HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/21/1997, 5 - CHORRO STREET SIDEWALK council M d6gDi 10/21/97
j acenaa uepout
CITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Michael D. McCluskey,Director of Public Worksw 'l�'
Prepared By: Barbara Lynch,Civil Engineer?�—
SUBJECT: Chorro Street Sidewalk
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Defer consideration for the installation of sidewalks on the east side Chorro Street from West Street
to Rougeot Street until the.preparation of the 1999-01 Financial Plan.
DISCUSSION
Background
During the 1996 budget adjustment review,there was a discussion of areas needing sidewalk. Staff
was asked to look at and report back to Council on the potential to install sidewalks on the east side
of Chorro between West and Rougeot. This section of roadway was reviewed for sidewalk
installation along with two others by the CIP Committee and the CAO and due to budget
constraints at the time none of the three locations(Chorro, Santa Barbara, Mill) were recommended
by the CAO for inclusion in the budget. During the 1997 budget hearings, Councilman Romero
again brought up the need for sidewalks along Chorro Street.
In recent times the City Council has put new emphasis on sidewalk installation by: a) increasing
the budget for sidewalk repairs by staff; b) creating a budget for contract sidewalk repair, c) most
recently creating a budget for 1911 Act new sidewalk installations; d) directing that staff prepare
this staff report for Council consideration to install new sidewalks on Chorro Street between West
and Rogueot streets; and e) as mentioned above previous Council requests for cost estimates to
construct new sidewalks on Santa Barbara Street and Mill Street.
Currently,the area on Chorro from West to Rougeot has sidewalk on the west side but not the east.
Chorro street, from about 35 meters south of Murray, was originally built with a center median like
that on Murray street between Broad and Santa Rosa. Consequently, the right of way is
immediately behind the curb. This means that new sidewalk must either be built within the existing
parking lane or new right of way must be purchased, with the exception of a small portion north of
West. In 1969, the City built a sidewalk on the westerly side out in the street, narrowing the travel
way to about 13.4 meters (Exhibit A), which is still adequate for two lanes of travel and parking
lanes.
Application of City Ordinances and the 1911 Act
The City has a number of ways to achieve installation of new sidewalks. New sidewalks are
routinely required with new construction and can be required of existing development when major
additions or redevelopment occurs. New sidewalks can also be constructed in areas of existing
development (such as Chorro) when either the City or the property owners decide that the need is
sufficient. Property owners may install sidewalk on their own or coordinate their efforts with their
neighbors in a larger and therefore more cost effective project. The City may direct that new
sidewalk be installed when it finds a public necessity and can fund that construction either directly
from the General Fund or via property owner assessment.
� I
Council Agenda Report-Chorro Street Sidewalk
Page 2
The City's most recent ordinance adopting general criteria and priorities for the sidewalk program,
Resolution 6031 (1986 Series), states that City initiated sidewalks should be installed only where
there is a pedestrian need. Priority is to be given to areas with safety hazards or heavy pedestrian
use, especially by children. This block of Chorro is not in a school zone and has sidewalk available
for use on the westerly side. While this may not be the most convenient configuration, it does
provide for pedestrians until such time as the City or the neighborhood wishes to install sidewalks
on the east side. Thus,this section of Chorro does not have a priority over other areas of town.
When the City determines that sidewalk is needed and that it should be paid for by the adjacent
property owners, two forms of property assessment are available to finance the installation: a)
Municipal Code (M.C.) Section 12.12 and b)the State Streets and Highways Code 1911 Act. The
City's Municipal Code Section is written in near identical wording to the 1911 Act with only the
percentage of frontage requirements of the 1911 Act deleted The City regulations do not require a
minimum frontage percentage before making of findings and in this respect the City regulations are
more stringent and allow the City greater ability to achieve new sidewalk installation.
The 1911 Act assessment procedures are available to be used by the City to force the installation of
sidewalks when more than 50% of the side of the street in question already has sidewalks. This
condition does not apply to either of three segments of Chorro under consideration. The block
between West and Murray has sidewalk in front of one house on the east side, the block from
Murray to Meinecke has one piece of sidewalk in front of one house, and the block from Meinecke
to Rougeot has sidewalk along just under 50% of the east frontage. The residents of the block(s)
could submit a petition to the City signed by more than 50% of the properties wishing to have
sidewalks installed and willing to be assessed to complete that work. The City could then pursue
the construction through the 1911 Act. Without a such a petition, the City would have to fund the
installation of new sidewalks in this area using M.C. 12.12 (property owners pay via assessment) or
the General Fund(City pays) via a new appropriation, since this is not an approved CIP project and
comes after the budget was adopted.
Design Considerations
Streets are designed to accommodate the traveling public (cars, buses, and bikes) and the pedestrian
public. Chorro Street in this area is 13.4 meters wide. Placing a 1.5 meter sidewalk on the east side
will narrow the street to 11.9 meters. This is close to a typical street width for arterials such as
Chorro with parking on both sides. Streets such as Buchon and Osos have.a similar width but carry
substantially less traffic. The addition of new sidewalk will enhance pedestrian travel but if parked
cars are to remain on both sides of the street, the reduction in width will directly impact cyclists. A
traveling vehicle takes up about 3 meters, a parked car about 2.3 meters, leaving only 0.6 meter for
a cyclist or half the size of the narrowest bike lane the City stripes, and half the area that they
currently have. This is of particular significance because of the steep incline in the block of Chorro
between Murray and Rougeot. It is difficult to see oncoming traffic for a car to safely pass a cyclist
by crossing the centerline.
Chorro is a designated bicycle route. Transportation staff has expressed concerns about decreasing
the pavement width, sandwiching bicycles between parked cars and traffic should the City decide to
construct a sidewalk within the right of way (Exhibit B). The existing pavement width gives some
maneuvering room for cyclists should a door from a parked car open in front of them. A narrower
street would limit that. The recommended alternative would be to remove parking to install the
sidewalk,removing the conflict between parked cars and cyclists(Exhibit B). The other way would
be to acquire right of way and construct the sidewalk behind the curb(Exhibit Q.
A significant design issue will be the integrating of the new sidewalks with existing driveways to
Council Agenda Report-Chorro Street Sidewalk
Page 3
comply with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The new driveways will have
to be designed individually to comply with ADA cross-slope(max. slope = 2%) limitations on
sidewalks(min width= 1.5 meters)while keeping the driveways from having too abrupt a change in
grade which would cause a vehicle to bottom out. There is the potential that the street will have to
be partially reconstructed to meet the requirements.
Staff Recommendation
This is not a currently adopted CIP project and as such has no priority rating from the Council for
implementation. It is linked somewhat to a council goal to implement new sidewalk via the use of
the 1911 Act. Staff is currently completing the projects carried over from last year's budget and
beginning work on new projects funded in the 1997-99 Financial Plan. It does not appear staff will
have time to complete this project during the next two years if all other projects are to stay on
schedule. If prioritized by the Council to be completed this year, the projects delayed would be a
watermam construction project, the construction of the Bullock Lane realignment, the Parking lots
at City Hall and Nipomo @ Palm, the Laguna Lake Dredging project and other miscellaneous
utility projects.
By defering consideration until the next budget cycle, Council will see the results of the current
1911 Act program. The funding picture of all projects compared would be available and continued
or new Council goals could be compared to the project This takes into account the potential of
other high priority projects areas and programs. It allows the project to be funded through the
normal budget process and be accounted for in planning for the CIP. The project could be
accomplished without impacting currently budgeted projects.
FISCAL EMPACT
The estimated cost to construct the improvements within the existing right of way is $75,000,
assuming no significant street reconstruction will be needed. The source of funds would be the
unappropriated balance of the General Fund or Council direction to begin implementing M.C.
12.12 for property owner assessment. The latter would be conformance with the previous Council
goal for sidewalk installation funding wherein the Council established the revolving $75,000
account for three years to fully fund perpetuating property owner assessment program via the 1911
Act. Therefore following that policy, staff is recommending that funding be provided by the
property owner via Municipal Code Section 12.12.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Install sidewalks on the east side of the street.
I.A.Install sidewalks within the existing right of way eliminating parking on one side.
■ This alternative will accomplish the project for the lowest construction cost.
■ Eliminating parking on one side would provide for bicycles and better traffic flow
than with parking. However, parking removal is rarely popular with residents,
especially in older areas where on site parking is usually minimal.
■ Approve the project as a part of the 97-98 mid-year budget adjustment process
I.B.Install sidewalks within the existing right of way,narrowing the travel lanes.
■ This alternative will also accomplish the project for the lowest construction cost.
Council Agenda Report-Chorro Street Sidewalk
Page 4
■ Since parking remains, a narrower travel lane will exist, increasing conflicts between
vehicles and bicycles.
■ Approve the project as a part of the 97-98 mid-year budget adjustment process
I.C.Purchase additional property along the street frontages for widening and construct
sidewalk behind the existing curbs.
■ This alternative will accomplish the project with the least impact to vehicle travel but
at a higher cost.
■ Residences in this area have minimal setbacks from the street, currently 6 to 7.5
meters. The addition of a sidewalk would narrow it to 4.5 to 6 meters.
■ At least one residence would require a retaining wall on their property because they
are above the street. Potentially one or two properties would have difficult driveway
construction because of the grade change.
■ Approve the project as a part of the 97-98 mid-year budget adjustment process
Attachments
Vicinity Map
Exhibit A-Existing Condition
Exhibit B- Sidewalk Construction in Right of Way
Exhibit C- Sidewalk Construction-Acquire Right of Way
fAg=psVworks\engrWVeet zWewslk ImVmvamenmlcer- hcm sidewalk.d=
i�ro�ect
Location
N
0 200 400 600 800 1000
2 METERS
\V
I
t
f CITY LIMITS _._,_._._,_,_,_ ._
N I
T
ti K
MysN N 101
x M :011UM M C
r g r
ORMA T
'A2i�E wr H
W T T
T/fr VVV \7
0 1
z �
OLRIMYT 5
U t -
9
s u n i 9Ci Q� I
.a� o
��lulllll!IIIIIII �IIIIIIIIIIIII
City Of G�orro Street
san till S OB1Sp0
Public Works Department Sidewalk Improvement Area
955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93402 ed, ,k ovemene:a .o (mo✓
N N N N N N
= () a) (1) (1) (1)
o
N E E E E E
NCO � aOM
MON C3) N N epi N O 4
O O O O LO
4 Q
M M N o
M N r Q
O
(n `o
M
U
N C cc `e
J Ccm cc Y
v � � E—j3:
> a) aD
b
co co .cv
am
cnf— cn
E
v
N �
2
O
® 'a �JNIdIN1S Q
W
Z r 3NIlN31N33 U
p N
O
~ x
Z z W
F
W
MON(3)
N N N N N N
C 4: x: .0.. (1W
O mma� ma�
N E E E E E
J J C N (O '-ctCOCf)
< y < NM N O
¢ O O O c
.r .. ..
Lo H W LO y y M M N T u
. . Z W O N r
<"y( ; V J IT Co fC
M e
x O > ` d N
Ns- N Y O_
a
3
0
E M
CD cyi
z M
Z E JNId12ilS J m
`JNIdILIlS O? 3NI12131N30 U ~
r U) m
3NI1L131N30 O
z z ~O x
w w z W
1- > E >
N a LO a
z w w
O
V
J � -
a
3
w
N
..t''-
Ilk \k Nk
c
MON AGN Cl)
w E y y W
N E E E E E .
C N (0 q- 00 ce)
QNMCV - O
�� lL 0 O O OLo
y
MON(3) N M Q
O
� � Q
a` = C E
U mJ � Y g
ca
tmJ3
> � a�
cnt-
- Mmin
O
W
2
t7 -
W
z
w
LU
LU
>
Ww
a J U
a
E N
OC6 ONWIN1S _
3NIlN31N30 Z W
V
C
uV
i
J
a .
3
W
D -
N
N '
F
MON(3) G j t•�
✓�
,•.•'FROM COUNCIL MEMBER ROMERO MEETING AGENDA
f DATE �a "9' ITEM # s
Resolution No. 6031 (3986 Series)
g- Staff will bring tb Council attention those properties %Akre
Mrrc than 50% of the frontage of a block has been impraved,
thereby reeting 1911 Act criteria for completion of imnrovcmen`,
within a block.
SIT£ SEL 1011 P"ZIORIT IES POR C OIN'STRUCTION OF NEW SIDL• kLKS
1. In areas with safety hazaxds or heavy pedestrian use, esrecially
c h,ildren.
2. Alcmg arterial and collector streets nezr schools, garbs, church s,
.and mdghborhood ca.., rcial center,.
3. 11101-9 local 'streets 1-c`*- sei-,00ls, parks,' ehurd-,—, and rcighborivv3
car=rercial *centers.
In ot)Lr residential ar�i co.._.crci.l areas as n:c1--sem:*v.
O:L :rotion of Councilman Griffincccc �cd by COUnCiI�: :i SCUIC a.-6 Q�
tInc- fol1c.;in3 roll cxll vote:
/,v-.:�S: Councilrcmbers Griffin, SCLLIC, Uovcy and I•'L3•or Dunin
done
A-SS--h-r; Councilworan P.appa
the foregoing Resolution Was ras.;c{d ,rd adopted this day of
July 1986....... .
�1-7/LYDR ROri t}PtItl
Al is
�UNCIL ' ❑CDD DIR
CI CLrma Pit• VOGES 0 DIR.
E CH
IEr
.
.. .:�'' Y .. . •..� DIR
_ .. ..:;.
10-ATTORNEY ORNE '�
1-:....;•r :fCLERIUDRICs: p POLICE CNF
- - - :::.: } .0 Q T YEAS! I�RE6'DIR. ..
:
t]IITIL DIR
w.
in IR
;M1