Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-12 BAC Agenda PacketAGENDA Regular Meeting of the SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Council Hearing Room, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo January 26, 2012 Thursday 7 p.m. MISSION: The purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) is to provide oversight and policy direction on matters related to bicycle transportation in San Luis Obispo and its relationship to bicycling outside the City. ROLL CALL: Bill Bradlee (Chair), Peter Deragon (Vice Chair), Chris Black, Catherine Machado, Kristina Seley, Howard Weisenthal, and Jim Woolf. PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, the public is invited to address the Committee concerning items not on the agenda but are of interest to the public and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Bicycle Advisory Committee. The Committee may not discuss or take action on issues that are not on the agenda other than to briefly respond to statements made or questions raised, or to ask staff to follow up on such issues. MINUTES: November 17, 2011 (Attachment 1) ACTION ITEMS: 1. Election of Officers 2. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update - Consent Items (Attachment 2) 3. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Outstanding Items (Attachment 3) PRESENTATION ITEMS: 4. 2012 BTP Update - New Presentation Items • Presentation of Railroad Safety Trail and Bob Jones City -to -Sea Trail Projects • Presentation /discussion of deferred Pavement Area 9, New Projects • Review existing plan: Appendices DISCUSSION ITEMS: 5. Committee Items: • 6. Staff Items: • Unmet Transit needs and Bicycle & Pedestrian Inventory Public Hearing • Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) status and feedback • Special meeting The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Please contact the Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. ACTION ITEMS: Item #1: Election of Officers Article 3 (Officers), of the Bicycle Advisory Committee Bylaws updated July 2007, states that, "The officers will consist of a Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson who will be elected at the first regular Committee meeting in each calendar year. The Chairperson will preside over all meetings of the Committee and perform such duties as directed by the Committee. The Vice - Chairperson will serve in the absence or incapacity of the Chairperson." Additional officer duties include; writing quarterly progress reports, representing the Committee at the Mayor's quarterly luncheon, and representing the Committee at relevant Advisory Body and City Council meetings. The term of election is for one year, commencing upon election. No person shall serve in the office of chairperson or vice chairperson for more than two consecutive terms. Chair Bradlee has completed one term and Vice Chair Deragon has completed one term. The Chair should open the floor for nominations for the office of Chairperson, close the floor for nominations, then ask members to vote for one of the nominees. If only one nominee is offered, then a voice vote can be taken. However, if more than one person is nominated, the BAC may want to cast a secret ballot. The same process should be followed for the office of Vice Chairperson. Staff Recommendation: The Committee shall elect a Chair and Vice Chair. Agenda Item #2: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Consent Items This material has been presented and reviewed at previous meetings and BAC input has been incorporated, along with individual BAC member rankings. These are consent items (Attachment 2). No further discussion is planned unless a committee member requests a specific modification at the meeting. BTP projects — Outstanding existing projects from Pavement Areas 6: • Laguna Lake Bikeways A • Laguna Lake Bikeways B • Laguna Lake Bikeways C BTP projects — Existing projects in Pavement Areas 8: • Casa to Toro Bicycle Boulevard, Crossing Hwy. 101 • Highland Class II • Highland / Santa Rosa Bypass • Highland / Chorro Class I Connection BTP text • 'A. Education and Promotion" thru "6. Administration" (pgs 20 -22) Staff Recommendation: Approve consent items. Agenda Item #3: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Outstanding Items This material has been presented and /or reviewed at previous meetings. Items listed below address outstanding questions or changes not yet reviewed by the BAC. (Attachment 3) BTP projects — Outstanding, new, and existing projects in Pavement Areas 6: Vista Lago connection BTP text • New text amending sections previously reviewed (Attachment _ ?): • Class III Bikeway Policy: Policy changes made based on discussion during the November 17, 2011 BAC meeting, related to cost of signage required in the current draft policy. • "Special Design Provisions" • Revision of Policy 1.43 - Expanded Policy on Sharrows: During discussion of proposed projects for Nipomo St. between Higuera and Marsh, and "North Chorro Sharrows" during the November 17, 2011 meeting, direction was given to clarify the need /use of Sharrows. Note: The Sharrow definition has been expanded to support this policy. • Revision of Policy 1.44 (Continued revision resulting from discussions during both the Sept. and Nov. 2011 BAC meetings) • Traffic Calming (Presented under Agenda Item #2, Nov. 2011 BAC meeting) • Expanded Definition on Sharrows: To support new sharrow policy. Staff Recommendation: Approve projects for ranking. Approve draft text. PRESENTATION ITEMS: Agenda Item #4: 2012 Bike Plan Update — New Presentation Items BTP projects — New Presentations Items (Attachment 4) • Railroad Safety Trail (RRST), all project sections: • Currently the RRST project segments are named and listed in a numerical sequence based on project prioritization from the 2002 plan. For this update, staff recommends that project segments be named by logical location names, and listed in a north to south manner. • To better identify the primary route of the Railroad Safety Trail that can be built meeting current Union Pacific Railroad requirements, staff recommends that project segments be designated as "Primary' or "Support ". "Primary' segments are those whose completion will create a single continuous north to south trail, and which are currently seen as the most attainable routes due to known right -of -way (ROW) or funding issues. "Support" segments are those that add further connections to the Primary route and should be pursued if current issues (such as right of way) are resolved. • Over time the RRST project segments have been called various different names in City plans and documents. A matrix will be created and presented in an appendix to clarify past naming in relation to naming proposed in the 2012 plan. • As with the current BTP, only the overall RRST project will be ranked, not the individual project segments. • Bob Jones, City -to -Sea Trail, all project sections: o Currently the trail project segments are named and listed in a numerical sequence based on project prioritization from the 2002 plan. For this update, project segments will be named by logical location names, and listed in a North to South manner. Presentations of proposed projects, Pavement Area 9 • Higuera Street: At the November 17, 2011 meeting, the following two project proposals were listed under "New Presentation Items ". The Committee requested that these be deferred to this meeting, and that data be made available for further discussion. (Attachment 5) • Downtown Higuera Street Bicycle Facility • Downtown Higuera Street vehicle restriction • Sharrow Projects: At the November 17, 2011 meeting the following two project proposals were listed under "New Presentation Items" and both involved the discussion on the use of Sharrows. Based on presentation /discussion in above Agenda Item #3, "Expanded definition and Policy for Sharrows ", provide direction for possible project creation on the following: • Nipomo St. Bicycle Facility between Higuera and Marsh • North Chorro Sharrows Data for streets previously proposed for Sharrow facilities, along with Monterey St. (existing Sharrows) has been compiled for review (Attachment 6). BTP text • Appendices: Appendices A— K of the 2007 BTP directly relate to requirements of CA Streets and Highways Code section 891.2, which make the plan eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) grant funding. For the 2012 BTP update, the information will be organized by subject throughout the plan. The updating process for these appendices has been ongoing by both staff and through input from the BAC, as part of policy text and the BTP project review process. For this meeting, please review the maps associated with appendices "D: Existing and Proposed End -of -trip Bicycle Facilities', and "F: Existing and Proposed Changing and Storage Facilities', and provide staff with input on any public facilities not currently shown on the maps. Staff Recommendation: Review in advance of the meeting the listed BTP text section for understanding. Use the meeting to seek further understanding and /or to provide staff with input on desired changes /additions. Review listed existing plan projects in advance for understanding. Use the meeting to seek further understanding of specific projects and /or to provide staff with direction. Members will rank these projects prior to the next meeting. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Item # 5: Committee Items • Committee discussion items Item # 6: Staff Items Updates on: • Unmet Transit needs and Bicycle & Pedestrian Inventory Public Hearing (Attachment 7) • Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) status and feedback Other: • Special meeting • Items for next meeting o Draft Outline "Actions" Update 0 0 The next meeting will be held: March 15, 2012 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Minutes, November 17, 2011 2. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, Projects and Text (Consent Items) 3. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, Projects and Text (Outstanding Items) 4. Railroad Safety Trail and Bob Jones City -to -Sea Trail project keys 5. Downtown: Higuera and Marsh Street data comparison 6. Sharrow Comparison Data 7. News Release: Annual Unmet Transit Needs and Bicycle & Ped. Inventory GATransportation- Data \_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation \Transportation Committees \Bike Committee \BACAgendas \2012 I 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 n I Tea � Minutes Attachment 1 io�L� Regular Meeting of the SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Council Hearing Room, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo November 17, 2011 Thursday MISSION: The purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Committee i direction on matters related to bicycle transportation bicycling outside the City. ROLL CALL: Present: Bill Bradlee (Chair), Chris Black, Absent: Peter Deragon Staff: Kevin Christian and PUBLIC COMMENT: Jessica Berry, San the following: • A recent survev to place the item on thevlallo • Ove[„�Q50 people parfcclE • Rideshare. is currently off contact Morg' Marshall at 7 MINUTES: Septeriber 1 CM Woolf moved to approve The motion passed unanimo of 1 of 7 p.m. provide oversight and policy Obispo and its relationship to and Kristina representative, discussed respondents were in favor of a sales tax ansportation, but 67% was recommended Month, and over 18% were bicyclists. to School "Mini Grants ". For more information minutes as submitted. CM Weisenthal seconded the motion. ACTION ITEMS: Attachment 1 zoo Lt Agenda Item #1: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update - Consent Items BTP projects - New and existing projects in Pavement Areas 6 and 7: • Cerro Romauldo Bicycle Blvd. • Cerro Romauldo Class I 8 • Foothill / Ferrini Crossing 9 • Patricia / Foothill / La Entrada Intersection 10 • Tassajara Sharrows 11 • Madonna to Laguna Lake Traverse, Class I Trail 12 . Santa Rosa at Boysen, Grade Separated Crossing 13 • Boysen Ave. Connection 14 North Chorro Intersection Enhancement 15 Sacramento / Duncan to Laurel Class I, Railroad Safety Trail Connection 17 BTP text 18 Bikeways, "Bicycle Parking and Storage" thru "Other Support Facilities" (pgs 16 -20) 19 20 Staff presented a report on the project rankings and text/policies amendments. Staff 21 recommended that BAC approve the consent items as submitted. 22 23 Gary Havas, SLO Bicycle Club, discussed Club support of the BTP. 24 - 25 CM Bradlee moved to approve the consent items as presented. CM Woolf seconded the 26 motion. The motion passed unanimously. 27 28 29 Agenda Item #2: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Outstanding Items 30 31 Staff discussed the outstanding BTP projects: 32 33 Staff noted Laguna Lake Bikeways B and C have been modified. 34 o There was consensus to move forward with the projects as modified. 35 o CM Woolf suggested the dirt path connecting the cul -de -sacs behind Laguna Middle 36 School be added to the BTP reserving it for bikeway connectivity. The BAC concurred 37 and requested that staff should move forward accordingly. 38 Staff discussed dropping the Highland centerline striping project from the BTP. There was 39 consensus that this was appropriate. The BAC concurred that the language, "on streets where 40 vehicle volume, speed, or collisions are impacting bicycle travel, the City shall consider possible 41 remedies such as a'ignay`e, striping, or other traffic calming devices" should be added to Policy 42 statements in the "Special Design Provisions" section of the 2012 BTP draft text, to help 43 address traffic issues. 44 • Staff discussed the proposed text regarding design provisions regarding colored bike lanes. 45 o Mr. Havas stated his Club endorsed the text as revised by staff. 46 o Staff Mandeville suggested including more general language for flexibility. 47 o The BAC supported the colored bike lane trial and concurred that the glossary of terms 48 should include language "...such as, but not limited to" bike boxes, etc. The policy as 49 presented will be modified to reflect the direction given. 50 51 Attachment 1 1 Agenda Item #3: Class III Bikeways — Prioritization, Project Listing, Highland Drive 2 3 Prioritization: Staff noted that signage specifications for Class III bike routes (existing and 4 planned) in City Pavement Area 7 would require approximately 50 signs. The agenda 5 attachment estimated that 36 signs had a cost of $18K. Staff suggested a preference to 6 prioritize funding cross -town routes and /or on higher trafficked routes, rather than, "Class III 7 routes shall include Bike Route signage..." as the currently policy directs. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 CM Woolf agreed with tying signage needs to traffic volume. The BAC concurred and directed staff to modify the Draft Plan text accordingly. Class III Project Listing: Staff discussed the project listings. Based on the above item discussion, traffic volumes would be considered. There was BAC consensus on this direction. Highland Dr. (Patricia to Cuesta): The BAC concurred with staff determination that the existing Highland and Patricia Drives Class III route be modified to Highland and Cuesta. PRESENTATION ITEMS: Item #4: 2012 Bike Plan Update - New Presentation Items The BAC agreed to email staff with any comments /questions concerning the text on pages 20- 22 of the 2007 Bicycle Transportation Plan, as listed in the agenda for review. Highlight discussion of proposed projects included: • UPRR Foothill Underpass: BAC consensus was to leave it out • UPRR Murray Undercrossing: BAC consensus was to leave it out • Relocation of Murray signal detector at Santa Rosa: BAC consensus was to leave it out, but forward the detector location issue to the City and Caltrans Traffic Engineers. • Downtown Higuera Class II and Pedestrian /Bike only Higuera St. restriction: The BAC requested staff to provide data, such as traffic volume and speed, and that these projects be brought back for further discussion. • Nipomo St. Bicycle Facility: Discussion centered on what type of facility would be appropriate if provided. There was general consensus that Class II lanes might not be appropriate as they do not exist in other blocks of Nipomo St. and would require removal of parking. The concept of installing Sharrows (Shared Lane Markings) was raised, and brought up the further issue of what criteria or warrants should be met to install Sharrows. The BAC requested Staff to create a policy focused on Sharrows, and to bring the project and policy back 10 the BAC for feedbac,:. • No. Chorro Sharrows: This project was wrapped in to the discussion on Sharrows in the above item. It will be brought back to the BAC at a future meeting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DISCUSSION ITEMS: No Items Item 5: Committee Items Item 6: Staff Items Attachment 1 �J . � 1 • Bike Rodeo re -cap, and recent Bicycling Accomplishments • Moving Planet: Bike path completion acceleration request • Draft Outline "Actions" update will be brought to the BAC at a future meeting • Advisory Body Training • Due to known date conflicts with some BAC members, an alternate date for the January 2012 meeting is being considered. BAC members will provide staff with their availability, and a date will be set and posted within two weeks. ACTION: CM Woolf motioned to adjourn. CM Bradlee seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm to the next meeting, date to be decided. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary Attachment 2 1 °C- \3 Project: Laguna Lake Bikeways A Description: Create a Class I bikeway from the north end of Laguna Lake Park to lower Foothill area at O'Connor. Create a link between Madonna Road and Foothill Blvd. which Intent: doesn't require using LOVR, providing direct access to O'Conner Way. Overall, the Laguna Lake Bikeways A, B, C should create off roadway links between northern and western City neighborhoods, City parks, and the City's only Middle School. Class: I School zone: SM Pave section: 6 Length (Feet) 10,000 Est. Cost $5,000,000 Priority m c .o Q �o_ F Z� 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim avg. SCORE First 4 5 _ 31 _ 4 - 5 c 3 1 4 4 2_1 0 - � m _4_ 1 o w qj 4 �y F ° c ° 0) C-7 AQ AO 4 5 _ 31 _ 4 - 5 4 1 3 1 4 4 2_1 0 4 2 4 3 _4_ 1 38 25 0 4_ - 5 5 3 0 5 1 4 5 2 34 - 0 4, 5 5 2 l j 4 2 4 -- 4 - - 3 34 4.25 4.5014.751 2.S0 1.25 4.251 1.25 3.501 4.00 2.50 32.7S Notes: Requires approval of Madonna ranch owners; path is in flood zone, may need elevated sections. Note relationship to Laguna Lake Bikeways B and Laguna Lake Bikeways C, Class I paths connecting to the Laguna Middle School neighborhood at Diablo Drive, and upper Foothill neighborhood area. Portions of the overall project (parts A, B and C) were formerly known as Mis 18 in the Bicycle Transportation Plan dated May 7, 2002. Cost associated with this project are noted as 30% from "TE /BTA" grant (Transportation Enhancement /Bicycle Transportation Act) in the 2002 plan. Attachment 2 20� \3 Project: Laguna Lake Bikeways B Create a Class I bikeway connecting the proposed Laguna Lake Description: Bikeways A, a Class I bikeway from the north end of Laguna Lake Park to lower Foothill area at O'Connor Way, to the Laguna Middle School neighborhood at Diablo Drive. Create a bike path (low traffic volume /speed) connection to the Intent: Laguna Middle School neighborhood. Overall the Laguna Lake Bikeways A, B, C should create off roadways links between northern and western City neighborhoods, City parks, and the City's only Middle School. Class: I School zone_: SM Pave section: 6 Length (Feet) 3690 Est. Cost ... $1,800,000 Priority c 0 Q F =m 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim avg. SCORE First co' F w� vF �ma, lc� Z o m s' y tiv o (10 Q y ° o AF 4 5 4 4 3 4 274 41 4 38 5 3 5 1 1 4 0 2 3' 1 25 - 0 4 5 5 3 0 5 1 44 2 33 0 0 4 5 5 2 1 4 2 4 5 3 35 4.25 4.5014.7512.501 1.2514.251 1.25 3.50 4.00 2.50 32.75 Notes: Requires approval of DeVaul and Madonna ranch owners; path is in a flood zone, may need elevated sections, and may require reconfiguration of Los Osos Valley Road between Diablo Way and the City Limit. Has a relationship to Laguna Lake Bikeways A and Laguna Lake Bikeways C class I paths. Portions of the overall project (parts A, B and C) were formerly known as Mis 18 in the Bicycle Transportation Plan dated May 7, 2002. Project: Laguna Lake Bikeways C Attachment 2 3 �Q,- k3 Create a Class I bikeway connecting the proposed Laguna Lake Description: Bikeways A, a Class I bikeway from the north end of Laguna Lake Park to lower Foothill area at O'Connor Way, to upper Foothill Blvd. neighborhood area. Intent• Create a bike path (low traffic volume /speed) connection to the upper Foothill Blvd. neighborhood. Overall the Laguna Lake Bikeways A, B, C should create off roadways links between northern and western City neighborhoods, City parks, and the City's only Middle School. Class: I School zone: SM Pave section: 6 Length (Feet) 9,970 Est. Cost $6,000,000 Priority First kzN m 0 Q F =m 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim avg. JI�V RL c 0 c° 3 Q) ,m j ° ��O a," mo' 41 fil o, 45� tiF v sic Q /.O 4 5 5 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 4 38 5 3 5 1 1 4 0 2 3 1 - 25 0 IF 4 _. 5 4 3 0 - 5. 1 41 - 4 2 32 4 4.251 5 4.501 5 4.500; 2 2.500; 1 1.251 4 4.251 1 1.001 4 3.5001 4 3.751 3 42.501 303 31.nn Notes: Requires approval of Madonna ranch owners, and may require acquisition of property in Foothill neighborhood; path is in flood zone, may need elevated sections. Has a relationship to Laguna Lake Bikeways A and Laguna Lake Bikeways B, class I paths. Portions of the overall project (parts A, B and C) were formerly known as Mis 18 in the Bicycle Transportation Plan dated May 7, 2002. Attachment 2 ' l a- \3 Project: Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd. Crossing Hwy 101 Description: The overall project creates a Bicycle Blvd. from the north end of the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd, over Hwy101, to Murray via Lemon St., Santa Rosa park and Casa St. Intent: To provide a low traffic impact north /south through route for bicyclists that serves Cal Poly for the neighborhoods East of Santa Rosa and other downtown bike route connectors, in response to the continuing congestion and deterioration of Santa Rosa St. Class: BB School zone: BP Pave section: 8 Length (Feet) 1,515 Est. Cost $4,000,000 Priority m c o Q F =m 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim avg. SCORE First 51 4 3 41 3 41 2 4 4 4 .o 51 5' 4 1 1 4 0 21 41 1 27 3 c°j c 0� tia 0 4 3 2 3 0 4 0 4 4 1 25 0 G° aim ��' •`i �a �c tiF � .0 tom`' � �O 51 4 3 41 3 41 2 4 4 4 37 51 5' 4 1 1 4 0 21 41 1 27 0 4 3 2 3 0 4 0 4 4 1 25 0 0 5 5 4 4 1 5 3 5 5 3 40 4.75 4.25 3.25 3.00 1.25 4.25 1.25 3.75 4.25 2.25 32.25 Notes: Has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the pedestrian grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of Lemon and Casa, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. City of SLO Bicycle Count Data taken in 2008 show the intersection of Santa Rosa and Mill use as thirteenth highest out of 28 locations surveyed, with a total count of 98 (data included here as this project may impact use at the mentioned intersection). Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB Project Section: Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd. "A" Attachment 2 S -1 \--� Section This section, "A ", creates a pedestrian Grade Separated Crossing Description: from Toro St. to Lemon St. across Hwy 101 This is the pivotal section of the entire project. The intent is to provide a low traffic impact North /South through route for bicyclists Section that serves Cal Poly for the neighborhoods East of Santa Rosa and Intent: other downtown bike route connectors, in response Class: BB School Zone: BP Pave Section; 8 Length (Feet) Est. Cost 405 $4,000,000 See overall Project Rank Section Relationship with "Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd." sections "B" and "C ". Notes: (Section "B ": Connecting Lemon St. to Santa Rosa Park. Section "C ": Lemon St. from Hwyl to Santa Rosa Park. ) Also has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of Lemon and Casa, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB c 0 See overall Project Rank Section Relationship with "Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd." sections "B" and "C ". Notes: (Section "B ": Connecting Lemon St. to Santa Rosa Park. Section "C ": Lemon St. from Hwyl to Santa Rosa Park. ) Also has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of Lemon and Casa, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB a;, I I ; � 6 IN a Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd. "B" This section, "B" creates a Bicycle Blvd. along Lemon, from Hwy 101 to Santa Rosa Park. To provide a low traffic impact North /South through route for bicyclists that serves Cal Poly for the neighborhoods East of Santa Rosa and other downtown bike route connectors, in response to the continuing congestion and deterioration of Santa Rosa St. BB BP 8 640 $3,000 C 0 c0) See overall Project Rank Relationship with "Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd." sections "A" and "C ". (Section "A ": Grade separated crossing at Hwy. 101 connecting Lemon and Toro. Section "C ": Lemon St. from Hwyl to Santa Rosa Park. ) Also has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of the GSX'ing between Lemon and Toro and the Casa St. BB section, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB Attachment 2 7 a �- \3 Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd. "C` This section, "C" creates a Bicycle Blvd. along Casa St. from Santa Rosa Park to Murray St. It includes a connection through Santa Rosa Park. To provide a low traffic impact North /South through route for bicyclists that serves Cal Poly for the neighborhoods East of Santa Rosa and other downtown bike route connectors, in response to the continuing congestion and deterioration of Santa Rosa St. BB BP 8 875 $ 4,500 See overall Project Rank Relationship with "Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd." sections "A" and "B ". (Section "A ": Grade separated crossing at Hwy. 101 connecting Lemon and Toro. Section "B ": Connecting Lemon St. to Santa Rosa Park.) Also has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of Lemon and the GS crossing at Lemon to Toro, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB c 0 co' LC F L¢a v m Um Ja� O \�F y v Q 0 03 FO See overall Project Rank Relationship with "Casa to Toro Bicycle Blvd." sections "A" and "B ". (Section "A ": Grade separated crossing at Hwy. 101 connecting Lemon and Toro. Section "B ": Connecting Lemon St. to Santa Rosa Park.) Also has a relationship with the proposed Toro St. Bicycle Blvd. Overall, the grade separated crossing (section "A ") is key to this project. Path through Santa Rosa park necessary to connect Lemon St. with Casa. This project with its related links of Lemon and the GS crossing at Lemon to Toro, becomes more important if the proposed Broad St. BB is not able to be completed. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 CasaToroBB Attachment 2 Project: Highland Class II Description: Install Class II bike lanes in each direction on Highland from SR1 to Cuesta St. Intent: To provide travel lanes for bicyclists. The project will also provide connectivity to the proposed Class III lanes on Cuesta and in turn, to the proposed Cerro Romauldo Bike Blvd. Class: II School zone: BP Pave section: 8 Length (Feet) 1,150 Est. Cost $5,000 Priority m oc Q �°_ QJ F =v 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 )im avg. SCORI Second 2 4 5 3 5 4! 3 3i 3, 2 11 4 c 3 3 4 4 0_ 2 4 2 4 3 3, 5 o m 28 23 0 33 0 ,gym` c r o AO 2 4 5 3 5 4! 3 3i 3, 2 11 4 2 1 0 3 3 4 4 0_ 2 4 2 4 3 3, 5 2 1 2 28 23 0 33 0 _ 0 5 4 3, 3 &00 5 _ 2 34 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.50 1.00 3.25 2.75 3.2 1.75 29.50 Notes: This project may require removal of parking. If space limitations only provide for one bike lane, it should be installed in the East hni inri ri ira�tinn to aCCCmm-date SICWe� ���...�n ^y Uphlll ISl ke traffic. This project was formerly known as Mis 10 in the Bicycle Transportation Plan dated May 7, 2002. In that plan the project was for only a Class II on the North side of Highland with a length of 575 feet and a "negligible" cost. Note that the project now calls for a class II lane on each side with the total length at 1150 feet. Costs responsibilities were listed as Developer = 100 %. "Cal Poly install as part of H -8 site development ". City of SLO Bicycle Count Data taken in 2008 show the intersection of Santa Rosa and Highland use as third highest out of 28 locations surveyed, with a total count of 202. Pave8_9 and misc Master.xls 1/17/2012 HighlndCLII Attachment 2 � 6� \3 Project: Highland / Santa Rosa Bypass Class I - From entrance at apartments (200 N. Santa Rosa), through parking lots and across existing creek bridge and along Description: the edge of the agriculture field, connecting to Highland Intent: To improve an already heavily used route for all season use Class: I School zone: HA Pave section: 8 Length (Feet) 2,700 Est. Cost Priority ZN c 0 Q F 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim avg. SCORI $300,000 Second 5 5 3 oc 3 4 3 31 m 3F— 46 ti<c v � 0o � /10 5 5 3 4 3 4 3 31 3 3F— 36 4 0 2 3 0 21 0 5 4 1 -- 4 01 I 3j - 0 3 4 0 24 0 - — - -- I 0 5� — 4 - -- 3 -- -- 3 1 4 3j 3. 5 2 33 4.25 4.00 3.00 3.00 1.25 3.75 1.50 2.751 3.751 1.2528Sbi Notes: This route involves both private property and Cal Poly State University property. City of SLO Bicycle Count Data taken in 2008 show the inters Qction of Santa Rosa and Highland use as third highest out of 28 locations surveyed, with a total count of 202. I� r Project: Highland / Chorro Class I Connection Construct a bike slot on Highland turning south on to Chorro St. The primary goal is the bike slot, but a secondary alternative would be to construct a Class I path from Highland to Chorro Description: streets on the South side of Highland. To facilitate better circulation for westbound Highland traffic turning south on to Chorro. The connection is necessary to provide an alternative north /south corridor into and out of the Intent: downtown area for bicyclists to avoid Santa Rosa. Class: I School zone: BP Pave section: 8 15 ft. for slot Length (Feet) up to 200 ft. for path Vim_. - mrrmus l�gfl- sl�I� -- Est. Cost $Ctly#f� pall n Priority First c\ °lc�' ' o° co 'zo moi a,° q oy y Div v (4 Z /10 Gm tea° 45c ��Q 1 Chris 5 5 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3E 2 Bill 4 3 51 11 3; 4 0 3 2 1 2E 3 Peter 3: 4 Catherine 4 4 3 4 0 4 1 4 4 4 5 Kristina 6 Howard 3 7 Jim 5 4 3 4 1 4 5 4 5 2 avg. SCORO 4.5014.0013.5013.001 1.7514.0012.501 3.50 3.50 2.50 32.7` Notes: Attachment 2 A 6�- \3 1 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan DRAFT UPDATE: 2 The following covers the text currently appearing on pages 20 -22, beginning with "4. 3 Education and Promotion" and ending with "6. Administration ". 4 Where 2007 version text has been modified, the original text appears as "strike- through ". 5 New text additions /revisions are in bold italic type. The numbering system will be revised 6 for clarity. For ease of comparing the proposed draft to the current plan, current plan 7 numbers have been left intact. New policies are generically " assigned as "X ". 8 9 4. EDUCATION AND PROMOTION 10 11 The City will: 12 13 4.1 Consider hiring a full time bicycle coordinator to help manage bicycle oital projects, prepare 14 grant applications, review development projects to ensure, consistency witii$icycle facility 15 standards, and coordinate City - sponsored bicycle promotion, and education act%ities. _ 16 17 4.2 Prepare and distribute Request foti4posals to organizations that can establish and sustain City - 18 funded bicycle promotion and edaoati tivities that benefit San Luis Obispo's residents, 19 workforce, and visitors. - 20 21 XX Provide annual bicycling behavior draining to. City deansit drivers, preferably just prior to the 22 start of the Fall school term. Addidiondliy, pursue otheropgortumues to train fleet or contract 23 drivers that work for companies that regmrea City contract or license for operation. 24 25 4.3 Continue-to-work with the San Luis Obispo Coastal Unified School District to create and support 26 "StiggestedRbotes to School Plans" and !prografisfor all elementary schools in San Luis Obispo. 27 _WA with the`Sau: uis Obispo' s 3nnier Middle and Senior High Schools to encourage the use of 28�liicycles. 29 30 4.4 Continue to promote andsponsor programs and events designed to teach children and adults safe 31 riding methgds and the baeits of bicycling. 32 33 4.5 Continue to or with the S) O Regional Rideshare, the SLO County Bicycle Coalition, the 34 League of Am encanBtcyetists and others to support bicycle promotion and education activities, 35 such as the anon al $ike i" Work Week, Bike Rodeo, bicyclingke education classes, after - school 36 programs, bike valet' bike helmet giveaway programs. 37 38 4.6 Continue - te- previde- Considerproviding incentives for employees to commute to work by bicycle 39 and encourage local business to do the same. 40 41 4.7 Promote and support the use of a "traffic school" option for persons involved in bicycle - related 42 traffic violations. 43 44 XX Provide residents with information about theparposeofnew bicyclefacility treatmemt (e:g, Comment[kc11. From swine Bike PI.., 45 bicycle boulevards, sha✓ed lane markings, etc.) and safe behaviorsfor all users operating on t uo uw n� xeaalc eovflmn :Donal onitiikemaam� n� ' 46 M thesefacilhies ............. __. _____-_ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 X.X Provide bicycling speeifrc information oh the City's "Construction Update" web page wlren any City bikeways are included in the eonstructlon area X.X . Postbicycleaadlor,makearailable routcnetwork mdpsin high- visibilitypublic;locations such as City offices; transit stops, libraries, college campuses and tourist destinations: Attachment 2 \zo� - \-5 Comment[kc2] ];4 tioa'fromth.porlland ptaa. Propose something as simple as a bullet point sayiag, Bike Lane Closed, Share the read" Add "POffiaadBioycle PJao- fbr2030 "tb our credits hat; , , XX Si pport effortsby Local organizations or individuals to nominate and maintain, the City's League ofAmetican`Bicychsts,(LAB) Bicycle Friendly Community (BF'C) awardstatus[_ _ _ Coroment[kc31; sF &tko plan X.X Support bicycling related events promotion (eg.: Tour of California) opportunities, with the goal of leveraging them for the promotional opportunity to increase local bicycle use and/or bicycling education. S. FUNDING BICYCLE PROGRAMS The City shall: 5.1 Reserve a minimum of two percent (2 %) of Its Eiihaspodaligu Development Act (TDA) funds for bicyclinge projects and programs.. - Candidate actfiddeiWpse of these funds include, but are not limited to: a) Support cost of bicycling safety b) Minor capital pirgipqts such as b C) Planning en ryneerlrg and envii d) Bicycleing,&ofhotional4E.bvitii 5.2 Continue to includejmgjor bii City's Capitol Improvenren€ X.X Continue to prioritize Ale'ag congestion relief high : priori 5.3 Require that new developmei and programs. New bikeways development.' , .. Y" drain grate upgrades. projects. including the Railroad Safety Trail, in the ipact Fee (TIF) programs. 1/2 cent sales tax) towards transportation t cruff to its fair share to support the costs of bicyclinge facilities shall tie created in advance of or during the first phases of FundbigGnuit Programs Level State Highway Account (SHA) Regional Trans ortation Enhancements Activities (TE) Regional & State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) State Environmental Entrancement and Mitigation Program (EEM) State Safe Routes to School Programs (SR2S) State Sae Routes to School Program (SRTS) Federal Statewide Transportation ImprovememE°hanoeme•° Program (STIP) Federal Communit Develo ment Block Grants Federal Hi hwa Sae Improvement Program (HSIP) Federal 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 nz 44 45 46 Attachment 2 k`3 0�- �3 5.4 Continue to apply for regional, state and tederal grants to help pay for bicycleing projects and programs. Candidate grant programs include, but are not limited to: H.e Railroad Safety Trail to the Cal D.J. e 5.6 Consider employing debt - financing strategies for large bikeway projects, where their costs are - out of scale with potential funding from regional, state or federal grant programs or from the City's Capital Improvement Fund. 5.7 Include small -scale projects, such as signing and appropriate. - KX :Wark.with local organizations,to pursue; additio. programs. By providing support to grants and o organizaaionsthat eonduct`edueation to - increase users' As part of the City's two -year financiaLl�tanning process, 5.8 Provide the City Council with aFwgpi facilities that include bicycle racks 2c such m striping. 5.9 Submit a list of prioritized projects th . year budget cycle. This funding shall facilities that improve bicycle transpo 5M for City paving projects when Comment [kC4):From Seattle Bike plan hHp / /wn , saetile ..goyltranaportatlonfbikemasterht m" (BAC) shall: g of miscellaneous bicyclinge or segment improvements for City funding during the two - I construction of bicyclinge SNISTRATION=' - - _1 . '(6 � -G1ty shall update )las.Bicycle:Transportation Plan as required by the Stat.. — °- 4) y�aintmn eligibili'€y for State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) grants. And - shall 6.2 Any person inakfile a request for amendment to this Plan with the San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. Requ istrwiusfidentify all proposed changes (additions, deletions, or modifications to goals, objective�_eiliiiies, activities, standards or maps) and provide a rationale for the proposed changes. Amendment requests are subject to the City's environmental review process. They will be acted on no more frequently than semi - annually by the City Council, after review and report by the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) and the Planning Commission. The Depa tment may charge applicants a ecc to e'valuatZ a proposed amendul at. .'re fee'; _'ll cover the cost of evaluation and process administration by staff. This page has been left blank on purpose. Attachment 3 to�-3 Project: Vista Lago Connection Paved or unpaved bike trail connection between Vista Lago and Description: Vista Collados ,Preserve/provide a paved /unpaved bikeway between Vista Lago and Vista Collados for a low /no traffic connection between Intent: neighborhoods around the Laguna Middle School. Class: n/a School zone: SM Pave section: 6 Length (Feet) 515 Est. Cost n/a Priority #DIV /01 m, c ° c s' w mm �m c° o 'Za my m°' m� a F L� cm F o aim v =m �oF �m �aJ 45� �F� �� /10 1 Chris 2 Bill 3 Peter ( 4 Catherine 5 Kristina 6 Howard 7 Jim ( avg. SCORE # ## # ## ###1###1 ###1 ###1###1###1 Notes: Relationship to Laguna Lake Bikeways B project. At this time preserving access as an unpaved route is preferred. Therefore, there is no cost associated with the project. Attachment 3 Zo� 3 1 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan DRAFT UPDATE 2 Where the previously approved version text has been modified, the original text appears as "strike - 3 through ". New text additions /revisions are in bold italic type. The numbering system will be revised 4 for clarity. For ease of comparing the draft revise to the current plan, current plan numbers have been 5 left intact. New policies are generically assigned as "X ". 6 Policy 7 Class III BlkewaV (previously approved test version 7/2011 PAC 8 9 1.21 'Bike Route "signage along Class III Bikeways 10 when the route provides a connection between other! 11 Bikeway facilities (Class 1, Class 11, etc.), when traffic cc 12 need to raise awareness of the route, or when the rou 13 route. (e.g. Bill Roalman Bike Blvd., Pacific Coast Bityc 14 15 Special Design Provisions =_ - 16 - Sharrow (previously approved text version 9/2011 BACtineyflnl 17 1.43 On streets where bike lanes are notprovided a:. 18 and cyclists to safely travel side: by side wlthln'fhe lane, 19 Committee, may install shared lane !markings (ai5osknoj 20 positioning of bicyclists on roadwa s with re ulai`br P g Y Y g 7cyJ 21 arterial roadways that serve as connettions betweeds 22 legends and associated signage should coincide witlYt, 23 for consideration in charidna Shormw lrirntinnc no,,. i ions (speed volume, etc.) have indicated a an identified City',=5tate, or Federal bicycle curb lanes are too narrow for motorists with input from the Bicycle Advisory arrows ") to improve the lateral arrows will most commonly be used on rcling facilities. Installation of the Pavement Management cycle. Criteria 24 . 'qn- Street parking 25 . T`ra>,el Jane width 26 . Posted speed limit 27 . MeasuredYtciffic speeds 28 . Traffic volume -_ 29 . Traffic composIt(on fprese&e of buses and large trucks) 30 . Bicycle traffic volume 31 . Number of incidentsafwrong- way bicycling, or sidewalk bicycling 32 . Corridors where there is a high potential to increase bicycle trips 33 G:\ Transportation - Data \_Tmnsponation Planning \Bicycle \Bike Plan \Bike Plan Update 2012 \Draft Bike Plan does \2012 BTP daft changes Shan-ow Classlll Alternative.docx 1/17/20123:53 PM Attachment 3 3 -� 3 1 - Contrasting Color or Other Design treatment (The following covers the tent currently appearing on page 16. This 2 text was originally reviewed in the 9/2033 BACmeeting, and followed with modifications during the 11/2011 meeting.) 3 4 1.44 5 t146 IQL�AfE' #90' '9PWIRFed,pavem6"t�pthe�,d !0! 6 hl complex traffic corridors where competingtlemands fo"r - -the use'of the right -of -way present unigye 7 chagenges thattra,Qitianalfacilii ies may aof-lu %ymeet (e.y.; areas wi[h�right -of -way constraints or 8 potential conflicts between multiple user groups), the City may consider testing alternative design 9 facilities such as, but not limited to: 10 • Colored Bicycle Lanes: To enhance Che:canspicuity of a tricycle lane orabicycle lane extension in it locations with hiohKbickete and motor v_ehioL use, such as through intersections and other trof i 12 con Ict areas) 13 Bik Box: To facilitate- bicycbist left tuna pasitioning, help- prevent'rigt}t -hook' collision conflicts,. 14 increase bicyclist corispieuity ar to group bicyclists together to clearintersections quickly. 15 • Buffered Bicycle Lanes: Using striping to create a G'ujfer between a bike lane and the adjacent 16 travel lane, and /or the "door zone" of the parlat,I one. 17 The design treatment that is approved for use by Clie City's Traffic Operations Manager will depend on 18 a variety of factors, such as the specific desired outcamme, impact to all transportation modes within 19 the corridor, future development plans, success rates ofilarfpcilities in other locals, local 20 supporting data, cost etc. 21 22 X.XX Traffic Calming: On streets where vehicle volume, speed ar collisions are impacting bicycle 23 travel, the City shall consider possible remedies such as signage striping, or other traffic calming 24 devices. " 25 26 m 27 28 ;Detlnitio0 (Previou3ly,approved test version 5/2011 SAC meeting) 29 Shared -Lane Markings — Otherwise known as Sharrows, ShaFealane -mark ags are pavement legends 30 intended to improve the lateral positic nlY gof bicyclists on roadways with Fee .� '.ye°4se and -n curb 31 lane widths too narrow for motorists and cytiT "sts to safely travel side by side within the lane. All narrow 32 travel lanes should be considered a shared space, these lane markings are a reminder. 'harrows are 33 carefully placed within the travel lane to guide bicyclists to ride in a predictable location that avoids 34 cardaors and /or roadwaygutters, and to remind drivers to share the road with cyclists; Unlike bicycle 35 lanes, sharrows do not designate a particular part of the street for the exclusive use of bicyclists. They 36 are simply a marking to guide bicyclists and remind motorists to expect to and share the lane with 37 bicyclists', _. __.. 38 G: \Tansp.a.t Ion- Data`Transponatlon Planning\ Bicycle \Bike Plan \Bike Plan Update 2012 \Daft Bike Plan dots \2012 BTP draft changes Sharrow0asslll Alternativ,Am 1/1]/20123:53 PM This page has been left blank on purpose. M IT, I =-, XA R M- ZE 3 mo to V) r- m 0 t 0 9NE4 CL E `E. 03 :3 CC S w CL o to V) ---- -- CG to r- tn ME (00 m Q3 cc CC LL V) E -_- `� E CL 2 gig 99E- 299 OWN F- F- Ln a V) V) V) V) IN ro 12 u 0. UJ CL E 0 0 0 0 u T 9L 0 _t� 4 6 r 0 0 C 0 c 0 w E 0 C� 0 C — 0 0 0 T o w Cm X V) x V) , U , r m 0 m V) (D 0 7n I C.0 Ji 0 0 LE o (CA, m to ko f� 00 1 0) 1-4 C11 m dT V) ko I,, w m Iq N I-i Iq 14 H H H H 1-4 CL CL n n n n n n a- 0- 0, m CL CL n a n n CL co co m 'm co m m 0� m co co M W m = m m m m ac L=— Iiii, R li w cc I Cc I cc I cc: I = cc cc oc i H 1 M0 W Attachment 4 OO C N CL CL Cu 0 C C C O i O R CM L C C Co vN O U to m Z O y N Y M C o u d 0 0 c Cr > N N v L tw O C O 0 '6 C O 0 cOa O 'A y m C s= YO C 3 C 3 Y Co M M S 7 V- 0 s a 0 t c m (A O c 0 ro m o N *' N C= t= C 0 Y N i d M O X y O O0 C N N 0-0 y> O L Co C C a O L V) N 0 Co (0 N o f0 (6 N O N Cr > Cu CO O m H Co [1 (7 -O (6 C o L V w Y N C U CO O Y N 0 c C 0 N V O_ Y O= M 'a c w N O o> Of 6 ,i Op O Y C N Co m O O M fO cO m i i M `~ M M O U Y N O C C (YO d CL `� M 0 V O O N -O O +' X O N w- o> Y0 N d f0 (0 m (p m V O Co Cu �" f0 •C m w N U 0- OJ U .O F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- 12 12 12 m m m m m m m m m m m OO C Cr 0 C C C O i O R > Co vN O U to m Z O y N Y M C o u d 0 0 c Cr > Co v L tw O 0 '6 0 'O 0 cOa O 'A y m C s= YO . Y Co M M S 7 V- V) a d c m (A O c 0 ro m o �- *' O C= t= C 0 Y N M O X N i N N 0-0 y> O0 L V) N y (0 (0 f0 (6 N O N > U N [1 (7 W U Co U CO U CO F- F- F- Co m M M M M m m m M M M M M V d .O a` N O N N p ci N M d' Ln lD Il 00 Ol a-i N c-i N F- F- F- F- F- m m m m m m Co Co Co Co M Co C O i Ca C O V m m D 0 N G1 L t C (6 L d 3 x C 3 0 0 N O O O1 N N m c s o oc c � 0 0 c � o '^ v v 3 3 0 0 c c c v v v v E E E E m m m m v v v v v a v v n n n n E E E E E E `o `o `o `o m m m m b z o 0 0 0 m �eguaprsay v 'a]igp' c J letlJdWWO] w c m o T y O O O M y Y N b E2 C b c \ m \ m \ m o ° m m v m m O w U N m m m m m U o C C C C LL' om 0 m 0 a r O O T °v 0 ,a 0 00 1010101 L L L L 0 E E E E W o N O N m N aM w O W W E E E E y E E E E = m ry m n a w 0 12 o m o v o v o o m c o m c LL O O W w w h N � 3 m N _m t � x o ° - °a -j 7 0 a 2 L M a w 3 v f m 41 N i W N m M � 0 L m N 2 V 'y o w n o � 0 N S m v LL c Z a 0 m` N ° O W m w Z K O a w O o o �u o C L m � U v 0 °c N �y III m N Vl Ifl VI arid- s m w r N L a N N N VI L O) OI Ol N ~ CM C � .n in in of of of m m m Z � N r � r o m m � 0 ° a o ° a a w O o `0 0 vYCi � U U' m Attachment 5 n T 02' N � U m '6 C O - CQ G O V F 3 ` 0 m r F c c v v F u s 0 E m o E 2 Z ATTACHMENT E i -_ - E E E= E z_ E E e E E E E V V V C U� 1 C m C V V Q Q Q Q Q V Q c c N y 0 0 0 o m lom oo °oo E E E E E E E E E N o.n oou+ E E E E E E E v E m = s o o - 3 ATTACHMENT 01/04/2012 18:22 FAX 18057815703 SLOCOG 10001 /001 ATTACHMENT 7 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SLOCOG) ** *NEWS RELEASE * ** For Immediate Release Re: ANNUAL UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS AND BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN INVENTORY PUBLIC HEARING Date: February 1, 2012 Time: 8:30 a.m. Location: County Board of Supervisors' Chambers, County Government Center 1055 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments ( SLOCOG) annually allocates approximately $10 million dollars in Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds to member cities and the county. The funds are designated for public transit, but can be used to improve local streets and roads after all transit needs are first satisfied. A Public Hearing will be held to receive public testimony identifying or Commenting on transit needs that may exist within the county. SLOCOG has scheduled a Regional Unmet Transit Needs and Bicycle & Pedestrian Inventory Public Hearing on Wednesday, February 1, 2012, at 8:30 a.m., in the County Board of Supervisors' Chambers, County Government Center, 1055 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo. Concerned residents will have an opportunity to testify on any transit deficiencies they experience. The testimony is evaluated to determine which requests meet the requirements to be considered as an unmet need and which are 'reasonable to meet." SLOCOG directs each jurisdiction to set aside funds to meet those needs, and then allows the remaining money to be programmed for streets and road improvements SLOCOG invites the general public to attend the hearing. Testimony may be presented at the meeting, by phone or in writing (Write to: SLOCOG, 1114 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 or email to: unmet needs�3a slodog oFg or tgtllha Qslocog.orq) Deadline for written, telephone, and electronic testimony is no later than Febn iy. &''2b, Ii at 500 p.m If you have any questions, please contact Tim Giliham at (805) 781 -1520.