY MINISTRATIVE OFFICER 7 TT EY COMMUNITY DEV MENT DIRECTOR et PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR / -g IInIyIII��I�I�IIIIII�I�III VJ � MEETING DATE: C� of S ���5 �B�Sp� hugest 21 , 1990 COUNC003 .. AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Dave Romero, Public Works Director (, SUBJECT: Bikeway Improvements CAO RECOMMENDATION: By motion, direct staff to obtain an environmental determination and schedule a hearing after Cal Poly starts this fall (possibly October 2 , 1990) , to receive comments on proposed projects for Phase I bike lane improvements (as shown on Exhibit E) BACKGROUND: For approximately 25 years, the City had various bicycle plans. Most recently the City adopted the Bicycle Facility Plan in May 1985. Progress in implementing this plan has been inhibited for several reasons including the following: 1. In some limited (but important) locations, creating bike lanes may require the widening of streets. (An example is the segment of Higuera Street between Marsh and High j Streets) . Street widening projects can be expensive . if undertaken by the City, independent of private redevelopment activity. 2. In numerous locations, creating a bike lane will require the removal of curb side parking spaces. In these cases, there is not enough room within the existing roadway to safely accommodate travel lanes, parked cars and a lane for bicyclists. I During budget review, the Council received a strong presentation from the public that much greater emphasis be placed on bicycle planning and improvement so as to encourage increased use of j bicycles. Accordingly, the City Council adopted a work program objective as follows: 1 "Create a continuous network of bikeways throughout the city that encourages bicycle use as an alternative to the automobile" . i This objective contained two separate phases, the first being implementation of bicycle projects outlined in the current plan, the second being an update of the Bicycle Facilities Plan to reflect a more urgent emphasis. In response to the first phase, $200, 000/year was included in the 1989-1991 Financial Plan. i Attachment I—a f °iN11�►i►Wlllllll�p ►IIIIIII city of San Luis OBlspo manjam,EmEnd COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Two City staff consisting of Dave Pierce, Terry Sanville, and Nancy Knofler, met with a committee composed of the following citizens: Dave Morrow, Air Pollution Control District James Merkel, ATTF/Sierra Club Peter Phillips, Cal Poly Stephen Puccini, ATTF/Sierra Club Wayne Williams, SLO Bicycle Club The committee reviewed a number of documents including Existing Bike Lanes, Routes & Paths (Exhibit A) , Existing Class II B Bike Lanes (Exhibit A-2) , Proposed Lane/Route System (Exhibit B) , i Design Standards (Exhibit C) , and Existing Policies and Objectives Related to Bikeway Projects (Exhibit D) . They spent considerable time and effort in determining what kind of program would provide best service to the community as quickly as possible. Their consensus recommendation, after considering numerous alternatives, was that the highest priority should be given to a program which would target Cal Poly students and which would encourage use of bicycles for commuting. i DISCUSSION: In making its recommendation the committee determined that safety was of prime importance, therefore, it recommended that most of the routes shown be developed as Class II-B bike lanes, that is with the bike lane against the curb with no parking. In making this recommendation, the committee realized that removing curb parking would be controversial and of concern to adjoining residents and businesses. However this recommendation is consistent with "Existing Policies and Objectives Related to Bikeway Projects", which contain the following provisions (summarized) : A. The City should promote alternatives to cars, such as bicycles. B. Streets should not be widened unless absolutely necessary. C. The City should promote the safe operation of all modes of transportation. D. The City should use Caltrans standards to design bike paths. E. Bike paths along existing streets may be created by removing parking or by striping a lane on the street side of the parking lane, when sufficient space is available. F. Circulation projects must provide for mitigation of adverse impacts on residential neighborhoods. I i Attachment I-b ���h���►ilVlllllflliP q��p� city o� san Luis OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Three I G. The City should develop a network of trails and bikeways to connect neighborhoods with major activity centers. H. Bike lanes are shown exclusively on arterial and collector streets. I. Arterial streets should not have parking (long standing City policy) . J. The City cannot guarantee a permanent right to curbside parking (M.C. 17.76. 020G) The committee discussed whether a more effective use of City funds would be to widen streets at critical bottlenecks (Higuera, High-Marsh, lower Higuera, Tank Farm Road) or whether the first priority should be the acquisition and development of alternative rights of way, such as surplus SPRR property. The consensus was that these projects will be costly, will require a significant amount of design work, and will take a significant amount of time and effort to implement. Therefore while these projects have j merit and should be pursued, they should not be considered as top priority projects for immediate implementation. The program recommended by the committee will provide the safest bike lanes (type B) by eliminating parking and will thus encourage increased use of bicycles. The feeling of some members of the committee (and of the staff) is that eventually all arterial streets will have parking removed and the longer we wait the more difficult it will be. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The committee recommended that 6 arterial streets be fully developed in the near future as Class II B bike lanes. City staff has broken these into two priorities, those nearest the campus being in Phase I . Phase I (Exhibit E-1, E-2) Parking Spaces Lost *California Blvd. - campus to San Luis Drive 79 Foothill Blvd. - west city limits to Crandal way 212 Grand Ave. - campus to Monterey 125 * The most heavily parked area on California Boulevard is between Foothill Boulevard and Hathway Street where curb spaces are occupied by people attending Cal Poly during the day and residents and visitors to adjoining apartments during the evening. As an alternative, it is possible to build a separated bike path west of the palm trees on the west side of California Boulevard and retain the curb parking on that side of the street. This off-street path could form a component of eventual path development southerly on railroad right-of-way. ; i / I Attachment I-c �r „n���►i►�IIIIIII�Iii►�ui��l�l`i city of San tins osispo NiiN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Four Phase I implies the removal of the 416 on-street parking spaces with day and night occupancy varying from 0-100%, but with an average occupancy of 46%. Phase II (Exhibit F-1, F-2) Parkins Spaces Lost Osos St. - Marsh to Santa Barbara 50 Santa Barbara - Osos to Broad 111 Johnson - Mill to Buchon 69 Johnson - Ella to Orcutt 480 Phase II implies the removal of 710 on-street parking spaces with day and night occupancy varying from 5-95%, but with an average occupancy of 48%. If these two phases are successfully implemented, there are a number of other routes of lesser priority which should be considered as Class II B bike lanes. These include North Chorro, Mill, South, Laurel, Orcutt, and county roads Los Osos Valley Road and Tank Farm Road (Exhibit G) . These projects imply removal of 800 parking spaces, however, staff has not as yet made an inventory of % occupancy. The City currently has 18. 0 bike lane miles along public streets. If the committee's Phase I and II recommendations are implemented, 8.9 bike lane miles will be added to the inventory. OTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION Survey A City transportation survey conducted in January 1990, showed that while bicycle ridership in the city accounts for about 10% of all in-city trips, bicycle ridership for college students accounts for over 18% of all student trips. Comparing Cal Poly student ridership to other communities is also illustrative: I * The most heavily parked area of these three street segments is along Santa Barbara Street near Railroad Square. Spaces in this area are occupied by patrons and employees of adjoining businesses. Parking along segments of Osos Street leading into downtown is from adjoining residents and closer to downtown (e.g. Mitchell Park north) parking for downtown patrons and employees. i Attachment I-d "�ii���IIIIfIIII�n IIIIIl1 city Or San WIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Five i Bicycle Ridership of University Students SLO, CA 17, 000 Students 18% ride bikes Eugene, OR 18, 000 Students 30% ride bikes Davis, CA 21,000 Students 65% ride bikes Goleta, CA 18, 000 Students 67% ride bikes The potential for increasing college student ridership may be I significant, if safe bike lanes and routes leading to and on Cal i Poly campus can be provided. For the general population, the results of the City's transportation survey show that providing bike lanes a) along streets, b) separated from streets, and c) reducing traffic levels were the top three actions that would encourage people to ride a bike more often. i Recent Proiects 1. Bike lanes were installed along South Street in connection with the installation 'of curb and gutter on the north side and street widening on the south side. Both type A and type B lanes were installed after Council received testimony at a public hearing. I 2 . Bike lanes were provided in connection with the widening of Higuera, between Madonna Road and High Street. 3 . Parking was removed and type B bike lanes were installed on Higuera, between Madonna Road and Elks Lane (Caltrans) . 4 . Type B bike lanes and separate bike paths have been provided i in connection with several new subdivisions along Tank Farm Road in the Edna-Islay area, as required by the Edna-Islay specific plan. Projects in Process 1. All City planning for arterial streets now incorporates bike lanes in the basic design. These lanes are installed as streets are widened. 2. Plans are virtually complete to construct a bike path on the i south side of Madonna Road from Los Osos Valley Road to Periera, leading to a new bike route along the frontage road to Oceanaire. Madonna Road will be chip sealed and restriped to provide a bike lane for westbound riders between Oceanaire and Los Osos Valley Road. I I j Attachment I-e -l3 II������ii�u�llllll8l��9I�111 city of San Luis OBlspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Six 3 . Staff is currently actively engaged in obtaining appraisals and studying the possible acquisition of surplus Southern Pacific railroad property, with one of the objectives being to develop a bike lane along the entire SPRR right-of-way within the city limits. This will be a long range and very expensive project requiring many years to complete. It should not be considered as a substitute for the recommended project. Future Proiect 1. An update of the Bicycle Facilities Plan to reflect a more urgent emphasis is awaiting Council decision on the projects presented in this agenda report so as to provide staff guidance. ALTERNATIVES 1. Remove parking and develop class II-B bike lanes on streets j as shown on the exhibits. (committee recommendation) Advantages: will best meet the objectives of the City, in the most cost effective manner. Safest choice for both bike riders and motorists. In many cases will allow restriping for left turn lane, thus improving safety. i Disadvantages: will result in the loss of 1, 126 parking spaces, resulting in inconvenience to many residents and businesses. Parking will relocate to nearby streets and may impact those neighborhoods. 2 . Remove parking on one side of streets, restripe the streets to provide a bike lane along the curb (type B) on one side of the street and a bike lane outside of the parking lane (type A) on the other side of the street. Advantages: will represent a compromise between the parking needs of the property owners and the safety desires of the bicyclists. Both sides may be partially satisfied. Some motorists will be able to continue to park in front of their homes, some across the street as opposed to all having to park on neighboring streets. i I Attachment I-f �� "�'i�i�►���i(ilillllP°������III city o� san tuts o3ispo 1 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Bikeway Page Seven Disadvantages: both factions will be partially dissatisfied. Approximately 550 parking spaces will be eliminated. Type A bike lanes are not as safe as type B. Major restriping required on virtually all streets, which will increase City cost. Many residents will have to cross an arterial street to use their car. Not as safe as Alternative #1. There will be some weaving of traffic lanes (a la South Street) . 3. Expend bicycle improvement efforts on elimination of tight spots or development of new routes such as the SPRR right- of-way. Advantages: major parking removal will not be necessary at this time. Disadvantages: these projects are very expensive and time consuming, and may require years to complete. Approach would not satisfy the high priority needs of the bicycle riders for a continuous network. Parking removal at a future date will be more difficult, and eventually will still be needed. 4. Follow past practice of providing bike lanes in connection with street widenings and at specific locations on a case by case basis. Advantages: major parking removal will not be necessary at this time. Disadvantages: progress is very slow on this basis. Would not meet high priority of objective to provide a continuous network. Parking removal at a future date will be more difficult, but will still be required. Bicycle riders will not be satisfied, nor will those who are willing to ride bicycles but are concerned that riding on city streets without bike lanes is not safe enough. FISCAL IMPACT: If project is approved as submitted with all parts intact, cost is estimated at $43 ,000 for Phase I and $70, 000 for Phase II . i $200, 000 is included in the 1989-91 Financial Plan for each budget year (page B-3) . Funds budgeted, but not spent for Phase I or Phase II improvements, would be carried over for other bicycles path improvement projects. Attachment I-g L ����¶�►ii►u►Illlll�p ►Il�lil city of San Luis OBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPOT Bikeway Page Eight ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Removal of large numbers of on-street parking will require an environmental determination, which will require approximately two months after the Council has made a preliminary determination on the project. RECOMMENDATION: The committee recommends that the Council proceed on the basis outlined, obtain an environmental determination, and set a hearing after Cal Poly starts this fall (possibly October 2 , 1990) to receive input from both residents and bicycle riders. Staff believes that the best interests of the city are served by removing parking from arterial streets and providing Class II B bike lanes. This will provide increased safety for both the bicyclist and the motorist. Since removal of this much parking may generate major opposition, staff believes it would be prudent to hold hearings on the higher priority projects on Foothill, California and Grand as a first phase. If the higher priority can be successfully implemented, Phase II would follow. i Attachments: Exhibits A-1 existing bikelane map A-2 Class II B bikelanes B (1985) proposed lane/route system C-1 (class I) design standards C-2 (class II) design standards C-3 (class II & III) design standards D-1 policies & objectives bikeway projects D-2 vehicular circulation E-1 Phase I E-2 Bikeway improvement projects/Phase I F-1 Project 1990 - Phase II F-2 Bikeway improvements projects/Phase II G Future Class II B bikelanes I I bikeimp/dfr#23 i Attachment I-h �Ap CAL POLY 1 Q1 HIGHLAND �Pu •••nun.. 'A � RAMONA 1 N i • o \V� C LEGEND • �' CLASS I ••••••••• ��Q, CLASS II—A sw E CLASS II—B NO CLASS II—C ••�•�•� Q CLASS III p �C HIGH : 91 LAGUNA \, cc+S LAK£ SOUTH ?k 1 t SOUTHWOO!') m N i ^ TANK FARM • • .. I :::. . city o� MAP #1 "f san Luis obi spo EXISTING BIKE LANES, i Department of Community Development ROUTES CC 9 o - 990 Painn Streei/Post Office Box 8100 • San Lws OWSDO. CA 93403.8100 PATHS p•r..w...r v1;5EAttachment I-1 J CAL POLY Ug HIGHLAND � s9 �O Z J T RAMONA Q N c pHIGH LAGII LAKE SOUTH U., z \�v O[lThWOOD Q� v P ORCUTT 0 o � TANK FARM is city Of EXISTING l"a' San Luis OBISPO CLASS II B BIKE LANES STRIPED - NO PARKING Attachment I-j r I � CAL POLY IQ HIGHLAND. may- U w .. �,• _ J� �♦ RAMONA ti ly tLyl '� ./, S LEGEND • • ' P'P CLASS I --------- CLASS II-A ............. 2P�t1 } ��L CLASS II-6 ` NO seams CLASS II-C ....... CLASS III S 2 I� LAGUNA LAKE I SOUTHWOOD � I T ,. �t � I i A Cl-CV 0� MAP # 6 ( 1985) san tugs osjspo BIKEWAY — Department of Community Development [ f. N "E/ROUTE SYSTEM` ' CCS Pcl(i: $ifE£:/rC51 Ol1�cE GOr E1u:1 Stn Luis OC:S3C. CA. �-:03E100 kv E . EXHIBIT"B'k 111 1 8' S• S• 8' PAM146 LANEBIKE LAME MOTOR VEHICLE LANES. BIKE LANE PARKING LANE CLASS 11-A B11E LANE dNj l s. BIKE LANE MOTOR VEHICLE LANES BIKE LANE CLASS 11-B BIKE LANE aw of FIGURE #9 San tuts OBISPO Department of Community Development DESIGN STANDARDS 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obisoo. CA 93403-8100 ,ATA.....r N ..e. 7 Attachment I-1 i UNPAVED a' IIIHIYUY a' YIHIMUY UNPAVED SNOULM BIKENE LANE MOTOR VEHICLE LAS BIKE LANG SMOULDER CLASS II=C BIKE LANE .NO CURs IIIIIIIR C'PARKING LANE MOTOR VEHICLE LANES RPARKING LANE CLASS III BIKE ROUTE SIGNAGE ONLY Clay Of San Luis OBISPO FIGURE #1 Department of Community Development DESIGN STANDARDS ?0 Palm Sfreei/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Ooisoo. CA 93403-8100 •-•'�* cissa Attachment I—m 8 ! 2,1 EXISTING POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO BIKEWAY PROJECTS Circulation Element Adopted March 2, 1982 Under Transportation Goals on page 3 the plan states that the City should keep its rural , small-city character, that transportation planning should be guided by these broader goals, and that "to achieve those broader aims, the city will Dursue the following goals in transportation planning: 1 . To reduce people' s use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles , and using car pools . 4 . To widen and extend streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects will cause no significant, long-term environmental problems. G. Promote the safe operation of all modes of transportation . In Part 2 - Traffic Reduction Programs under Bicycle Transportation on page 10 the Basic Objective is to: "Use of bicycle as a means of daily transportation or recreation. People who live near their job or school (within a 20-30 minute bike ride) should be encouraged to use a bicycle) Under Policies and Examples of possible Programs on page 10 the following are stated The city will use the classification system and construction standards developed by Cal Trans as guides to design bike paths. Bike Paths along existing streets may be created by (1 ) restricting curbside parking during daylight hours , (2) removing curbside parking when it is not needed, or (31, striping the street to the left of the curbside parking lane when sufficient space is available. Objectives under• Part 3 - The, Street Master "Jan on page 17 inc.lude that the City Government will : Ensure that existing streets are fully used before it considers wideninF� them or building new ones. Manage Traffic so that it is concentrated on arterial streets and thorough fares and is not disbursed throughout residential areas . Ensure that. any circulation project solution , major or minor , must provide for the mitigation of adverse impacts on all residential neighborhoods . Circulation Study Phase I Report dated December 1988 Section VI Preliminary Transportation Goals . Policies and Programs included the fallowing goals . Policies and Programs under the Issues as indicated Attachment. 2 Attachment I-n I CAL POLY Q HIGHLAND R R"ONA n , aulmam BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS Q Q�5 0 HIGH '_ z J c SLYJTH p0 ORCUTT Clay Of BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT san tins oBlspo PROJECT 1990 Attachment I-o EXHIBIT "E" - 2 3 C-- C40 L Y n Q � p1 L M d n L CZ d N A d •- n U N N N C = d A 4 d — T L N p r « d « O ' ' V• N « L N d T « 9 d « - � C M o d a c c A c A p « N H _� « « d Y U Y A « N C 6 A d A � A � C O'' A � O S Y � � d S Ln n 6� n N W ~ N d n ad. .V '\ VI Z d T d C d N C d W > •- > > C d � �+ S N •r d � l V O d d d L A d@ p �' A d p d d N U y d p y q .- ' _ C « U7 Ln CD N C _ W 1 Ip Y O O p •« + a Iwo O •` N A u v W Z_ O� QI QI C C T d A A M « 7ZS _ = W S t « U n p A O LLS{ N ? C O •C W d Y _ A LU > > Z Y LA Q L U A N .- p N A M Lo A A " y 0 d u YY 1G lf1 F: n A A L « y A Co ¢ C d A d V Q Q LT C3- 1 + A O + — .J.. Q T 6@ O A Ln Ln LL 2 u N Y A Y ~ N S p y d A L«.I e u A n n A LL A J O d S 9 W a d O d C LTO .•. C .-I C A L W A S 1 V d .9 p m L O Co o O K d d d d d « p > W + H �_ O a 3 H -- u Ln •- S H H 9 H 3 L u 6 d K A + Z A H I T U Y U N 6 V + W L O O Lr7 N O O O 3W Q a C s W + y G d 3 Ln Ln Ln v v .e S O a N A « Cn 0 3 A ¢ 2 ¢ Y ¢ Q � T N d O S C A N O 1_ _ « N p L P A J W A O Lfl > u j o 2 r F E 1 d .Q M P'Y IP o LU p a c p J w p o o A Ln r W � C9 — N �. = � •t .-. g — �. n ` � 0 0 0 ► @ cc MM O O 11 O u w W N Ln 21 u u Attachment I-p Y M — N M Y t N C — d N u Ip NY M . d d M •- d 1 j C -0 C 8 d p d 2 p N QI L - p C Ip �'•� L � C Y O A N Y Y d n c s p d e S 4 -- Y N d u d C N m n L o N � Y ++ N N Y d d 0 - L C C d - fp 10 > N L Y C C — Y p L W MQI -- d r 8 m0 d .0 •C 10 d � •C Y L J[ Y Y L Y Q L L N N N L r -- 4N N A N N d (19 6 d Q Y 1 d H 8 C C Qf u d J Y O LLAE p Y p u OL N p d C E6 B d •-1 p C d O d — d N • L cc m � m O ' O G O N -N. 4 u7 O n7 � u M W O d 6W7 W .Z--. M M CM w W J S S S S S �- O K Ln sr r LLS ? oma• • M a 3 L9 W = Y_ Co Y O � O r ¢� ¢c o rh rn a N Q Q d N N N C C U d d LM u �c n Z m L L N n u n A A N N Y N n n C] 4 N p o N .fir CL- Z14 d d d d d � •8 9 H 8 8 ¢ O_ H 3 �O �O �O .�O O> Q v _ N N H C N L 'p •V O 1O N U] m J E p A Q V p O a>r V Y Y N p O �. wUn m A O LA d ] W = V U M m p E W H 2 1 0 O Q O pd N lL U Attachment I-q l' 2� CAL POLY Q H/GHLAND RAMONA cin 0 c �V �0 0 BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS Q�5 p c SOUTH �pp0 v ORCurr Cly of BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT San Luis OBISPO PROJECT 1990 PHASE II EXHIBIT F-1 Attachment I-r C d d d 1 L N O L N 1 1 M p d N C M M d U T _m H C Ip T T d > > N N C G +' T N j w w L d QI T N U'Y N N N M C •- - 1 T .- .- O N Y •... N N Q1 L L � �•• to C C C � O A a _6 O� D• 6 Y Y ..c L r •- •- L O rt Cl- L- y d IC C ILC ILC L C CL- d ¢ a c •« c d d a c ••' ¢ cn d d d L y y Ip C o • L N > L IC n v+ N �' �•. ••' �•. f L ` N �. C d N N N N M O d yI d w. •- d d d .- n 1 d r yI Y d d. NM N N N y p "' •N N T C T C A C C C 1 dd C A C P d u E d L .- u , x JL > Y Y JL Md N !. Y cn L L L L d d N L N jI IO d N M N N Q>I N C L H 6 6 n n » •C C n p 0 n y d Z d •- d d d L C d d � L d N W > w > > > C •- - U > z o d o 0 o d r m re o m a a' � O d 6 d d d m d d 1 d L U OC •- d d' Cx a+ Q L ro pC A U OC N N s a 4L. 0 0 0 0 0 o c O O O O O O ^� Ln H V 1 l V U LLJ LD � l O ¢ > > Z Y L L i S L t W Z � a OI OI v+ D• 0+ 7 W Juj Lo Ln Ln =3 2 WLM m Q Q wx P P ? m O O a c V Y w T N ✓ ` N N N N C C N d d d d d d u Z MMMm '� n n n a n n m n N IL- Ne N N N N n n N jj C Go ¢ •.o N N o- 0 0 0 0 d u A d d d d d d d d 6 S a H H 3 H H H H F- N O_ m O •S •.O m .e 1 •U O Q d Q C Q M ¢ ¢ N d P N C J O O •+ L L O Y f 7 d S m u c N u L u m c o o U) L m O o m v W 2 = > O y d A ++ U. :> L L C •7 d n W ¢ d d S O J O N N 1 N 1 Z - C OI L u C N N w N x E 2 f Co N J m W 2 1 1 1 1 1 I � 2 L O u7 -i Attachment I-s l � z� d Ip w C .- •� d d L N O +n N M > D'. 7 7 1O o 0 a+ u N d L b N - � d d N O L L d E m d N > N d N d r[ uLn ea m a N A C d O1 N •� — x L O d m o Q bc N c „ d t .+ L z o o to n m 1O �. a o d H d > CM N S G D S O u M d r. O ip d N d q V OCc d a' •- oe � M HN N C- CM 0 0 N N M En M H V CDV W M N R W 1.7 2 Y 1 L 1 t L Z m m m W J 2 2 S 7 O 1' •e W S Ln we WC T = � Ifl Z f3 c7 m GYc } O O O L i d O M1 ? �T y�• N N N d b b u 2 N N 6 a n N Y N N Q b O d d d S H H 3 H O O O O 3 •e •c .a r N d 0 O d J L LO W O En N e Q N L N m O to O Ul Attachment I-t l ' zg VEHICULAR CIRCULATION Page VI-1 Policies 1 . The city supports the effective use of existing major streets, thereby limiting the need for street widening projects or new major streets . 3. The city will ensure that circulation projects incorporate the mitigation of adverse impacts on residential neighborhoods BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS Page VI-4 Policies 1 . The city supports the use of bikes and walking as alternatives to the automobile and encourages the use of existing bike and pedestrian paths 2. The city should continue to develop a network of trails and bikeways that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and link up with bike routes in the county, as well as supporting bicycle facilities San Luis Obispo Municipal Code The Subdivision Regulations section 16.36. 140 Street Types and Requirements requires that the pavement of an arterial be 70 feet wide and prohibits curbside parking. There are five vehicle travel lanes, two each direction and a left turn lane, plus a bike lane in each direction. The vehicle lanes are 12 feet wide and the bike lanes are 5 feet wide. Attachment I-u CAL POLY HIGHLAND v v \J� ya 2 J� v Q � � v FO � t� Q y�o AHIGH LACUNA o' / LAKE a MWOOD 00� �unw It n, n nnu m �O� v 5' J' Q I # IN COUNTY I APR � � clay of FUTURE ip san tuts oBIspo BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS CLASS II B BIKE LANES Attachment I-v EXHIBIT "G" Attachment ��Ililli'����� ��I!!ill"I'►!!!r'�'"°���quii;�lll;�lllll sAn Ctuis ouilizip IIllt�g 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 ► b-a6 Luis Obispo„GA 93403.8100 December 13, 1990 Mr. Dave Pierce City of San Luis Obispo PO Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: ER 31-90 Portions of Foothill, Grand, California, Johnson, Osos, and Santa Barbara Streets Dear Dave: On December 6, 1990, I reviewed your project's potential effect on the environment. My action was to file a miticated negative declaration. That means that I determined the project will cause no significant harm to the environment, and no further environmental study will be required because of the changes you have agreed to make in your original proposal. The declaration is issued for the amended project. The changes are listed on the attached sheet. Please sign the original and return to my office as soon as possible. Please contact me immediately if this doesn't coincide with your understanding of the changes. A negative declaration could be reversed later, either on appeal or by automatic review by a decision-making body. Appeals may be filed by anyone, either now or shortly before your project is reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission, or City Council. With or without an appeal, a negative declaration is automatically reviewed by the Planning Commission and council -- and sometimes the ARC -- when they review the project itself. If you have any questions, please contact Judith Lautner at 549-7166 as soon as ssible. sincere , Arnold B. Jonas, D' ector Community Develo nt ATTACHMENT: Initial Study Attachment II-a 1 -3t ER 31-90 Removal of parking and installation of bicycle paths on some major streets Portions of Foothill, Grand, California, Johnson, Osos and Santa Barbara Streets The following measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Please sign the original and return to my office as soon as possible. A. Since adequate area exists, construct a separated bicycle path west of the palm trees on California Blvd, between Foothill and Hathway. Thirty-two spaces could then be retained on the west side of California, while 23 would have to be removed from the east side of California. The path could be southbound only, but since northbound bicyclists may choose to ride on the separated path rather than in the street, this path should be constructed wide enough to accommodate riders going in both directions. or Allow parking on California Blvd. at night only. Bicycles would use the space by day, and vehicles would park at night. This strategy would maintain use of all 67 spaces an California at night, when they would be used by residents. B. Since parking is heavy on the east side, but not on the west, reserve bicycle lanes on the east side of Grand for daytime use only - make available for parking at night. Approximately 60 spaces would then be available at night to serve the nearby residences. If allowing parking at night on only one side of the street is determined to be confusing for residents, then it may be desirable to allow parking at night on the west side of Grand, also. C. Reserve bicycle lanes on Osos Street, between Marsh and Leff, and on Johnson Avenue, between Mill and Buchon, for daytime use only, making them available for parking at night. D. Inform neighborhoods near the new bicycle lanes of the process to apply for 'permit parking only' for their streets. If approved, only residents would be issued permits ark on the street. This strategy could lessen the impact of addit'onal ehicles ntering the neighborhood in search of parking spaces. APPROVED BY: Arnold B. Jonas, i ector Community Development City of San Luis Obispo Applicant Attachment II-b / , 32, ER 31 - 90 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Since adequate area exists, construct a separated bicycle path west of the palm trees on California Blvd, between Foothill and Hathway. Thirty-two spaces could then be retained on the west side of California, while 23 would have to be removed from the east side of California. The path could be southbound only, but since northbound bicyclists may choose to ride on the separated path rather than in the street, this path should be constructed wide enough to accomodate riders going in both directions. or Allow parking on California Blvd. at night only. Bicycles would use the space by day, and vehicles would park at night. This strategy would maintain use of all 67 spaces on California at night, when they would be used by residents. 2. Since parking is heavy on the east side, but not on the west, reserve bicycle lanes on the east side of Grand for daytime use only - make available for parking at night. Approximately 60 spaces would then be available at night to serve the nearby residences. If allowing parking at night on only one side of the street is determined to be confusing for residents, then it may be desirable to allow parking at night on the west side of Grand, also. 3 . Reserve bicycle lanes on Osos Street, between Marsh and Leff, and on Johnson Avenue, between Mill and Buchon, for daytime use only, making them available for parking at night. 4. Inform neighborhoods near the new bicycle lanes of the process to apply for "permit parking only" for their streets. If approved, only residents would be issued permits to park on the street. This strategy could lessen the impact of additional vehicles entering the neighborhood in search of parking spaces. Attachment II-d I _ 3 Cly Of San WIS OBISpo INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT �Ortxons of Foo=.t.L.L, ran , Ca.L.Ltornia, SfTELOCATION Johnsen ncnf Santa Rarhara APPLICATIONNO. 31-90 PROJECT DESCRIPTION _Removal of parking and installation of bicycle paths on some major streets. APPLICANT City of San Luis Obispo STAFF RECOMMENDATION: X NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED PREPAREDBY Judith Lautner, Associate Planner DATE Nov. 1, 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTT N: DATE990 SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS 1.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................................................... NONE* B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.......................................... NONE C. LAND USE ................ NONE D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ........................... NONE* E. PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................ NONE F. UTILITIES........................................................................ NONE G. NOISE LEVELS ...................................... NONE H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... NONE I. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS................... ........... ................. NONE J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY .............................................. NONE K PLANT LIFE...................................................................... NONE L ANIMAL LIFE..................................................................... NONE M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL ................................................... NONE N. AESTHETIC .......................:.............................................. NONE O. ENERGYIRESOURCEUSE .......................................................... NONE P. OTHER ............................ .................. ........ . . . ....... . . . ....... NONE STAFF RECOMMENDATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WITH MITIGATION FE:i:..CHED REPORT SB-BS Attachment II-c 1 '�� ER 31-90 BIKEWAYS INSTALLATION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project is the installation of bicycle lanes on existing streets, involving removal of parking and restriping. The bike lanes would be installed in the following locations: Phase I: California Blvd - campus to San Luis Drive Foothill Blvd - west city limits to Crandall Way Grand Ave. - campus to Monterey Phase II: Osos Street - Marsh to Santa Barbara Santa Barbara - Osos to Broad Johnson. - Mill to Buchon Johnson - Ella to Orcutt All of the paths are proposed to be "class II-B", which is next to the curb, with no adjacent parking lane. Installation of all above paths as proposed would require the removal of 1, 126 parking spaces. The city currently has 18 miles of bike paths along public streets, about 4 .5 miles of which are classified II-B. The proposal would increase the length to 26.9 miles. All of these bicycle paths are on major streets. In addition to these paths, combined pedestrian- bicycle paths have been built (and are proposed) within linear parks and within neighborhood parks in the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area, consistent with the specific plan. POTENTIAL IMPACTS Community Plans and Goals The project is consistent with the city's goals to increase commuter bicycle ridership and emphasize alternative forms of transportation over the use of single-occupant cars. The project is consistent with the Bicycle Facilities Plan, adopted in 1985 . The project is also consistent with the council 's adopted work program objective: Create a continuous network of bikeways throughout the city that encourages bicycle use as an alternative to the automobile. Attachment II-e / .,3 S ER 31-9C Bikeways Page 2 The city' s Parkins Management Plan, adopted in 1987 , contains two goals: 1 . To maintain downtown as a viable retail center; and 2 . To protect the character of downtown and surrounding office and residential zones. These goals are followed by policies and actions. Policies that relate to the project are: "Programs should be established by employers to encourage employees of downtown businesses and government offices to use the parking structures as well as to use transportation other than the automobile. " "Curbside parking spaces shall be made available to short-term parkers and long-term parking should be encouraged in parking structures" . Removal of fourteen curbside spaces on Osos Street, from Marsh to Pismo, appears to be inconsistent with the policy to make curbside spaces available to short-term parkers. These spaces, however, are on the periphery of downtown and appear to be used more for employee parking than for shoppers. The 36 spaces farther down on Osos (from Pismo to Leff) are occupied heavily during the day and slightly less heavily at night (90%/70%) . Daytime parking appears to be primarily residential and employee parking. Similarly, most of the spaces on Johnson, from Mill to Buchon, appear to be used by employees of downtown and of the nearby offices by day, and about half are used at night by residents. The removal of employee parking spaces and creation of a bicycle lane is consistent with the policy of encouraging employees to use transportation other than the automobile. Removal of resident parking is consistent with Circulation Element goals to shift transportation emphasis from individual motor vehicles to other forms (mass transit, carpooling, bicycle, pedestrian) . Removal of spaces used by residents at night may lead to greater impacts on surrounding residential neighborhoods, however. This impact is addressed below, under "Transportation and Circulation" . Attachment II-f / / 3n ER 31-90 Bikeways Page 3 Conclusion: The project is consistent with adopted city plans and policies. Transportation and Circulation The proposal will increase the length of on-street bicycle lanes by over 30%. These lanes should improve the continuity of paths throughout the city, thereby encouraging more residents to ride their bicycles to school and work. The removal of parking is expected to provide additional visibility, and therefore safety, for bicyclists, as well as for pedestrians and children playing near streets. The proposal will involve the removal of 1, 126 parking spaces. Use of these parking spaces varies from 0 to 100%, with an average occupancy of 390 spaces during the day and 325 at night. This means that, if all parking spaces are removed along the proposed routes, and not replaced, approximately 390 vehicles will have to find other -parking spaces during the day (and 325 at night) , if driving and parking habits remain the same. In phase I, neighborhoods near Grand, upper California, and Foothill would be affected. In phase II, neighborhoods near Johnson Avenue, Osos Street, and Santa Barbara Avenue will be affected. Generally, the people who use spaces on the affected streets are students, residents, or employees of nearby businesses, and are therefore regular users of these spaces. A few are expected to be residential guests or customers of the infrequent nearby shops. It is likely that when the bikeways are first installed, people who normally use the on-street parking that has been removed will try to locate other spaces in the neighborhood. If successful, they will continue to park in residential areas near these major streets. If they are unsuccessful or if finding a space requires repeated circling of blocks, many parkers will pursue other options. These options can include buying permits for parking on- campus or in city parking garages, carpooling, using the bus, parking farther from their destinations, or using a bicycle. Over time, it is expected that parkers will find other places to park or will choose other forms of transportation. Bus service is currently available along most parts of the routes where parking would be removed. Where buses do not go on the same streets, they have relatively parallel routes on nearby streets. Nearby neighborhoods are likely to be impacted more heavily than they currently are. Traffic levels may decrease incrementally, depending on how many people choose alternative transportation. The most heavily-used parking spaces during the day are those on Foothill near Cal Poly, on the east side of Grand, and on Johnson Attachment II-g 1 '3 ER 31-90 Bikeways Page 4 and Osos, near downtown. Near these street segments, the surrounding neighborhoods are also heavily parked. At night, the streets near Cal Poly (California, Foothill, and Grand) and Osos Street between Pismo and Leff, are heavily parked, presumably by residents of the area. The other street segments are less-heavily parked at night. Foothill from Broad Street to the city limits. is used for parking for apartments that do not provide adequate parking. Johnson Avenue near downtown is similarly affected. Local streets near east Foothill and near north Johnson are heavily parked, and will therefore afford little opportunity for replacing the lost nighttime parking spaces. Therefore, residents of the neighborhoods near Cal Poly, near Osos between Pismo and Leff, and near the west portion of Foothill Blvd. and north portion of Johnson Avenue would be affected the most by the removal of nighttime parking spaces. It may be possible to restrict parking in some cases to nighttime use only, allowing bicycles to use the lanes during the day. The city of Santa Barbara has restricted parking on several streets to night use only, or to limited hours during the day, to allow bicycles use of the streets during days or only during a few hours in the mornings and evenings, depending on need. That city has used these "limited class II" lanes since 1976. The impact on that city has been a need for increased enforcement, particularly at the start and end of each bicycle use period. However, removal of parking on the east part of Foothill is consistent with the classification of the street. This segment is a thoroughfare. Parking should be prohibited on it at all times. Conclusion: Removal of parking at night would create a hardship for certain neighborhoods, particularly where off-street parking in the surrounding area is not adequate for residents. Recommended mitigation: 1. Since adequate area exists, construct a separated bicycle path west of the palm trees on California Blvd, between Foothill and Hathway. Thirty-two spaces could then be retained on the west side of California, while 23 would have to be removed from the east side of California. The path could be southbound only, but since northbound bicyclists may choose to ride on the separated. path rather than in the street, this path should be constructed wide enough to accomodate riders going in both directions. or Attachment II-h / �� ER 31-90 Bikeways Page 5 Allow parking on California Blvd. at night only. Bicycles would use the space by day, and vehicles would park at night. This strategy would maintain use of all 67 spaces on California at night, when they would be used by residents. 2. Since parking is heavy on the east side, but not on the west, reserve bicycle lanes on the east side of Grand for daytime use only -. make available for parking at night. Approximately 60 spaces would then be available at night to serve the nearby residences. If allowing parking at night on only one side of the street is determined to be confusing for residents, then it may be desirable to allow parking at night on the west side of Grand, also. 3 . Reserve bicycle lanes on Osos Street, between Marsh and Leff, and on Johnson Avenue, between Mill and Buchon, for daytime use only, making them available for parking at night. 4. Inform neighborhoods near the new bicycle lanes of the process to apply for "permit parking only" for their streets. If approved, only residents would be issued permits to park on the street. This strategy could lessen the impact of additional vehicles entering the neighborhood in search of parking spaces. Air Ouality Shortly after removal of parking spaces and installation of bicycle paths, it is expected that there will be additional circling of blocks by vehicle drivers looking for parking spaces. This circling will create additional air pollution. However, since most of the parking space users are regular users, they will likely find other available spaces or use alternative transportation after a short time, thus reducing the amount of circling. Conclusion: Impacts will be short-term and are expected to be insignificant. RECOMMENDATION Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the following: Mitigation measures: 1. Since adequate area exists, construct a separated bicycle path west of the palm trees on California Blvd, between Foothill and Hathway. Thirty-two spaces could then be retained on the Attachment II-i / '3 9 ER 31-90 Bikeways Page 6 west side of California, while 23 would have to be removed from the east side of California. The path could be southbound only, but since northbound bicyclists may choose to ride on the separated path rather than in the street, this path should be constructed wide enough to accomodate riders going in both directions. or Allow parking on California Blvd. at night only. Bicycles would use the space by day, and vehicles would park at night. This strategy would maintain use of all 67 spaces on California at night, when they would be used by residents. 2. Since parking is heavy on the east side, but not on the west, reserve bicycle lanes on the east side of Grand for daytime use only - make available for parking at night. Approximately 60 spaces would then be available at night to serve the nearby residences. If allowing parking at night on only one side of the street is determined to be confusing for residents, then it may be desirable to allow parking at night on the west side of Grand, also. 3 . Reserve bicycle lanes on Osos Street, between Marsh and Leff, and on Johnson Avenue, between Mill and Buchan, for daytime use only, making them available for parking at night. 4. Inform neighborhoods near the new bicycle lanes of the process to apply for "permit parking only" for their streets. If approved, only residents would be issued permits to park on the street. This strategy could lessen the impact of additional vehicles entering the neighborhood in search of parking spaces. Attached: maps showing proposed bicycle lanes parking space use summary Attachment II-j / �� CAL POLY HIGHLAND lipQ �o v R"ONA n y •�� c11 � 0 BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT L!W.ATIONS Q� � o SOUTH a \ v O p0 v �p ORCUTT T. Clay Of BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT `ASan Luis OBISPO PROJECT 1990 Attachment II-k CAL POLY 1 ti Q HCHLANO - V Q 9Z �O r � RAMONA o � � BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT N LOCATIONS Q V H/GH sourH - a EE \ v O ORCurr ,. Cid Or BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT A. San WIS OBISPO PROJECT 1990 � PHASE IT Attachment II-1 aL m N d d .� - L .O+ A L N d C L r b n CL. n N q b 'L n u N N N • Y q rV_ G L Y G d 6.q r r C T Y 0 Y 1 C d •L � > Y i � O L r 9 � M — i O •� Y C a 0 .- a Q Y L 4 Y d N O ' P11 JC .9 G G— i •y i O N a Y q L — t rq O a 1 Y r N N w C N S Y C i w C w L L L C C r pl a Y 4 w C w L O o f r py L n C O w q _ r r N n T CL C � C u 0 C > i O T O Q w q 1 L M S O C W% � L r W� n i•. n y T n .Nil W A Y L .� M wL O 0 7 C C R. = q A a d o V OC i OC q r � Y C s Y � U _ O O O N o N7 A a p 1O q C 1 i 1 O O p ' OOC ..' 1 C]O U y O 0 Y d. SWCC 0 ,� 0 p C u W 2 vl CI Ol P Ol OI N A M M O .O i a CK t[ H O O A n Oa •a C C .r V q O 7 L A u w N w ` N q W q r i 0 b y iC p[ {j] K A L r y w H J a 0 O• 1 — q p m � U.,1w d W r C d r T Ol •� i N L ./ .� L N N C N C W 1Up N Y L b d .- d H U u n A G Q W U y +1 U J[ Ns N n a 1 A d 6 A d A = O Y 2 d ]C d M N 6 N 6 O x d. .••1 w Q O M OC d C U'1 C C 4 0 - i 0_ a v L W w i 1 Y . C Y 6 Cc C y/ m L a lL d Y Y Y - 4 4 6 l9 O O a — = N a a .NIO •s s s L r 0 Y OQC w 2 q Ci u _ i. u w 6 y 41 L O O N O O O f u") Ln Lr) `� `� t i O O. w S meq+ L Q _ O Q Q ► r � pl w 6 L O r . r .. N ¢ t32 32 -j J (t A p L CL. = L C 1 d .f L W O O O NCo o e d i 4~ o o G G Z 4 i j .b.. � O O O W it 1 1 1 Q M M M N ppll H .I O w N SI y u Attachment II-m 1 - q3 w N r q d •d A y j d p d j p _ M P L p y 6 q 1 -0 > L S 4 C Y N A 4 ■ r c d u d c c A . ■ — n d 4 CLU P ' N A n 4 L o Y Y . N n L � N N A C Y L C C >• � � C w q > N L Y C C .- a a— y am ■ a i d u E A d C Y L L • L g M w N ` Y P en c P u Y d 4 Gp 4 u 4 p o e m �� 4 c V S pC q d N j C d N L OL J A H A pC A O ^ O O L O Ln Ln u W O OC d W U' ti TQC = Z P T OI RI 2 0 K � 4+ u v L-A C, ✓Ki 2 0- cc W K m p�C i O we K K CL. O M P P d N N N C C U y y O1 u u Z A L L 1/1 n 6 IC M 6 6 p N N 6 N c c t d Y d 4 y O _ _ H Q v N H A p H .. C 0_' M � � A N M C p ■ � o — N m J o A i r r V 6 _ p 1- yam/ _ C O p T O — L pc Y 4 W1.7 m p w L -05 4 J qp C W S V 4J q m p W H 1 p S CD OC O T� ti Attachment II-n C d b d 1 N A C •+ •+ q d U M > > N N C n A d C O �+ > q P M A LA N P C � _ � -•O _ A C P P L L q = C C ` O O C>• JL •- � -- p � C C N ' d d Q C 4 c A A y C d N N N N N r O L V r d C r - C 7 N Y C •1 A y O r � A N S + T. P P C P r A > C q C C C y Y d C A C q b A A q A N 6 6 n n 6 C r A C e �-- A 0 -0 .- C p 0 0 p W > > > > C .� C Y d A l O z L O M > t Y L••� d' •� OC 2 CrC r Q L A OC A V CY A S 4CL IZ v v v v ev v [V N ry u W O tY O H 4 j e }_ T m C 1 1 1 Z O ^ W O C O Ci m _W L O ]LQ V\ m -C Q Q P P ? C2 O^ O— ao V N N N N P P N Nk U• u u ICL d Z A A A A L N d • OAC N N N N q q n N p n N C Co r - Ln Y y d N d d d d q v v v v v y n O q L17 Lf7 0 Q Q •Q.. ` Y A Q O M L Q N oNi > 7 -C A d P •^ C J O O r = d S A 0 C r r = U C y A L H O O C2 U] C m O 2 = r W OLM O C P L 1 d 1 W Z� La fJ•/ J Co CxO Cn -L Attachment II-o l d q t N G q S n c .. •� M •- i � r � O p Y q Y i r OC r N r > > > A u OL N Y Y O i Y Y N O � � Y H r Y 3r- C r w > q 0 O! 6 N r u � A s Aen 4O N n A d W 7d > b Y M Y G d r O ra p i > .v S y d OL n CmY A r r L QC C C C] (/•) O p CTC cn O N N V M u W O d' d W 2 X i L w J S S = O o_ K H Y 7 W K m K K K 9-0 M N d w Y Y u 2 A u A Y M 6 n N K N Q d P+f Y d d 4 v O r N 6 N Q � N � _ A Z d J CO L r r 1.7 (n N � N C Attachment II-p �i�l�l II I!Ililll I I II����;,i��� �IIIII II IIID ► �I �► �► City Of SAn tuis OBISPO 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 December 28, 1990 MEMORANDUM TO: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director FROM: Dave Romero, Public Works Director r— SUBJECT: ER 31-90 - Bike Lanes My staff and I have discussed proposed mitigations for this project and offer the following comments: A. We are in agreement with the construction of a separate bike path behind the trees for southbound riders along California Boulevard, and don't seriously object to making it wide enough to accommodate two way traffic if northbound riders elect to use it. We can find no reasonable way to provide a safe crossing of the Foothill-California intersection for northbound bike riders. This is a very heavily traveled intersection with most of the motorists making a turning movement, thus there is no signal phase when the northbound bike rider would have protection heading either direction on Foothill or continuing north along the easterly side of California. This safety might be provided by a signal phase which would stop all vehicular traffic, however this intersection already has many phases, which creates very slow traffic movement. Even then the right turn vehicular movement could create a problem. The second paragraph outlines a strategy which we believe will create significant enforcement problems and continuing ill will among the residents. Allowing night time parking in bike lanes eliminates the safety the lanes provide just when it is most needed. This is especially true on routes near Poly where some winter commuting might be done after dark, and with night class all year. Attachment II-q �� Bike Lanes Page Two Classes at Poly begin at 7 am, therefore cars parked in the bike lane would have to be removed well prior to that time. If we attempted to accommodate night classes, parking would have to be prohibited till approximately 10: 30 p.m. Is there any benefit to allowing parking in the bike lanes between 10:30 p.m. and 6:45 Am. ? In order to make the bike lanes workable they would have to be strictly enforced, using up valuable time of enforcement personnel, but more importantly creating another ongoing source of friction between the City and the residents. Finally, there are significant benefits in having parking on arterials removed at all times. Visibility at intersections and from driveways is improved, additional flexibility is provided in developing turning pockets for safer vehicle turns, and the curb lane is clear at all times, thus allowing better street sweeping. In addition, restricting parking on arterial streets is City policy of approximately 15 years standing. B. The same problems occur as outlined above. C_ I believe the need and the benefits derived from Phase II improvements is much weaker than for Phase I, and the problems, particularly in downtown are potentially much greater. Staff may well recommend against the committee recommendation when this phase goes to the Council. Rather than -committing ourselves to a mitigation at this time, I would .rather withdraw Phase II from consideration and resubmit after the hearings (and input) on Phase I. D. Since this will merely require staff time and won't do any harm, we are willing to inform the neighborhoods. If we do receive a request from a significant majority of residents in one area there is considerable cost and effort on behalf of the City in setting up and posting a district, and ongoing resident cost and inconvenience in obtaining permits. we anticipate particularly difficult problems with the permitting process with the fraternity houses on California Boulevard. er3190/dfr#25 Attachment II-r 7�( C... POLY / \ `AO• 1e b s G1 ♦ � � i ` oma. � m I ♦ O `� �-x O,•°- JO� � 1 a p0 11 O ,� kj IT I \\ \ I Q O D D I.e ❑ U \ leo lJ.l ❑ ] C / e. I I� e 1 1.1 � -R W~� \\ ..•JO, I*-I'G �e O4 .O QiQ D 1 W 1M❑ ° Q fT❑2 °' pC - N 269 0 Qf p O f0 f O D D • DN D- DNDN NN DN ❑N " �• A ti zel - 9Q 'P =° BOND ST. 22 (1 4 �l \\ �. Fly . z1° O9 N 5e ° D ` ;�Ip�01. e° � - ( f'� \� `'''// 2 �YV ❑N DNI ��` J NW❑ NI.100 N❑ 300 Q .,FREDERICK ST. tY s ti1- P -- 'P,L ❑ C) I ❑ Q e CD I - ❑ (n ®, /, /� ❑ I o e ^on arc of p O .❑ IO \ 1 -I ❑ ❑Iy D„, 'J NDNIND NI❑NI Nner �- STAFFORD ST. } TAf ' n CALIFORNIA BLVD. „IDD:I❑��o°J o „I �„ Eliminate Parking • ; /-',,, ❑ ID I i �� z ,r' East side Hathway to Foothill 23 spaces °� L ^ v DG Retain Parking West side Hathway to Foothill = 32 spaces -- ' /, TAFT ST. O m °D eP FOOTHILL BLVD. - - ❑ -,,, 1 rp (n Eliminate Parking ❑ j' North side Foothill to Crandall = 22 spaces ❑ _ °— D , Attachment II-s III Z !❑o D J - -' U1 --,- T. WILSON ST. ❑ P O I I r^� p 7� &a SOP II ❑ On] > 2❑e 0 ri !I ° eo° e° � I L, •� I—j \01 l Q 6-1 n , o, o C o • O VP 90 '''•,, a_� � 'O° � ! e'e,0 ' �\sU'�'' �\�` ��\ Il,l ' • 6 0 ❑e �iJry '60 7 zr.e Oe 7' �j •Q ° ,( Q �j Qr °•' I Q�` - e O�,(�/�',ee �` �,l p° e • o`er I `O ( r ° Q °0eo0 QO LIO.( �` �� 30 Y/� Q1 1 /��\ /i i .3 �� \- Q• Op O CALIFORNIA BLVD. Eliminate Parking East side Phillips to Hwy 101 = 12 spaces 'j\ OHOd :. Both sides Marsh to Higuera = 12 spaces � � , � �"• Attachment II-t �P o O J� �O Qb. --" - nC LCQi$�OLEE i=MCR.CLZ- `'C ❑W ❑ '�" Ch n I i ,� .n I I L:.1 ❑ � I.I :Jr1J I � C = � LLJ — , ❑ ; '�° ❑ � iso � �^, C . C _ I Z Z 4 < ❑ o o ; O° Rcr uuLoo. D( .lJ.l se ° D o Q ❑P � OR pO [ PaCNECo ELEMENTARY i HAYS STREET 9CnOOL f 2]I � Z TF C r r l - C 41 rr rQ ❑ I ❑ 240 z O2:o e 0 r —C--31 `-rL 246 _ < g o W Ozsa I ❑ ❑E,� {0} 2M ❑n ❑n❑ C 7 2a° L MC COLLUM LV STREET = lc�cllr- 01 ��ai�_�°r, I c_i❑�_G�I� !lYL '_❑o l ❑g, o0- l:• Z - �-O ❑❑rua.IIi Rlny ic 7�❑❑0ti°ST �I /(/lnomyL o❑❑ r I S0❑j Q s00 Q3° Nlo o ❑en❑ Ci os ❑g G Q Q o- o C! OF HOPE ST. OQFREDERICKS ST ' 410 OCR ,dr : 1411 [ ]O 28 4]] 300 4 LJ I 411 ❑ ❑ ❑ W Z6 cw.cw . O O 6Tc \ �B an9 Q 460 473 Q O ❑ O ❑a ❑° 4 .1, ° 411 474 < 470 °o ole_" g❑ =V a°° LOOMIS ST IlIR ezo TCO cl ° H \A/ IOI - I I I I ° ASSOTT ST. D ° C� s-I Z GRAND AVENUE iy WILSON ST. O Retain Parking 6ii GC ❑ 6 614 gym, East side Monterey to Abbott = 29 spaces ^° I,•a.�•. East side Loomis to Slack = 34 spaces GHRF 00 Eliminate Parking West side Monterey to Abbott = 23 spaces O l', West side Loomis to Slack = 31 spaces c Attachment II-u t o( Y � o `O 7 � 'i �` O /pa 1 BIKEWAY - ALONG THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY The following cost information concerning a bikeway along the Southern Pacific Right- of-way from CalPoly to Orcutt Road is a very rough estimate. Routing through several tight spots is speculative. BIKEWAY DESCRIPTION: LOCATION: Southern Pacific right-of-way from Foothill to Orcutt. PRELIMINARY Heading south from Foothill, the bikeway is on the east side of the railroad. A gentle rise takes it through the easterly opening of the Mill Street overcrossing. (The path does not climb all the way to Mill Street; however, an access is provided.) The bikeway crosses above Monterey Street and crosses Marsh Street at grade level. The bikeway crosses to the west side of the tracks. After crossing San Luis Creek and Johnson Ave., the bikeway must cross the tracks near the north end of the railroad station. (Several options for at-grade, above grade and below grade crossings have been discussed). The bikeway continues south to Orcutt Road along the east side of the railroad. LENGTH: 15,000 feet GRADE: Level except for the sections at Mill Street and at the north end of the Railroad Station. CROSS SECTION: 12 feet of asphalt paving with 3 foot shoulders on each side. This width is the minimum recommended by CafTrans for a path that will accommodate both bicycle and pedestrian traffic. PAVEMENT SECTION: Asphalt Concrete 2" Must support maintenance Class II Base 6" and emergency vehicles CROSSINGS: The proposed route includes: 3 at-grade street crossings: Foothill, Marsh, and Orcutt; 3 highway overcrossings: Hwy 101, Monterey, & Johnson; 1 bridge across San Luis Obispo Creek; 1 railroad crossing north of the Station; and 1 culvert across a channel that flows through Sinsheimer Park Attachment IIIA-1 c / �J CONSTRUCTION COST: $4,400,000± Item Units Quant. Estimate Grade & compact sub-base LS 100,000 AC paving - 2"x15' Ton 2,400 120,000 Class II base - 6"x18' Cu Yd 5,000 250,000 At grade street crossings Each 3 450,000 Railroad crossing north Each 1 500,000 of the Train Station Bridges and Overcrossings Each 4 800,000 Drainage Culvert Each 1 30,000 Mill St. overcrossing & access LS 1 300,000* Fence between bikeway and LF 15,000 150,000 railroad Signing LS 10,000 Street Lighting Each 60 200,000 Landscape - 5' each side of path SF 150,000 225.000 $3,135,000 Planning and Design 15% 470,000 Contingencies 25% 800,000 TOTAL PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE $41405,000 * This estimate assumes that the bikeway through the structure can be less than 25 feet from the center of the railroad track but outside of the support for the Mill Street Structure which limits the width of any train. If this encroachment into the railroad right-of-way cannot be negotiated, the cost of keeping the bikeway at a reasonable elevation and more than 25 feet from the center of the tracks would be several times this estimate. NOTE: Off the road bike lanes will also require the purchase of maintenance and patrol equipment and will incur costs for utilities, maintenance and security patrols. PROPERTY ACQUISITION COSTS: up to $14,900,000 All the property that could be considered as excess to the current needs of the Railroad has been appraised at a value of $14,900,000. This appraisal made by an appraiser hired by the City includes a large parcel adjacent to Sinsheimer Park, a large parcel at the east end of Lawrence, and a large area across the tracks from the station. These large parcels are not needed for a bikeway. g:bw sprow.wp Attachment IIIA-2 j S3 TSF �wq tri ;v`. i i/ *•pQ✓�`•� ; ST < I❑ Ull OT r ' III((II y�SSII '7 MYOLLUM U' I L 1 sT IJ 7Z T YrSi, m / 1 90rvC 5. v` J 0 I � / ` \�± ��� u PRGOER�CXS 3 I wOPE ST I!^IIS GF( •� J��YP 1 OQF T PL N I❑ U ��r T STAFFORD ST �•. � r.,, 5. � Z n1URRAY Z T ✓ (� STI NE5T T. i 1 TST hA-i J I 1 Sr C �� ur �!\ P n I, `� tY�` O O O (�oq � •Y Jr `1 7 \ H ID4. O ^ I N, OR IN �'O410 C0 `,' OSO Qry51� y O ( C, `� O CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO D 10 {O N JFIIR_IiCR Nf CLASS I BIKEWAY \✓1 SOUTHERN PACIFIC syP �t s� CIO, � o Q W RIGHT—OF—WAY F "6" 4 a 'T ` �Q �°"�; mE Proposed Route O SANOMACUCK aT O m �®DaD 3 i Y n y = r aaxa FUSC 6RANCw 6T.` `V tVE. V q r Jv 7//�—/ 0111. IV - 9R1OGE Cl 11-1� WOOOBRiOG�'� ;'\#*.'. / c�P� Uslj j G ptlV rl S' R7.CAV DILL ST �/.�!\P// f^ ��♦ J`. r � MORO -ON / J a I' _LAwRCNCE OR._� � � ,�. Y C 0ROCKT. P�M r� \ J t J U "In'�e':':;i � J Attachment IIIA-3 TT s .: �• } s r 1L ,• / ` BIKEWAY - MADONNA ROAD TO FOOTHILL BLVD Through Laguna Lake Park The following information concerning a bikeway between Madonna Road and Foothill Blvd is provided as an example that will allow the discussion of costs an other concerns that must be addressed in siting of a bikeway. The siting is on City and private land so that concerns relating to both of these situations have to be discussed. No contact has been made with the owners of private property, managers of the City pro eg_rty. members of the cycling community. or City departments that would be concerned with the development. Siting of bikeways on private property, even for early stages of planning, should involve the owners of that property. During the revision of the Bicycle Facilities Plan a bicycle committee should formed to review all proposals. Owners of major parcels of open space in and around the City should be asked to participate with this committee in siting bikeways. BIKEWAY DESCRIPTION: LOCATION: From Madonna Road to Foothill Blvd. Through Laguna Lake Park and across private property. The route would follow the existing roadway in the park. A paved bikeway/ pedestrian path would be constructed from the end of the road to Foothill Blvd. LENGTH: 9,200 feet - 2,600 feet in Laguna Lake Park and 6,500' on private property. GRADE: Level. The siting shown follows the 121±' level from the end of the road to Foothill Blvd. CROSS SECTION: 12 feet of asphalt paving with 3 foot shoulders on each side. This is the standard for bikeways that will have pedestrian traffic. It is anticipated that this pathway would be used by a significant number of runners and walkers. STRUCTURAL SECTION: Asphalt Concrete 2" Must support maintenance Class II Base 6" vehicles Attachment IIIB-1 l �✓ FLOODING POTENTIAL: The 100 year flood level of the lake is 126 feet The 121 foot contour line is 1 foot above the level of the lake at the beginning of the summer. This siting was chosen to follow property lines where possible so as to have the least impact on property owners. siting just above the 100 year flood level and would require many drainage structures and would have more impact on private property. Siting at the 140' contour would reduce the drainage structures but would have more impact on private property. CONSTRUCTION COST: $600,000± Item Units Ouant. Estimate Clearing LS $ 5,000 Grade & compact sub-base LS 20,000 AC paving - 2"x12' Ton 1,400 70,000 Class II base - 6'x18' Cu Yd 3,400 170,000 Fill for low areas Cu Yd 500 25,000 Drainage Culverts LS 20,000 Fence both sides through LF 13,000 52,000 private property Signing LS 1,000 Clean up LS 1,000 Street Lighting Each 42 130,000 Landscape - 5' each side of path SF 100,000 100.000 $594,000 NOTE: This estimate does not include the cost of property acquisition, engineering, contingencies. Off the road bike lanes will also require the purchase of maintenance and patrol equipment and will incur costs for maintenance and security patrols. PROPERTY ACQUISITION COSTS: ?? The private property that would be required for this project is outside the City Limits. The route described on the map, cuts across the comer of a large parcel leaving a 60 acre comer cut off from the remainder of the parcel. Of this 60 acres almost 50 acres is covered by reeds and tules indicating that it is marshlands. The remainder of the route is along a property line that divides parcels owned by different parties. The 30' wide right-of-way approximately 6500 feet long covers 4.5 acres. Attachment IIIB-2 1 � The ballpark value of farm land in large parcels along the Los Osos Valley Road may be estimated from the asking price of two large properties currently for sale. A. E.18 acre property consisting of three separate parcels on which there are two living units and a barn is currently for sale for $3,600 per acre. A 229 acre property consisting of two equal parcels with one old barn is currently for sale for $5,700 per acre. If land is worth less than $10,000 per acre, the right-of-way is worth less than $45,000.- However, The right-of-way is a long narrow parcel the value of which is more appropriately estimated by determining the change in value of the parcels from which it is taken. Also there is a question as to the disposition of the 60 acres that are cut off from the large parcel. The disposition of 60 acres would most likely be a matter of negotiations and the value would again most appropriately be established by the change in value of the larger parcel. No attempt has been made to establish any values until options are further refined. Two-way Bike Path on Separate Right of Way Z d(Min) { - 3' 12' 3' Graded Paved Graded 9.b WG Attachment IIIB-3 .. 1 Ca `` l ; J = 600 /r.. ��`' .i `�• j�' � �' � I tl v { } \ �1 �..//�`r'// �•1 200 / X3 �' •,� par "p F ?p0 � ProPenY 80 ut7dry ar t'Act iiXaWaY y aQ Routa or . 00 \\ oi. maple A u � Exiatta�aaPle Bl, � � . /p all t F \ prt va 4ao 4 Tr \ a I $ ProPe �\., ��._. • __ Fxi,tlng on LAGUNA LAKE i . jos p60 \ ON j. Mp 200 / / ! 400 .\ 'J� �,J i' — �. _200 \- LL �C Attachment IIIB-4 , v SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATION WITH OTHER CITIES SAN DIEGO - Michael Jackson San Diego is a large City with 53 Community Planning Areas. Each area has its own circulation element which includes a section on bicycles. Most actions do not go to the City Council unless they are brought there by citizens. For parking removal, all property owners are notified by mail and each of the complaints is considered. The final plan of action is developed through bargaining with the individuals concerned. Recent examples: A 4 mile length of bikelanes in which a 1/2 mile section allows parking from 6:00 pm to 6:00 am and all day Sunday. A 3 mile length of bikelanes on a divided 4 lane parkway on which there is no designated lanes for the first two blocks and the bikelanes are adjacent to parking for the next 1/4 mile. On street parking is being reinstated adjacent to the bikelanes on a 1/2 mile section from which parking was removed in 1989. The Bicycle Coalition has not been forceful in making their wants known when the establishment of bikelanes has run into conflicts with adjacent property owners. Some projects take a long time. After many years of discussion and planning a bikelane has recently been installed with the removal of parking on a 1 mile section of street near UCSD that had provided day parking on a street with 60,000 ADT. The University agreed to provide additional on campus parking and the on-street parking was removed during the summer. There were no significant complaints for this action. Often there are few or no complaints until after the project is finished and in use for a few months. Alternate parking may be provided. EUGENE, OR - Diane Bishop Eugene has a lot in common with San Luis Obispo. It is slightly larger but has an old section with narrow streets and hilly terrain that restricts the options for bikeways. Each bikelane is designed to fit the situation and to accommodate as many of the varied needs as possible. The City Council has been strong in the support of the adopted Bicycle Master Plan. Often they have made an unpopular decision based mainly on the fact that the project was required by the Master Plan. Attachment IV - a 1 ,51 Examples of compromises include a 36 foot wide street with an ADT of 8,100 to 8,500 cars per day. Parking was removed from one side and the street was striped for a 4- 1/2 foot bikelane on one side, two 9-1/2 foot travel lanes, and a 12 foot wide parking and bicycle lane. The narrow lanes tend to slow traffic and may cause people to seek alternate routes. This is similar to the situation of Chorro north of the freeway where the street is 40 feet wide and traffic volume is about the same. Often the neighborhood will support a project because it creates a situation that will tend to reduce through traffic. Each project is developed through a process of negotiation. Special concerns are given careful consideration and may require expensive remediation. An example was a widening that was made to accommodate on-street parking in front of a neighborhood corner grocery. Negotiated projects result in bikelanes with parking that move from the curb at intersections to the inside of the parking along the rest of the block. This is not the best but it provides a bike lane. This is similar to the bikelane on South Street. The City Traffic Engineer has consistently taken the position that the primary purpose of the street right-of-way is to move people and materials. PALO ALTO - Gail Likens Most of the bikeways and bikelanes were put in place in the early 1970's. Often these bikelanes do not meet the current CalTrans Standards. In residential areas, no streets were completely stripped of parking to make room for bikelanes. Various options were used including narrow traffic lanes, bikelanes adjacent to parking and 8' wide lanes that are bikelanes during the day and parking at night (7:00 pm to 7:00 am). Examples of these actions are streets with 3,000 to 5,000 ADT that have 9-1/2 foot travel lanes, an 8 foot lane for day bikelanes and night parking on one side and a 12 foot parking/bike lane on the other. Commercial vehicles are allowed to make deliveries in the 8 foot bike lane in residential areas for up to 5 minutes. There was no significant removal of parking in the downtown area. Some streets have no parking but that is not attributed to bikelanes. The two mile section of Bryant Street that has received wide publicity as Bicycle Blvd has vehicle access along the entire length but automotive traffic is blocked every 3 to 4 blocks so that only bicycles and pedestrians can travel the length of the street. There were compromises but Gail has heard no complaints as the lanes were in place for 5 to 10 years when she took the job 10 years ago. Attachment IV - b 1 -�&o SANTA BARBARA - Dave Corbett Part time bikelanes have been established for commute traffic. The hours are 8:00 am to 5:30 pm. The routes seem to work well with the exception of a section near a ballfield. People start parking before 5:00 pm as enforcement of this parking restriction is not a priority at this time of day. Thus the bikelane is eliminated during the evening commute. MONTEREY - Bob Shanteau Monterey is similar to San Luis Obispo in that many of the streets are narrow, the lay out is dictated by terrain, traffic is relatively heavy, and parking is limited. Monterey has a recreational bikeway along the coast using the old railroad right-of-way. This bikeway is heavily used. The remainder of the bikeway network is not very good. The master plan has been published but not fully implemented because of the conflicts of narrow streets, heavy traffic and limited parking. Solutions that have been given wide publicity such as Davis, Palo Alto, etc. are based on street networks that have relatively wide streets laid out in a grid pattern. Davis had wide streets and a grid layout. Palo Alto was able to remove Bryant Street from the vehicle grid because there were parallel streets to carry the traffic. Monterey and San Luis Obispo do not have wide streets and there are no alternative routings for vehicles that have the capacity to take an increase in traffic that would be generated by reducing the capacity of an existing arterial. Attachment IV - c kLONG AGENDA DATEUt�REM#/ l� April 26 199 Mr. David F. Romero Director of Public Services — City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Mr. Romero, Referring to the Bikeway improvement notice that we received in the mail April 25 : We are not in favor of removing any more parking on Foothill Boulevard. We are very much in favor of lowering the 40-mile- per-hour speed limit in order to perpetuate safety for all vehicles as well as bicyclists . Foothill Boulevard seems to be less used by bicyclists since the Spirit bicycle shop, at the corner of Tassajara Drive, went out of business and the bus transportation has been improved. Instead of using Foothill Boulevard, bicyclists traveling to and from Cal Poly seem to use Highland and Ramona Drives, which have less vehicle traffic. In conclusion, due to the fact that the apartments along Foothill Boulevard do not seem to have enough guest parking it would seem only fair to keep parking on Foothill for them as well . Sincerely, Naoma and Ken Wright 400 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 ( 805) 543-5232 E tion Q FYI ❑ CDD DR❑ FW.DIR ❑ CFII[FLa ,kCAL7PW EDM ❑ REC DI RE - L DIEL �_ N+FI>:f(NG AGEICA 3�7ITEM # STEVE EABRY 1786 Oceanaire San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805)-544-1096 3 May 1991 TO: SLO City Council RE: Bikeway Improvement Item on your May 7th agenda. Gentle People, I support the recommendations in the proposed resolution which will be comming before you next week. Our city has great potential to shift a significant proportion of vehicle use to bikes - with many benefits to all of us. This proposal is a good start along that road. I urge you to approve it. Thanks, cc: Dave Romaro COPIESM. ActO° Q Fn ❑ CDD DIX IN.DIX RECEIVE® CAO E r -MC W oxi� c. p uCECr-E MAY 1 1991 ❑ MCMT eau�❑ Inc DIR, ❑ cxFAD ❑ vrr SAN'l OBISPO.CA TELEPHONE BOS/SVTYC!!— A.__nNG AGENDA Cpp3Tp, - ❑ DATE-5- SAI T 31#� ❑ Denotes Adkm Q c� ❑ CDDDIR dCAO ❑ FN- I WILLIAM J. SCHANBERGER• PH. D. A.CAD��+y AhvchobgkalCop"bn 11 W�`�c a Z FW DIEL 1 5 9 9 moi,•,:s„—PT R E S T P C=C,. ❑ POLICE C7 L 112 2 Calif. B 1 . GMT. .tii ❑ REC DIR. SAN LUIS DEIIS PO, CALIFOF NIA 93401RfFADFILE El ILDR I — o..a�.,. «� P9VC_OLOC.. �'.� •MERMAN BOARD O'PROFESSIONAL PSVC-OLOGr �� May 1 , 1991 City Council of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 re : Public Hearing on Bikeway Improvements, California Blvd. The purpose of this letter is to file a formal objection to your proposal to remove parking on California Blvd. between Marsh and Higuera. Incidentally, there are some 23 spaces in this block, not 12 as your announcement states. I have lived in San Luis Obispo since 1962 , and have conducted business at 1500 Marsh St. and 1504 Marsh St. since 1969 on a full time basis. I am semi-retired since January, 1.991 . I live with my wife in the house at 1122 California Blvd. , having resided there since 1983 . I have owned the property at 1500 and 1504 Marsh St. and at 1122 California Blvd. since 1974. The removal of parking in the 1100 block of California Blvd. ( i .e. between Marsh and Higuera St. ) would have a severe, negative impact on my home and office buildings. Both staff and clients of the Diet Center at 1500 Marsh St . and the Psychology office at 1504 Marsh St . utilize California Blvd. for parking. Next to my office, at the old Mountain View Center ( 1540 Marsh St . ) , there are the offices of EOC Family Planning and a dozen or more small business offices, many of which use California Blvd . for parking. Next to my home, at 1110 California Blvd. , are the offices of Blakeslee and Blakeslee, the staff and clients of which also utilize the parking on California Blvd. r The daytime parking in the 1400 block of Marsh St. is already very crowded with cars from the houses and businesses on that street. The daytime street parking in the 1400 and 1500 blocks of Higuera St. is already very crowded with cars from the houses and businesses on those streets. The removal of parking in the 1100 block of California Blvd. would have a negative effect on the conduct of business in all of the areas cited above. RECEIVEL MAY 1 1991 C@LERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA -2- The removal of parking in the 1100 block would have a negative impact on the businesses currently on my property, and could reduce the property value and/or the rental value of this property. Given the above, I wish to go on record as objecting strongly to the proposed removal of parking on California Blvd. betwegn Marsh and Higuera St. With all due respect to bikers, I do not believe that their needs and rights are more important than the needs and rights of the many businesses and several homes in the 1100 block of California Blvd. area. If the bikers ' rights are more important, then that principle should also prevail for all of the downtown streets that continue to allow street parking to accommodate the businesses in that area . As a suggestion for the safety of bikers , pedestrians, and cars in the 1100 California Blvd . block I would recommend that this area be clearly posted as a 25 mph zone, and that it be better monitored by the San Luis Obispo police department. Silicerelyl eJm J . Sch erger WJS/cd MEETING AGENDA R E C E I V'E D DATE - - ITEM #- MAY 3 1991 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA To: Mayor Dunin From: Greg and Joanne Nishi property owners 244 Foothill blvd . San Luis Obispo. Re: Bikeway improvements along Foothill Blvd . As enthusiastic bicyclists and property owners along Foothill blvd . we disapprove of the proposed expansion of the bike lanes along Foothill blvd. The permanent removal of parking spaces will unfairly burden residents,businesses and churches along this roadway . Parking in our area is already constrained with the available parking on the street. We frequently ride our bicycle¢ on Foothill and we are happy with the current set-up. We would recommend that our tax dollars be spent on other more worthwhile projects. Sincerely , „, y� GREGORY H. NISHI JOANNE M. NISHI COPIESTO: ❑-Dewtes Action ❑ FYI �Camd1 ❑ CDDDIR. C :CAO ❑ FIN.DIR Q”ACAO ❑ E CHIEF ;d A77ORNEY �DIR. CLERK/ORIG. ❑ PoLICE al. Fil MGMT.Tizium ❑ REC DIR Q,C.READ FILE C]AUT:L D:g. MEETING AGENDA � DATE 417-'?l ITEM # COPIESTO. May 2 , L� sAedm Q Camdl ❑ CDD DID'City Council of San Luis Obispo 2r CAO ❑❑ "DIX P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 � TTnCLERKR[VEYG�ORI O F9WDI ❑ MGMT 7Fp1M ❑ PC POUCEDIR CfL RE: BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS ❑�C2:r. n , ,, L Gentlemen: --���� �� This is written to protest the plan to provide full time bike- ways along the full length of California Boulevard . Specifically, I am protesting the strip along California between Marsh and Higuera. Your plan would take away 12 desperately needed .parking spots for the small business and/or professional men and women located in this vicinity. With the economy as it- is , it seems to me that common sense dic- tates FAVORING small business or professional people, not handi- capping them. .and a vital part of their ability to operate their business or profession includes parking for their clientle. I amange what is commonly known as the Mountain View Center . Many auxiliary members of the "helping" professions are located here. The include psychologists, family counselors , etc. Most all of them have a limited business and work by appointment only, using the facility part time. The rent is affordable here for these part time, independent con- tractors without whom the public social service system would be even more overcrowded and underfunded . Family Planning is also located here, providing services to low income people needing family planning services as well as glaucoma tests for the elderly. The young many times bring their children with them and the elderly do not ride bikes . Although we meet most of the needs for parking within our own complex, there are times when street parking is required . More importantly is the overflow from other businesses , especially along Higuera where the City has allowed office conversions with the resultant impact on parking facilities . This is not the issue- the issue is that if these 12 parking spaces are taken for bicycle paths, the overflow will attempt to use our facilities making it even more difficult to patrol our parking lot. RECEIVE ® MAY g 1991 CFFY CLERK SAM LUIS OBISPO,CA I have enclosed a newspaper article from the TST featuring one of the tenants here . It is to give information for a better understanding of lessees. This counselor ( as well as . the others ) see clients by appointment only. The privacy and atmosphere of this old building is perfect for these types of services. Parking nearby, however, is essential . Ownership of property is becoming more and more precarious in this City. There is the expensive earthquake proofing of buildings, the increased utility and services costs . In order to make a small margin of profit, landlords must protect whatever interest they hold in order to avoid increased rents which impacts the City as well as the business and professional community and their clientle. To stay in business , these small, independent contractors , if rents are increased , would be forced to pass the increase to their clients , many of whom are on a marginal budget and could not afford that extra cost and would need public institutions which cannot care for the load they now bear. Parking spaces are an assett, including on street parking. To take these spaces for bicyclists, takes assetts from business including the property owners nearby.. It seems to me the City has allowed office conversions in housing neighborhoods which has caused much of this problem. However, to solve the problem one CANNOT consider removal of these vital spots . My suggestion would be this: To create a design for a "turn-off and dismount" area from the San Luis Drive onto California which would insure safety of the cyclists who could then push- their bikes for the short distance required . The same could be done at the Higuera entrance along California Blvd. Surely this would be less discomfort for the general populace, since a very small percentage of travelers are bicyclists . . . and the time they are along that short strip is negligible com- pared to those in need of the services of providers along that short block. I agree we should encourage transportation other than autos . . but the reality is most people either won ' t or their jobs and time will not allow them to become a bicyclist . An "Ivy League" community with college professors and care-free students IS des- irable, but until a great social change takes place , it is a vision not a practicality. Siily, Wi4fifred Alexander, Manager Mt . View Center 543-8611 Drugbl'biess, pBoM in ain . Ano Fairbanks San Luis Obispo and Twin Cities Communi- Telegram-Tribune ty Hospital in Templeton. Combined with General's births,that's a total of 2,494. Consider a baby who's so overwhelmed, Taking 13 percent of that, she said, so tense and so irritable, that she can't means that "more than 300 substance- even look at her mother's face, exposed infants may have been born in San "Just the complexity of the human face is LuisrObispo County." too much for them to handle;' Kathryn 4. It's not known how much cocaine or Brewer, a San Luis Obispo educational other hard drugs a pregnant woman can psychologist,said of babies born to cocaine- ., take before her baby will be affected,Pinto using mothers. �� .., said Then consider the mother, who besides Mothers who take one to two drinks ada have babies with decreased birth- dealing with her drug use,"is wanting this y little bundle to love (her) ...and here's this weight,growth abnormalities and behavior- child you can't look at and you can't talk to K problems, according to the National C because it goes into a screaming fit Council on Alcoholism. "That doesn't bode too well for bonding," Brewer, who's also a marriage, family '- and child counselor, said children exposed Brewer said. The challenge of educating children to alcohol or drugs m the womb exhibit a damaged by their mother's alcohol and "'' whole rangeof behaviors that challenge drug use during pregnancy was among the Kathryn Brewer their parents and teachers. issues explored Tuesday during a daylong Among those behaviors are: symposium in San Luis Obispo. ...educational psychologist ■ Decreased use of adults for solace or It's an issue that will continue to attract play attention as more and more "drug-ex- "This is especially true for those who posed"children are identified If an infant cries and have been exposed to cocaine," Brewer At least'118 — and maybe triple that cries and gets no said. "This indicates we need to teach dependency to these children. We need to County last year said in S Gina Pin oa , response, it doesn't learn teach them how to ask for help." coordinator with the county Drug Program. a cause-and-effect ■ Difficulty reading social cues. Of 911 babies born at San Luis Obispo , "If an infant cries and cries and gets no General Hospital, 118 were exposed to relationship. response, it doesn't learn a cause-and- alcohol or drugs while in their mother's — Kathryn Brewer effect relationship;'Brewer said. The baby doesn't learn that its behavior. uterus,Pinto said That's 13 percent=nearly double the 78 and that of other people, can cause drug-exposed newborns identified in the more likely to test positive for marijuana something to happen. county hospital the previous yearand alcohol,Pinto said,while cocaine use is ■ Indiscriminate attachment to stran- "We're getting better and better at more prevalent among women enrolled in gers. identifying them as we educate the care public prenatal programs. This applies especially to young children providers,"Pinto said. It's likely, she said, that the 13 percent who were exposed to alcohol,she said. "As She said the nationwide rate ranges from rate reported at General Hospital applies to teens they become very socially engag- 12 percent tb 16 percent, and applies to the two private area hospitals with matern- ing ... but they don't know their bounda- babies born both in public and private ity wards. ries" hospitals. A total of 1,583 babies were born last year Please see Babies,Back Page Women in the care of private doctors are at Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center in ' age . ■ • 'l r_AEA_ u! don't realize that if it's unacceptable secs_. i younger children, Brewer Babies to throw rocks ll the unacceptable said today it will still be unacceptable trolled raraImpulsive behavior and uncon- tomorrow. . ■ Jerky movements. Continued from A-1 E Delays in language' "They don't have smooth motor "They don't know how to let you planning," Brewer said "and flit ■ Desperate for body contact and know what's going on with them,"she around like a little butterfly." affection. said. ■ Poor social skills. This is more common among those In addition, children ask 34/2 times Research shows that at age 11, exposed to alcohol,she said,and puts more "why, where, what" questions these children are about three years "teens at real risk for sexual promis- as their peers, she said, and their behind in their social skills and ability tasty„ language skills are about two years to adapt to situations,she said. behind. Tested again at 17,the youngsters' ■ Difficulty in malting choices and problem-solving. ■ Extremely short attention skills had not increased Many ofthese children a know spans. "At age 17, they re still at age 8 in how to generalize, Brewerr said, and These can be as short as 20 to 25 their adaptive behavior skills" MEETING' �AGENDA DATE M31#_ May 1, 1991 City of San Luis Obispo Attn: Pam Voges, City Clerk 25 Prado Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Public Hearing on May 7, 1991, on Bikeway Project. Dear Pam: I am an employee of a business located at 550 Foothill Blvd. Monday through Friday, I commute from Los Osos and park on the street during business hours. I have no alternative but to park on the street, as do all of our business clients, because all other legal, off-street parking is specifically designated and numbered for apartment tenet use only. . As a matter of fact, only one of the off-street parking areas even has a "visitor" space, so all the vehicles of non- resident visitors, guests and cars belonging to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th students sharing one apartment must also park out on the street. Usually, it is moderately difficult to find a space to park, even on the street. I have nothing personally against improving bikeways, as my husband is also an avid bicyclist attending Cal Poly, but removing all available parking from this stretch of Foothill will, I believe, turn a bad situation into an impossible one. My two years' casual observance (we have glass doors and many windows) tells me that, although cyclists are in evidence, the frequency of their use is far outweighed in sheer numbers by the parking usage on any given day of the workweek. I hope that the many won't be inconvenienced for the comparatively few. Removing what already little parking space there is will not only hurt our business, leaving clients no legal place to park, but will also force an even greater hardship on all those who have to work and live here for those who already have a way of- pass ni g through. Thank you so much for your serious and fair consideration of this matter. Yrne;bden COPM TO- 528-7152 ❑ Aclkmp4 DIX iJ CAO ❑ DIX �ACRO ❑ Q.W ATIY1{tNFy RECEIVE D Ld a E1tK/0RJQ ❑ m CECK ❑ MGM7:TFA.�i ❑ RFC DIX MAY L COPIESTO: a Action `13 FIN. nFYRI MEETING AGENDAZtAO DATE ACRO �0�1RE0-i� �/ TTQiWEY L� FW DIR. Mayor Ron Dunin fflbmwopw. 0 rouaci-L City Council Members 0 McMT.TEA.w ❑ RFC Eolp, c DPIIE C3 City Hall San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 May 5,1991 Dear City Council Members, We wish to register our opposition to the proposal to eliminate parking along Foothill Blvd. We own a home along Cuesta Drive, between Tassajara and Ferrini. Our concerns are several: The parking availability within the residential area one block off Foothill Blvd. is already near capacity. There are already times when we are unable to park in front of the residence we own. The homes in this development have single car garages and single car driveways. The city has allowed many garages to be converted without additional off-street parking required. This has resulted in many homeowners and renters needing street parking. We cannot accomodate the additional autos your proposed change would bring onto our streets. The automobile traffic this change would bring into our neighborhood is also of concern. As the parents of small children, an increase in auto traffic near the Teach school park is also unacceptable. We are mostly opposed in this regard as the traffic would be from the student rentals along Foothill Blvd. and on several occasions we have had problems with eBcessive speed along our street by the student population_ Cerro Romauldo Dr. is the preferred route for children walking or biking to Bishop's Peak School. Any additional traffic on this route will pose a hazard to the elementary school students. We feel that the need for bike lanes is legitimate as are our concerns for the safety of our children and desire to find parking in front of our own home. The need for parking along Foothill is greatest overnight when bikes are less likely to be on the street and when residents off Foothill need their own street parking. Might we suggest bike lanes during daylight hours only, allowing residential parking along Foothill at night. If you are opposed to this, may we request consideration of a parking district in the area off Foothill Blvd.? As in other neighborhoods, a parking district restricting parking to residents of our streets is bound to be an issue before you in the . near future if overnight parking along Foothill is eliminated. Another alternative would be aquisition of land behind Thrifty Drug Store for a parking lot. Respectfully submit`t/ed, �� MAY 6 1991 d C' Qi CITY CLERK / D SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA MEETING AGENDA DATE 9`ITEM# 5-2-91 City Council of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 As a resident of California Blvd. between Marsh and Higuera St. I wish to object to your proposed ban on parking in favor of bike lanes. I have been a resident here for five years and have continually felt the need for MORE parking in this area not less . As you may know there are several small businesses and private homes in and around the 1100 block of California Blvd . whose residentsutilize the parking on California Blvd. It is my feeling that the parking ban in this area will have a detrimental and long-lasting negative effect on the business and residential areas. Why not consider clearly marking this area of California Blvd. a 25mph zone and policing it more carefully? Please consider this objection to your proposal . Sincerely, Carolyn Schanberger 1122 California B1. San Luis Obispo, CA COPMTO. ❑ktCAO ��M DOL HNWLDpKEaw RECEIVED TTamy _ FYJDIR V. Camwowc. ❑ roucEcn ❑ MCMT.TE"I ❑ RM DIR. MAY U 6 1991 ❑ READFILE C3UTItDIIL ra'�T T, © Fly SAN LU S OBISPO, CA DATE Janet K. Miller, Ph.D. Sharon A. Ripper, Ph.D. t+cep Psychologist PSY10530 Licensed Psychologist PSY6297 1504 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805)544-1912 Friday May 3, 1991 . Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council: On Tuesday,May 7,1991,you will be taking Public Testimony on the issue of removing parking from both sides of California Boulevard between Marsh and Higuera Streets. As psychologists whose practice is operated at 1504 Marsh Street, we strongly oppose the proposed removal of parking along that stretch of California Blvd. The only off-street parking available to us at this time are two spaces adjacent to 1504 Marsh Street. Parking along California Blvd. is already impacted. Elimination of an additional 12 spaces would not just be inconvenient but would seriously restrict our business. We respectfully request that you consider the potential loss of business in that area and OPPOSE the development of bikeways along California Blvd. between Marsh and Higuera Streets. Sincerely, > ATO: ❑;6poto Action Q E1'1 B�c�nlxlt oIMCHW RECEIVED � ot CLM/OR1C. POUa G 1. MAYo Mcari:TE.AJM 0 RM DR .61991 0 c.1zFAn SAN LUiSS 0811WpK,CA COM TO: ❑•Da�ores Action FYI C tI CMDUL PENNY L. ZENGLEIN MEETING AGENDA 9ACAO1540 Marsh St . , Suite 101-A CAO FKDM Mountain View Center ATE - -S'( CLatMW ❑ � San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 POLKE ❑ MGMT.I AM ❑ REC.DZL C RF D FIL£ [],LnILDUL Eir May 6, 1991 City Council San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Bikeway Improvements- California, Foothill , 8 Grand Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I am a tenant in the Mountain View Center located at' 1540 Marsh Street . I was recently informed of the City Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 7th regarding the hearing for proposed bicycle lanes from Marsh to Higuera on California Blvd. I am unable to attend this meeting, but wanted to voice my opinion on this matter. I am against this proposal as it would have a very negative impact on the businesses in the area. I am the owner of a very small business in SLID in the neighborhood where you are considering removing parking for bicycle lanes. I have had a great deal of trouble Just finding a small office space to rent In this town that is affordable and .has decent parking. Parking in the building where I rent , and the surrounding neighborhood is at a premium to begin with. Tenants are lucky if they can even find a parking place at all If they are not at their office before 8am- 9am. I was assigned 1 space when I rented the office I'm in, and if I leave it open for my clients, I must park In the street . As it Is, I leave my spot open for my clients now, and I am constantly having other cars park in my reserved space even with the TOW AWAY Signs posted everywhere. This tells me there is already a shortage of parking places In this area. The parking situation is already miserable enough right now for the tenants, and clients in the buildings of this neighborhood. I cringe at the thought of how It will be if you take away all of those parking spots. I believe it would be devastating to the businesses in this area to take away any parking! If I don't have a place for my clients or myself to park , my business can't make it ! Please give some consideration to the people and businesses that are already in this area, as well as the shortage of parking spaces and affordable office spaces that are in this town , before you take these parking spots away for bicycle lanes. Thank you for your consideration . Sincerely, RECEIVE Penny . Zengl a CMT MAY 1991 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA MEMORANDUM "" "' �''� city of San WIS OBISpo 990 Palm Street/Box 8100•San Luis Obispo,CA 93403.8100 TO CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA DATES. =ITEM # / FROM KIM CONDON, CITY CLERK'S OFFICE SUBJECT BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS MAY 7 , 1991 _ DATE 5/7/91 The attached letters from Luther and Betsy Bertrando were delivered to the City Clerk' s . Office at 8: 30 this morning. With them came a petition entitled "Residents Against the Elimination of Parking on Foothill Boulevard" signed by 125 people . (sample page attached) . The full petition is available in the City Clerk' s Office for COPIES ❑'Derides Action FYI L7 Cmx l Ci -CDD DIR PAM13 FIN.DRis AG40 ❑3 AM CHIEF C?'ATTORN Y LTJ FW DIF CLERK/ORIG. ❑ POUCECFL ❑ MGMT.TE NI ❑ RBC DIR. ❑� CRFADFiLE �UII�jD MEETING AGENDA RECEIVED DATE _,ITEM # MAY 71991 May 3 , 1991 . CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,`' o the City Council of San Luis Obispo: Please accept the following comments concerning the elimination of parking on Foothill Boulevard and enter them into the official record of said hearing. On Foothill Boulevard from the City limits to Tassajara Street, a Class II-B bike lane is proposed. This connects a Class II-C bike lane outside the City limits to a Class II-A bike lane east of Tassajara Street . Class II-A bike lanes allow a parking lane for cars . Foothill Boulevard is essentially the same width east of Tassajara Street as it is west of Tassajara Street. The selection of a Class II-B bike lane west of Tassajara Street is based on a parking survey vacancy rate done in April , 1983 . This survey is currently 8 years old. The criteria for selecting class II-B lanes was based on "where the vacancy rate was near or exceeded 70% and off-street parking was available" . See page B-5, Bicycle Facilities Plan. A more current survey, "Bikeway Improvement Projects" (available from the City) , indicates a vacancy rate of 65%. This fact alone would then call for the bike lane west of Tassajara Street to be reclassified class II-A. On a more general discussion, one must question relying entirely upon the arbitrary quantification of vacancy parking rate as the sole judgement for bike lane designation. Also to be taken into consideration is the adjacent land uses . The area in question is Single-Family Residential - page a-4, Bicycle Facilities Plan. The neighborhood is a mix of new and older single-family homes . Offstreet parking is limited in this type of neighborhood, and the provision of suitable offstreet parking for these types of homes would most certainly cause extreme financial burdens to families in this area. In many cases offstreet parking could not be provided. Parking for visitors to residents of Foothill Boulevard would be more than inconvenient . The south side of Foothill Boulevard is without a cross street from La Entrada to Tassajara Street giving those residents in the center of the block no optional parking for visitors . Properties without suitable offstreet parking, and parking prohibited on the street , would without question lose considerable value. Although the City of San Luis Obispo adopted a new General Plan Circulation Element in 1982 that would encourage alternative forms of transportation such as bicycles, we should not isolate the various plans and cause distortions in our approaches to solutions . In reading the Bicycle Facilities Plan, it became apparent that the planning for bicycle lanes became a project isolated from the many other factors that influence our quality of life. While it may be commendable to provide impetus to alternative transportation, we must also balance that encouragement with the reality of current use. It is important to have ongoing surveys to evaluate the cost effectiveness of our projects . I have not been able to secure a study of the traffic patterns of bicycle use in the Foothill area. Since the study was done in 1982 , free bus transportation has been provided, primarily to the students of Cal Poly. This certainly must have had some affect on decreasing the number of bicycle riders who would be using Foothill Boulevard on a day to day basis for transportation to Cal Poly. To plan adequately, this information is needed. My observations indicate that most daily bicycle traffic on Foothill. Boulevard occurs between Cal Poly and Tassajara Street, and drops dramatically at that point . Unfortunately, the cost of poor planning will be the burden of the property owners on Foothill Boulevard. In looking at this plan, I feel it is attempting to promote recreational bicycling. While there is some benefit to doing so, we should not place recreational use above the day to day needs of the residents of an area. Indeed in realizing that recreational use is the primary driving force today, we should also see that we are not even complying with the stated goals of the Bicycle Facilities Plan. This is not promoting alternative means of transportation, it is simply providing a path for recreational bicycling. What are some of the functions that will be denied the residents of the Foothill area? As I write this, there is a garage sale in progress across the street . This will surely be the last garage sale on Foothill . No longer will the residents feel free to invite a number of friends over for a party or get-together. An annual tennis tournament that centers on Foothill Boulevard will more than likely end after more than ten years of successful operation. These are just some of the things that come to mind, but they may be summed up by stating that what will be changed on Foothill Boulevard is exactly what the area is zoned to provide, single family .residents . What is required on Foothill Boulevard is a solution to the automobile traffic flow. A design has been implemented that causes excessive speed and noise to the residents . Foothill Boulevard was recently designed to handle the heavy traffic that occurs in the morning hours from the Los Osos area to Cal Poly and the City center and in the late afternoon hours in the reverse direction. Unfortunately the solution to channel one lane of traffic outside the City limits to two lanes of traffic in the city had the affect of creating a raceway through the city where drivers frustrated by a long stretch of single lane traffic can now overtake the slower drivers ahead. This all must be done within the first two blocks of the city. To continue the traffic pattern outside the City limits to within the City limits would not cause each driver loss of more than a minute, since the City portion of the road is less than half a mile in length. What - the City should be doing is focusing on solving this problem. In reviewing the Bicycle Facilities Plan, I was struck by the paucity of a full compliment of options . I am aware that the plan may well be the end result of some very thorough planning, but it would seem to me it would be a much better document if a discussion of alternatives and their reasons for rejection would be part of the record. This would be of benefit to the planners, to the residents of the City, and to the elected officials who are going to have to make a hard choice. One obvious option that I would like to see discussed, is to remove bicycle traffic from streets with heavier traffic patterns . If we are trying to promote alternative means of transportation, would it not be better to shuttle the bicycle traffic to side streets where traffic is very light? Would this not provide a better safety margin for bicyclers , especially those very young? Do we really want to create a freeway for bicycles? Let me reflect for a moment on another project that took place on Foothill Boulevard some 10 to 12 years ago. The City decided to plant trees to line the Boulevard. To do this holes were cut in the concrete pedestrian way and trees were planted and maintained in these areas . The affect on the pedestrian way was to eliminate the possibility of walking arm to arm with a companion. Groups of two or more were forced to walk single file because the area taken by the holes to plant the trees took half the width of the sidewalk. Lately, the City recognizing this fact , some attempts have been made at particularly dangerous places to widen the sidewalk by encroaching into the area of the property owner. The project must have been costly; the affect trivial . If this project were to be reviewed, on would see that perhaps 80% or more of the trees could have been planted three feet from their current position in the middle of the sidewalk, if the City had just asked permission of the property owners . For much less cost , the City would have achieved the same end result , and walkers would have had the benefits of a cohesive walk-way. I am concerned that we may be suggesting the same kind of solution with regards to the Bicycle Paths . In our own small and personal survey, we have found that quite a few of the residents were not aware of this hearing. The reasons could range from overlooking the not ification:,that,.came by mail to an oversight on the part of the City t,o' notify owners of Foothill Boulevard properties who live elsewhere. Certainly a project of this magnitude with impact to so many deserves more publicity and discussion, and the City should be the leader in providing this . I hope that my thoughts will affect your decision in a way to reconsider implementing the Bicycle Facilities Plan as it stands at this time. I remain sincerely yours , Luther Bertrando Resident and Owner 267 Foothill Boulevard. MEETING AGENDA DATE , 2:fl ITEM # ` BETSY BERTRANDO 267 Foothill Boulevard RECEIVED � �`r CG ® San Luis Obispo, California 93405 G V (805) 543-7831 MAY 71991 May 6 , 1991 CRY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA To the Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council : I first received notice regarding the proposed bike lanes and the permanent exclusion of resident parking on April 25 , 1991 . I then gathered all the background information available from the City to review the proposed project . This response is for the area on Foothill Blvd. that is R1 from Tassajara west to the city limits . I have resided there for 23 years and am most familiar with the area. The original report completed in 1985 was based on parking surveys completed in 1983 . An update was done informally about 15 to 16 months ago according to Dave Pierce, but there is no information available as to when during the day or weekend this "study" was made. The update states however, that the R1 portion of Foothill is a part of a segment classified as a Thoroughfare and as such parking should be prohibited and access limited. It became a "Thoroughfare" 23 years ago when traffic managers were "king" and ruled our lives . This pattern came to an abrupt halt when the good citizens of SLO fought the proposed Monterey Street "Thoroughfare" and created instead Mission Plaza. After traffic patterns were dethroned, "Alternative" transportation concepts became popular as an outgrowth of the 70 ' s and the gas shortage. The "Bicycle Facilities Plan" was one of the results of this next phase of our civic development . The purpose was to encourage people to depend less on automobiles and use bicycles as an alternative form of transportation. Again the powers that be knew better than the residents affected, who never seem to be asked. Well its the 90 's now, and many of us are older and wiser. We know about useage patterns for pedestrians , joggers , bikes and automobiles . It 's also a kinder and more gentler time. It is time for residents to regain their neighborhoods instead of sacrificing them for commuters from Los Osos and recreational bicyclists. I would be happy to dedicate one current tr-affic lane for bicycles , one for autos , and one for parking, in a residential neighborhood. Otherwise the cost to me for the Bike Lane proposal will be as follows . Removal of a retaining wall , mature trees , and a garden between my house and the street , loss in property values as my front yard becomes paved to allow parking for my friends and family . At least I know where to send the bill . Don' t mention parking on the side streets . Residents there won' t like it either. We are in the middle of a block of over 20 parcels and I 'm not telling family and friends the city says they aren't welcome. We are not talking about a commercial zone or an apartment complex, but an R1 neighborhood that has seen enough foolishness. Incidently, I am aware of the ordinance that disallows parking on the property within 20 feet of the street on the lawn and I understand this includes paved areas also (driveways excluded) . Well that ' s all we will have on Foothill and I 'm sure the ordinance will not be inforced as it hasn' t been thus far . As bike lanes are solely to encourage city resident participation according to the report , in this case we are talking about an area two blocks from the edge of town ending at a two lane county road. Looking at a map, the residents on the north side of Foothill access Highland to go to Poly . People residing on the south side take Ramona and enter Foothill at Tassajara for Poly or continue to Meineke and enter on Chorro. Bike traffic dropped a great deal since the initial report due to City/Poly subsidized bus ridership for students . This was an example of a smart idea with good results . However, Foothill bike traffic is primarily recreational at this time with a loop that continues to the coast and back on Highway 1 or into town again on Los Osos Road. Bike recreation is terrific but not at such an expense to city residents . This is not the solution for the accomodation of a current popular pastime. Please allow this community of older homes many of which were designed without rear yard access to continue to exist . Sincerely Bets Bertrando RPRIDENTA AG iNST THP £r.=NTNATTON OF PA IIEL C3 Oh FOOTH LL HO tT EyAgn We, the undersigned, hereby state under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that we are over the age of eighteen, owners and/or residents of property on Foothill Boulevard or within one-half block of Foothill Boulevard and, that we, by affixing our signature hereto state our position that we vehemently oppose even the suggestion of removing parking along Foothill Boulevard. " Name and Add��'ss Check if you "eSs �p received prior notice Name - P t of the public hearing set for on May 7, 1991 a tb [ yes ,e.e t � Signer?rl �if�t�� Address [ no ""k Name and Adder ss tez ON C- LA. Name SignSt 72rU [ ] Yes Address no N"k Name end Addres .' Name yes es [ Akj ddress no ...r Name and Addr es "ss _ AN Om t 7 1rS0 t'f Signature [ 7 Yes mw t t ZZU GtmiuklJ.. .P,�,ID f Address I VJ no _mow Name and Address p^s �C�I I C• O�-pc(J NameAt 0. i t ft" -*t S gna Address [ no 5'n,..l (,.tie 08iS•(�o ('fit- � 3`F0.� RECEIVED MAY 7 1991 Cm CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO.G cOPIESTO: ❑'�enot. Action FY! g �� ,FETING AGENDA KAW � DATE�LITE i FW IDR CLERIC/ORIG. ❑ POLICE cH ��MG DFHX 11RECDIR REVISED ,�DF7[.E ❑,tmt_D� RESOLUTION N0. (1991 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF A BIKE PATH ON CALIFORNIA BLVD. AND BIKE LANES ON CALIFORNIA BLVD. , GRAND AVE. AND FOOTHILL BLVD. AND GRANTING THE PROJECT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION SUBJECT TO MITIGATION MEASURES A & B WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo adopted a Bicycle Facilities Plan in 1985, and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a work program objective to "create a continuous network of bikeways throughout the City that encourages bicycle use as an alternative to the Automobile, and WHEREAS, Phase I of the objective is to implement projects outlined in the Bicycle Facilities Plan, and WHEREAS, a City appointed committee recommends that implementation begin on commuter routes leading to Cal Poly, specifically California Blvd. , Grand Ave. and Foothill Blvd. , and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that adverse environmental impacts can be mitigated, and WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing in order to receive imput and to consider the concerns of all interested parties; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the San Luis Obispo City Council as follows: . 1. Approves the installation of a bike path on California Blvd. and Class II-B bike lanes on California Blvd. , Grand Avenue and Foothill Blvd. ; tETING AGENDA May 3 1991 DATE-5-72Z ITEM# FDmwtm n f/�'FYt®The City Council ❑ FIN.DIXCity of San Luis Obispo ❑ �25 Prado Road DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ❑ �p, D FII.E ❑ yTtLDUL Subject: Bikeway Improvements : _ D� California Blvd. East side -Hathway to Foothill Dear Council Members: Full time bikeways the full length of California Blvd. would be unsafe to bicycle riders for the following reasons: 1 . Automobiles entering and exiting driveways on the East side, used by many occupants , such as Fraternities, would have to cross over the bicycle lane in order to use their off street parking spaces , as well as gain access to their property. 2. Vehicles using parking spaces at' Campus Bottle Shoppe, East side, 290 California Blvd. wouldhave to back up into the bicycle lane in order to gain access to the highway, causing another safety hazzard. 3• The street is too narrow for bothc automobiles and bicycle lanes , especially during the peak traffic hours. 4. The palm trees cause a visability hazzard upon exiting the East side driveways from residences , as the front of my car has to extend 3 feet into the street before I have clear visability to oncomingtraf.ficr 5. Not all bicycle riders wear safety protection or obey bicycle safety laws. In addition to the above unsafe reasons to bicycle riders , highly needed parking spaces used mainly by Cal Poly students would have to be eliminated. I would like to state that I am opposed to any bikeways on. the street of California Blvd, from Hathway to Foothill , for the above reasons. Sincerely, P:67ty W rlison 286 California Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 RECEIVED MAY 7 1991 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 11ifornia-West Inc. 1380 Broad Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Area 805 543-9119 MEETING AGENDA COPIESTo: DATE ITEM # / 13*Denotes Action P FYI 21 COMICH E CDDDIR 1g,CA0 ❑ FIN.DIR. LQ ACAO �❑ CHIEF May 5, 1991 TTOR'' DR CI sRI rO.G. ❑ roLiCE aL ❑ MGMT.TEAM ❑ REG DIR. C�D FIIE ❑ City of San Luis Obispo Public Hearing San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: BIKEWAY PROJECT Dear Council Members, As a management company for many properties in the areas that your proposed project will affect, California-West, Inc. feels the need to express it ' s concerns regarding removal of parking spaces along the proposed routes. The illimination of parking spaces in the areas proposed will further strain an already inadequate parking situation. Residents in many of these areas are having an increasingly difficult time finding spaces to park. Residents in the areas of Foothill, California-Blvd. , and Hathway are already severely restricted in available parking. The housing complexes in the area usually provide tenant parking, but in most cases can only provide one or two spaces per apartment . Many residents depend on street parking. The shortage of public parking in these areas usually manifests itself in the public illegally parking on private property. California-West understands that a bikeway would make cycling a much safer prospect, however, we don ' t agree that the hardship this particular proposal would create on those who live, work, and attend school in these areas is warranted. Thank You, Robert B. Townsend, Property Manager RECEIVED MAY U 7 1991 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,0 MEETING AGENDA DATE Ste_ITEM_ May 2, 1991 220-C California Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-1405 COPHSTO: ( 805)544-4535 Ahn�.Fn 9111 .� cDDDa fcAO ❑ FAV.DB City of San Luis Obispo [�4 CAo D���RECHIEF 25 Prado Road TTCW-JEY WFWDUL San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 CLERK/ORIG. ❑ 17OUCEcx D MCMT.TEAM D REC DEX ❑ C READ FILEQ't'"f3,L DRATTN: City Council Members RE: Proposed Bikeway Improvements - California Blvd.-East side-Hathway to Foothill Dear Council Members: I am a resident .of the above-listed section of California Boulevard where the bikeway improvements/parking space eliminations are being proposed. I cannot attend the May 7th meeting because I have a night class at that time; however, I felt compelled to write in lieu of my presence. Firstly, I ' ll give some brief background information. I am 34 years old and a reentry student a Cal Poly. I have lived at my place of residence for three years now. My home is one of six houses that sit amid apartment complexes and fraternities. I ride my bike daily to school. As a resident, a student and a bike rider, I am asking that you DO NOT go through with the elimination of parking spaces on California Boulevard. Speaking as a resident, it would be disastrous to all of the residents of this section: we would have no where to have visitors park (and, in some cases, roommates) . Parking in the various living complexes are limited, and the street parking is precious. Speaking as a student, I feel a need to speak-up for for the student parkers. The eliminations would dislocate 23 of these daily parkers. Knowing what it is like to be a struggling student, I feel it would be a hardship for those drivers (who are most likely trying to save on the high campus parking fees) . As a bike rider, I want to say that I understand why the improvements are being proposed--it can be a bit scary riding along traffic on that road. However, it is no more treacherous than other city roads during peak hours. I ride portions of it daily and have not had any problems. I .am careful to watch for people leaving the driveways (anp Vr E I Y E D versa, I watch for bike riders when I leave my drivew my vehicle) . MAY 7 1991 COY CLERK MAN LUIS QBISPO,eA I hope you can come up with an alternative solution to whatever problems have been voiced. Please seriously consider the hardship the parking space eliminations would place on many other people, especially the residents. If anything, would you please consider postponing making a decision on the proposal for, say, another month, so we can at least make an attempt to gather petitions on the issue. Thank you for your time and anticipated consideration. Sincerely, KALLI G. BOLANIS -2- (PersBus-6-6. 1) O Dw-otm Acdon D FYI MEETING M'*'CA 'd` �a MR. C�cAo ❑ M.MR. C��( o ❑ ME CHEF D DATE - REM 21WDX Dear City Counsel Memeber: ,K/ORIG. ❑ POU ❑ MGMT.TEA.11 ❑ RECDIR ❑ CRFADF1LE ❑ UTILDIJL In my absence of the May 7, 1991 City Counsel meeting, B� this letter to voice my opinion about the proposed bike lane changes . These proposed bike lane changes would prohibit me from parking on Grand Ave. outside my place of residence. I would be forced have to my friends and relatives who come to visit me, to park on a side street in front of someone else 's home. I feel that these proposed bike lane changes are not only unfair to me but also to surrounding neighbors. The surrounding neighborhood streets will now resemble a used car lot due to the extra parked cars on the side street. I believe that I have the right to park in front of my place of residence just like the other 34 , 000 residence of this city. Presently the bike lane on Grand Ave. is 3. 5 ft. wide, which I ride in to and from Cal Poly. This bike lane seems to be adequate size and I know of no accidents that have occurred due to it ' s narrowness . If these proposed bike lane changes go into effect, the width of the bike lane would increase from 3. 5 ft. to 11 . 5 ft. This 11 .5 ft. bike lane would run the entire length of Grand Ave. until it reaches Mill St . , upon reaching Mill St. the 11 . 5 ft. bike lane disappears . The bike lane disappears because Mill St. is a Class III Bike lane. (Class III is the equivalent of no bike lane) Mill St. will also now have some extra traffic from people having to search for parking. This appears to be poor planning to go from a 11 . 5 ft. bike lane to 0. I would also like to suggest that all Class III bike lanes be removed from the Bikeway Lane/Route System Map since they really s aren't bike lanes just signage only. In closing I would just like to say that the city staff report makes no claims to increasing bike use with the proposed bike lane changes . I have seen no evidence that wider bike lanes would increase bike use in the city staff report. I would like to see some kind of cold hard facts about increased bike use with these proposed changes before I give up my parking space. Until then, I am against the proposed changes. Very Respectfully, 506�1 � RECEIVED aAAq1E1- 7>0/vAN06 MAY 71991 -717 GRANA ANE 4 400fin CRY CLERK cera I 1 110^010 n n. N -T AGENDA D"it -7- .ffEM #�_ May 3, 1991 To: The City of San Luis Obispo City Council From: Alison Engen and Kit Kline Managers of San Luis Village Apartments, 204 California Boulevard and 1205 Foothill Boulevard. Agents for Lawrence Martinelli. RE: Bikeway Improvements, Agenda Item May 7, 1991 To Whom it May Concern: This letter is in regard to the notice sent out by the City of San Luis Obispo (undated) regarding the bikeway improvements proposed for California and Foothill Boulevards. The removal of parking, specifically The East side of California from Hathway to Foothill (23 spaces) and removal of parking on Foothill from California to Crandall (22 spaces) will cause an undue amount of parking impact in our area. We find that even with the existing parking located in this area there is still a problem for persons (residents and non- residents) to find available parking. This apartment complex has a private parking lot with a maximum of 32 legal parking slots. At this moment we are under full capacity for occupancy. When we do have full occupancy there are usually enough parking slots for residents only. With the elimination of the proposed public parking spaces on California and Foothill Boulevards we will receive a greater amount of students and other persons in search of a parking space for visiting or school purposes. As it stands now we tow persons violating the posted signs designating our lot as private parking. With the loss of an additional 55 spaces in our immediate area we are quite sure that our job duties will be filled by towing non-resident parking violators. We feel that it is the responsibility of the city to provide parking for such a highly populated area of the community. Please reconsider the elimination of these spaces. Perhaps Union Pacific may give the city a lean on their property and a two- way bike path may be established on the West side of California Boulevard. Thank-you for your consideration, RECEIVED Alison J. Engen Kit C. Kline MAY 7 1991 �/ `/� SANµJIB OBISRD,GA MEMNSG �/ AGENT 5/7 DATE _ITEM# DEAR SIRS, Taking away the parking on Foothill Blvd. means more chance of a bicycle being hit and the speed limit being increased by drivers thinking that it would be an open raceway.. As a resident on Foothill Blvd. , I see many accidents, many incidents of Police pulling speeders over, and pedestrians trying to cross Foothill Blvd. on the time limit given to them to cross . As a bicyclist, it seems the bicycle lines are drawn appropriately. they- just-�need to brighten them up, possibly with yellow paint. In closing Foothill Blvd . is dangerous enough without .the extra burden of no parking available. Thank You, Carl Bruce Wright RECEIVED 381 Foothill Blvd. S.L.O. California MAY 7 1991 CITY GULERK SAN LUIS ONPO,CA COPIESTO: FCA AdiosCDDDIIL C3FIN.DIR.IFL §�CLEWORIG'Trapj&-r ZFW. ❑ eOUCECK ❑ MCMT.TEAM ❑ PW-DIA �' r rCREADpU.E Rr E•ILAGENDA ITEM# B11A �� c DAT ' --f/.LEE&BI1 _EE 1110 Califomia Blvd. • San Luis Obispo • Califomia 93401 • 805/543.4366 May 7, 1991 San Luis Obispo City Council City Hall San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Bikeway Improvements California Blvd Marsh to Higuera Streets To Whom It May Concern, I have worked at Blakeslee & Blakeslee for over seven years. Time was I could pull up and park with no problems at any part of the day. As the area has grown, many of the small residences have turned into professional offices. The parking has gotten increasingly worse to where I need to get to work early or walk two or three blocks in finding a parking space. There is not enough parking in the area right now to accommodate its needs. Additionally, there are plans to build more offices in the next twelve months. How can you possibly remove twelve valuable spaces given these circumstances. Pretty soon I will have to park in one of the structures downtown and walk from there. I strongly urge you to reconsider this plan of eliminating the above mentioned parking spaces. or, please give me a year round pass to the parking structures and a tram to my office. Resp ctfu ly, 561 W. ° nn Vice President Certified Financial Planner COPMsTo• 1PV������ 13-Dmotm F,Wa MAY p� CDD DU L TY. BSp CrFW�D:7 1OIPO�rO 7C LERK/ORI A D SAN LU � 13 MCMT.T ❑ OX RFADFCDRE LDM Member NASD PASO ROBLES SAN LUIS OBISPO SANTA MARIA Member SIPC MEETj1VG AGENDA DATE Z-f DRAFT QUESTIONS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY STAFF RE PROPOSAL TO REMOVE 190 PARKING SPACES FROMFOOTHILLBLVD. What studies have been done with respect to removing parking on Foothill? What studies have been undertaken to determine to what extent large truck traffic would be increased? How many additional automobiles would use Foothill (as a thoroughfare) if parking were omitted along Foothill? Have there been any studies to determine the average increase in speed per vehicle on Foothill if parking were removed? Have there been any studies on how much- noise would increase on Foothill if parking were removed? Have there been any studies on how much the cars parked on the street buffer noise from the houses along Foothill? Has their been a study with respect to where the people who now park on Foothill would park? Has there been a study with respect to the present parking usage? What did the study indicate that the parking availability is on Sunday mornings and on different evenings? What did the study indicate re the parking that would be available in the evenings? Have there been any studies- undertaken with respect to, given one car per renter, how many parking spaces are needed on Foothill at the present time, taking into account the off street parking provided? Example: One church was allowed to expand and another to be added that the city relied upon street parking. COPIES TD: 1 Ld Caa+dl 2'CDD D1R RECEIVED 2'CA0 ❑ RN.MX I ACAO � MAY 7 1991 I AnMVEY FW DUL �!rCLERK/ORic. ❑ MEla(3i. CI COUNCIL ❑ MCMT TEAM ❑ REC DWL SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA ❑ CRFADFILE Q Jn1LDIII xr How does that comport with the present requests to extinguish all parking on Foothill? In allowing multiple family dwellings along Foothill what number of parking of off-site (on street) parking spaces were allowed each property owners meet their parking requirements. Has there been .a study to determine the noise increase by way of cars speeding up, including out of town, through this area. Any on how much cars would speed up going into town. What number of non-resident property owners were notified that it was proposed that parking be taken off the street. Has there been any study as to the effect on property values of removing on-street parking? Is there any intention by the city to compensate owners for any decrease in value. Has the City had any "pressure" from any group or entity to increase the availability of Foothill to Los Osos residents; if so, what is the nature of same. RE BIKES With respect to bicycle usage on Foothill, has the city done any study on the present resident use of Foothill as a bikepath. Has the City done any study on the non-resident use of Foothill as a bike path. What, if any, change there would be in the resident use of Foothill as a bike path in the event parking were removed? What, if any, change would there be in the non-resident use of Foothill as a bike path in the event parking were removed? Has the City done any study with respect to designating 2 other arteries as bicycle paths through the Foothill area. Has the City done any studies with respect to whether or not reducing the speed to 25 miles per hour would achieve the purported goal of the city re bicycles. Has it done any study with respect to reducing speed and limiting Foothill to one lane in each direction and how that would achieve the goal of the city with respect to bicycles. Has the City done any study on the increase in speed in the last ten years on Foothill. Has the City done any study on the number of people that the removal of parking would benefit versus the number of people that it would negatively impact. How much time did the City spend in analyzing the proposal (to remove 190 parking places on Foothill) prior to notifying the persons who were notified. 3