HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-31-12 BAC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the
SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Conference Room #1 (This is a location change, 5/31 only)
919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
May 31, 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, Howard Weisenthal, and Jim Woolf.
SWEARING IN: Swearing in of new Bicycle Advisory Committee member: Arlene Winn.
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: March 15, 2012 (Attachment 1)
ACTION ITEMS:
1. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update – Consent Items (Attachment 2)
2. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update – Outstanding Items (Attachment 3, 4)
3. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update – Draft Plan Review
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
4. Committee Items: •
5. Staff Items: • 2007 Bicycle Transportation Plan compliment (Attachment 5)
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:
Agenda Item #1: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Consent Items
This material has been presented and reviewed at previous meetings and BAC input has been
incorporated. These are consent items. No further discussion is planned unless a Committee
Member requests a specific modification at the meeting.
BTP projects – The following projects (Attachment 2) have been previously discussed,
presented, and ranked by the BAC:
• Buckley Extension Class I and II
The project is part of the overall project called “Buckley Road Bikeway Network” that was
approved as ranked in the Sept. 15, 2011 BAC meeting. The project section, “Buckley
Extension Class II” has been modified to add a Class I lane on the north side of Buckley,
whereas previously it only consisted of Class II lanes. The addition of the Class I lane will
connect to the proposed “Buckley Class I Path” section of the overall project. The individual
project section has been presented, along with the overall project.
• Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class 1, Option A and B
Previously these two projects were named “Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class
1” and “Prado Grade Separated Crossing (GSX)”. The proposed change to the “Oceanaire
to Existing East end of Prado Class 1”, is to add “Option A” to the name. Two changes are
proposed for the “Prado Grade Separated Crossing (GSX)” project. The first is to change
the name to, “Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class 1, Option B”, and the second is
to lengthen the project to more accurately substitute for the option-A project.
BTP text – The proposed text provided in the March 15, 2012 agenda packet was approved by
the Committee at the meeting so there was no need to bring the text back for consent at this
time.
Staff Recommendation: Approve consent items as presented with no ranking adjustments.
Agenda Item #2: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update – Outstanding/New Items
BTP projects – (Attachment 3)
• Bridge to Laguna Middle School
The “Laguna Middle School Connection Options” project in the current BTP called for a
Class 1 facility connecting Oceanaire Drive with Laguna Lane utilizing either a pathway and
bridge over Prefumo Creek connecting to the pocket park on Vista del Lago, or a pathway
along Los Osos Valley Road. While the bridge project was preferred, acquisition issues
resulted in the LOVR path being pursued. The project is expected to be installed in Summer
2012. To leave open the option for the bridge project in the future, the existing project has
been revised. The BAC should provide direction to staff as to if they want to include this in
the 2012 plan, and if so, provide their ranking of the project at the meeting.
BTP text – The table, “Draft Plan Modifications” presented in Attachment 4 represents staff
recommended revisions to text previously approved by the Committee. When reviewing the
compiled draft plan document, staff identified some new policies and modifications to existing
text that should be considered for inclusion in the draft plan. Staff seeks Committee concurrence
of the proposed changes.
Staff Recommendation: Use the meeting to seek further understanding and/or to provide staff
with input. Approve revised project and draft text.
Agenda Item #3: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update – Draft Plan
Last year the Bicycle Advisory Committee initiated an update of the 2007 Bicycle Transportation
Plan. The Committee kicked off the update process in May 2011 with a noticed public hearing
seeking public input on proposed policies and projects. The Committee held six more public
meetings reviewing the Plan chapter by chapter and considering public input. These efforts
have culminated in the Draft 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan that is included in Committee
member packets. The BAC draft Plan is also available for review on the City’s website.
The draft Plan represents the Committee’s efforts over the past year with the exception of any
direction that may be provided at this meeting. The role of the Bicycle Advisory Committee now
is to review the draft document, agree to any final changes and vote to forward the document on
to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval.
The document, “Draft 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Introduction” has been presented with
the Draft 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan. The table contained in the document presents a
listing of all text and project element changes made from the 2007 Plan. Committee members
should use this document, along with the 2007 BTP, to review the Draft 2012 BTP.
Staff Recommendation: Review the draft Plan, provide comments and/or revisions and either:
1. Recommend City Council adopt the Draft 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan, or
2. Recommend continuance of the item to a date certain to allow Committee members
additional time to review the draft document and recommend revisions prior to forwarding
the document to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Agenda Item # 4: Committee Items
•
Agenda Item # 5: Staff Items
Updates on:
• 2007 Bicycle Transportation Plan compliment
• Items for next meeting
o _____________________________
o _____________________________
The next meeting will be held: July 19, 2012
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Minutes, March 15, 2012
2. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, Consent Projects
3. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, Outstanding Project
4. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, Draft Plan Modifications
5. 2007 Bicycle Transportation Plan Compliment
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\Bike Committee\BACAgendas\2012
MINUTES 1
Regular Meeting of the 2
SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 3
Council Hearing Room, City Hall 4
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo 5
6
7
March 15, 2012 Thursday 7 p.m. 8
9
MISSION: 10
The purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) is to provide oversight and policy 11
direction on matters related to bicycle transportation in San Luis Obispo and its relationship to 12
bicycling outside the City. 13
14
ROLL CALL: Bill Bradlee (Chair), Peter Deragon (Vice Chair), Catherine Machado, Kristina 15
Seley, Howard Weisenthal, and Jim Woolf. 16
17
ABSENT: Chris Black 18
19
PUBLIC COMMENT: 20
21
Eric Meyers, SLO City Planning Commissioner, discussed a recent Regional Transit Center 22
public meeting. At that meeting he had expressed a need for the center to be multi-functional, 23
including being a bike hub for multi-modal users, and a “bike station”. Further, he encouraged 24
the BAC members to look for opportunities such as this meeting, to promote the integration of 25
bicycling in the community. 26
27
Staff noted this (3/15/12) BAC meeting was the last one for CM Seley and thanked her for her 28
service to the Committee. A certificate of appreciation was presented by Chair Bradlee. 29
30
MINUTES: January 26, 2012 31
32
CM Woolf moved to approve the minutes as submitted. CM Deragon seconded the motion. 33
The motion passed unanimously. 34
35
ACTION ITEMS: 36
37
Agenda Item #1. Election of Officers 38
39
Staff discussed the election process. 40
41
CM Machado nominated CM Bradlee as Chair. CM Deragon seconded the motion. The motion 42
passed unanimously. 43
44
CM Woolf nominated CM Deragon as Vice Chair. CM Bradlee seconded the motion. The 45
motion passed unanimously. 46
47
48
Attachment 1 - 1
Agenda Item #2. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Consent Items 1
2
Staff discussed the consent items and rankings, and recommended that the project move 3
forward as presented. There was general Committee and staff discussion pertaining to the 4
report. 5
6
CM Woolf moved to approve the consent items as submitted. CM Deragon seconded the 7
motion. The motion passed unanimously. 8
9
10
Agenda Item #3. 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update - Outstanding Items 11
12
Staff presented projects in the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP)and the Margarita Area 13
Specific Plan. 14
15
Eric Meyers (public) stated that there was a need for more direct commuter bike routes from 16
outlying neighborhoods to destination centers (shopping, recreation). He did not feel the bike 17
paths necessarily needed to follow car routes as current specific planning area documents call 18
for, because of the different infrastructure requirements and user needs. 19
20
Staff noted that the annual “Unmet Bike Needs” compilation has included a request for a 21
connection between RR Safety Trail and the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail. 22
23
BTP Projects: 24
Staff noted that the Tank Farm Creek Class I project is in the current BTP but needed to be 25
ranked, and that the Tank Farm Road Class I project was currently only contained in the AASP. 26
Therefore creation and inclusion of a “new” project in the BTP would be consistent with all other 27
AASP bikeways, and would need to be ranked by the BAC. 28
29
The BAC discussed the merits of the previously ranked projects and the two projects presented, 30
in context to the overall areas projects. Parallel but separate trails along Tank Farm were 31
generally discussed as preferable to just a single trail (on one side of the road). The Committee 32
discussed the needs of recreational vs. commuter cyclists through the area and stated that the 33
bike bridge over the freeway at Prado Road needed to be a priority even if the Prado Road 34
overpass is not to be constructed. 35
36
CM Woolf felt the Prado Class I trail connection should continue from Madonna Road through 37
to Broad with connections to Tank Farm. He felt that there should be a diagonal connection from 38
Marigold Center to the Octagon Barn. With the discussed diagonal connectors and the planned 39
dual Class I trails along Prado Road, he felt that Class II bike lanes along Tank Farm would be 40
sufficient and the Class I pathswould therefore not be necessary. 41
42
CM Seley discussed leaving the projects as listed (supporting the various Specific Area plans) 43
and ranking them based on their individual merits. 44
45
The BAC directed staff to provide them with projects to rank both the Tank Farm Road Class I 46
and the Tank Farm Creek Class I.trails. 47
48
BTP Text: 49
Mr. Christian discussed the text and requested any BAC input on action items vs. policies. 50
51
There was BAC consensus to move forward with the listing as presented. 52
53
54
DISCUSSION ITEMS: 55
Attachment 1 - 2
1
Agenda Item #4. Committee Items 2
3
CM Weisenthal reported that the Adventure Cycling Association publishes maps for the Pacific 4
Coast Bicycle Route and that they are seeking sponsors for map panels. He wondered if this 5
could be considered for funding through the City.as a promotional item. 6
7
At request of the BAC, staff provided a brief summary of plans for striping and colored Class II 8
lanes at the intersection of California Blvd. and Monterey St. The installation is currently planned 9
for summer. 10
11
Agenda Item #5. Staff Items 12
13
Staff provided updates on: 14
• Land Use Circulation Element (LUCE) 15
Eric Meyers, SLO City Planning Commissioner provided additional information as a 16
member of the LUCE task force. He spoke on the subject of “L.O.S.” (Level of Service) as a 17
measurement that is commonly used for measuring roadway performance for motor 18
vehicles, and that it is now beginning to be looked at for all modes, including bicycling. He 19
commented that a good LOS score for motor vehicles could result in a poor LOS score for 20
bicycling (and vice versa). He urged the BAC to give input to the LUCE task force and to, 21
“Think beyond the City.” He also spoke of the idea of creating a cultural bike route. 22
• CA Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 23
Changes were noted about “Sharrows” and that a new sign may be used which indicates 24
that bikes are allowed full use of the lane. 25
• An open house meeting for the Los Osos Valley Road bikeway (Middle School connection 26
project) will be held on March 21st at the golf course, and will be considered by Council April 27
10th. 28
• BAC May meeting date changed to May 31st, 2012 29
Staff proposed that the next meeting be rescheduled due to staffing conflicts. The BAC 30
requested staff email them and coordinate the date following the meeting. 31
32
Action: CM Seley motioned to adjourn. Chair Bradlee seconded the motion. The motion 33
passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. to the next scheduled meeting (to be 34
decided). 35
36
Respectfully submitted, 37
38
Lisa Woske 39
Recording Secretary 40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Attachment 1 - 3
III
LR
5
Project:
Intent:
Class:
PrioritySecond
Class I Class II15,665Length (Feet)#VALUE!
Est. Cost$4,602,000
Total:
36,210
Buckley Road Bikeway Network: Overall Project
Pave
section:
School zone:
Description:Class I paths and Class II lanes providing bicycle facility connectivity between
Broad and S. Higuera St. along with connecting to the proposed Acacia Creek
and Tank Farm Creek paths.
Connect existing and future bicycle facilities along Buckley Rd. to
preserve and enhance this popular cycling route as traffic volume &
speeds increase.
Name
(optional)
Com mu
ting
Safety
Recreational
Traffic Flow
Educates
Encou
rages
Impleme
ntation
Links
Schoo
ls
Regional
TOTALS
1 Chris 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 33
2 Bill 3 3 3 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 22
3 Peter 4 5 5 3 1 4 4 4 0 4 34
4 Catherine 2 2 3 2 0 1 0 2 0 2 14
5 Kristina 3 4 4 3 1 3 3 4 0 4 29
6 Howard 5 5 5 4 3 4 4 5 3 2 40
7Jim 344314433231
avg. SCORE 3.43 3.86 4.00 2.71 1.43 3.14 2.71 3.43 1.71 2.57 29.00
Notes:Projects are within the Airport Area Specific Plan. Relationships
exist with proposed Tank Farm Creek Bike path, Acacia Creek Trail
system and the East Fork of San Luis Creek Class I project. If
Buckley Road is extended to S. Higuera, Class II lanes would be
installed as part of construction.
2012 MasterProjects.xlsx 5/21/2012 BuckleyNetwrk
Attachment 2 - 1
Project
Section:
Section
Description:
Section
Intent:
Class:II
School Zone:LR
Pave Section:5
Length (Feet) 1,400 2,800
Est. Cost
Buckley Road Bikeway Network:
Buckley Extension Class I and II
Class I bike lane on the north side of Buckley, and Class II bike lanes
on both sides of Buckley, from S. Higuera to Vachell
To provide space for bicyclists and motorists, and connectivity to
bicycling facilities proposed for Buckley Rd.
$420,000
Class I Class II
$ 10,000
Com mu
ting
Safety
Recreational
Traffic Flow
Educates
Encou
rages
Impleme
ntation
Links
Schoo
ls
Regional
TOTALS
See overall Project Rank
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Section Notes:
See overall Project Rank
Project is adjacent to the Airport Area Specific Plan but provides connectivity
with the planning area's other bicycling projects. Relationships exist with
proposed Vachell ClassII, Buckley Class II, Buckley Class I Paths projects,
Tank Farm Creek Bike path, the Acacia Creek Trail System and the East Fork
of San Luis Creek Class I project.
2012 MasterProjects.xlsx 5/21/2012 BuckleyNetwrk
Attachment 2 - 2
III
SMHA
5
340
FirstPriority
Pave
section:
Class I 26,165 Class II
$ 680,000
52,330 Bridge
Est. Cost$8,791,150
School zone:
Length (Feet)
$ 261,650 $ 7,849,500
Project:
Intent:
Class:
Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class 1, Option A
Class I bike paths and class II lanes on the existing (2012) paved portion
of Prado Road continuing on to a grade separated crossing of US101,
continuing on Dalidio Rd.to Laguna Lake Park and then southeast along
Madonna Road to the intersection of Oceanaire.
Provide connectivity from the existing eastern terminus of Prado road as a
main east/west connector across town to shopping and, most notably, our
single middle school.
Description:
Nam
e (optional)
Com muting
Safety
Recreational
Traffic Flow
Educat
es
Encourag
es
Implementation
Links
Schools
Regional
TOTALS
1 Chris 5 5 4 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 34
2 Bill 4 4 2 2 1 1 0 3 3 1 21
3 Peter 0
4 Catherine 5 5 4 4 1 4 1 5 4 4 37
5 Kristina 5 3 3 4 2 4 1 5 5 1 33
6 Howard 5 5 5 5 3 4 5 5 4 2 43
7 Jim 5 5 5 5 1 5 3 5 5 2 41
avg. SCORE 4.83 4.50 3.83 3.83 1.83 3.50 1.83 4.50 4.00 2.17 34.83
Notes: The need for a Class II along this project length should be evaluated as
developments are proposed along the corridor.
There is a need for a Class I crossing of Hwy 101 between LOVR and
Madonna roads. Failure to provide a Class I Prado Rd. grade separated
crossing of Hwy. 101 with this project will trigger the need to implement
the "Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class 1, Option B" project.
Note the following project relationships: "Prado East extension to
Broad", "Prado to Calle Joaquin" of the Bob Jones Trail project, Prado Grade
Separated Crossing (GSX)".
2012 MasterProjects.xlsx 5/21/2012 OceanairePrado(A)
Attachment 2 - 3
I
SMHA
5
Description:
Project:
Intent:
Class:
Pave
section:
Length (Feet)170
Est. Cost$2,500,000
School zone:
Oceanaire to Existing East end of Prado Class 1, Option B
Class I crossing of Hwy. 101 between Madonna Road overpass and
LOVR overpass connecting to Oceanaire Dr., and planned Class I's
on Prado.
Provide connectivity from the existing eastern terminus of Prado
Road as a main east/west connector across town to shopping and,
most notably, our single middle school.
PriorityFirst
Name (optional)
Com muting
Safety
Recreational
Traffic Flow
Ed
ucates
En
courages
Implementation
Links
Schools
Regiona
l
TOTALS
1 Chris 5 5 2 3 3 4 1 3 3 3 32
2 Bill 4 4 2 2 1 1 0 3 3 1 21
3 Peter 0
4 Catherine 4 4 4 2 0 4 0 5 5 2 30
5 Kristina 5 5 3 4 2 5 1 5 5 1 36
6 Howard 5 5 5 4 3 4 5 5 4 2 42
7 Jim 5 5 5 5 1 5 2 5 5 2 40
avg. SCORE 4.67 4.67 3.50 3.33 1.67 3.83 1.50 4.33 4.17 1.83 33.50
Notes: If a Prado Road GSX for motor vehicles is not to be installed, this
project calls for a bicycle/pedestrian facility installation. If a Prado
Road grade separated crossing of Hwy. 101 is completed for
automobile traffic, incorporating appropriate bicycle facilities would
suffice for this project.
Failure of this project implementation will require the addition of
a Class I crossing of Hwy. 101 on LOVR.
Note project relationships: "Prado East extension to Broad",
"Prado to Calle Joaquin" of the Bob Jones Trail project, "Oceanaire
to Existing East end of Prado Class I".
2012 MasterProjects.xlsx 5/21/2012 OceanairePrado(B)
Attachment 2 - 4
I
SM
6
Class:
School zone:
Pave
section:
Project:Laguna Middle School Connection
Description:
Install a bridge from Oceanaire to the pocket park on Vista del
Lago over Prefumo creek.
Intent:Provide better cycling connectivity to schools (Laguna Middle
School and C.L.Smith) between neighborhoods (Laguna St. area
and Oceanaire area) to avoid use of LOVR.
Length (Feet)
PriorityNA
Est. Cost$500,000
590
Name (
optiona
l)
Com muting
Safety
Rec
r
eational
Traffi
c Flow
Educa
tes
Enco
urages
Implem
entation
Links
Sch
ools
Reg
ional
TOTALS
1 Chris 0
2 Bill 0
3 Peter 0
4 Catherine 0
5 Kristina 0
6 Howard 0
7 Jim 0
avg. SCORE ##############################0.00
Notes:The City does not currently own land or have easements needed
for the creek to park crossing option. City of SLO Bicycle Count
Data for 2008 shows the intersection of LOVR and Oceanaire use
as 25th highest out of 28, with a total count of 39.
No Ranking yet:Waiting for BAC
input as to if they want to
maintain this project.
2012 MasterProjects.xlsx 5/21/2012 MiddleSchBridge
Attachment 3 - 1
Location in 2007 PlanLocation in 2012 Plan Description of Change
Objectives (definition) pg. 8Purpose, Page 2
In 2007 (and approved by BAC for use in 2012) read: are specific
endeavors that support the achievement of goals.
In 2012 draft reads: Expected outcomes to implementation of this
Plan’s projects, policies, and actions.
Actions (definition) pg. 8Purpose, Page 2
In 2007 (and approved by BAC for use in 2012) read: are specific steps
needed to implement this Plan.
In 2012 draft reads: Implementation steps associated with specific
Plan policies.
n/aPolicy 1.16, Page 30
New Policy: Roundabouts or Traffic Circles: Designs shall provide
bicyclists the choice of proceeding through the roundabout as either a
vehicle or a pedestrian…
n/aPolicy 1.20, Page 30
New Policy: The use of bollards on any facility where bicycling is not
expressly prohibited should be avoided. For Class I Bike paths, a
divided path (two narrower one-way paths just prior to the roadway
intersection of the path) should be considered in lieu of the
installation of bollards. When bollards are used, they should comply
with City standards.
n/a Implementation Action
1.20.1, Page 31
New Action: Revise City Engineering Standards to include current best
practices for bollard use, including but not limited to: minimum five
foot clear space between bollards, minimum five foot setback of
bollard from structures or path access points, number of posts used,
and diversion striping.
n/a Implementation Action
1.20.2, Page 31
New Action: Maintain an inventory of existing bollard placements
within the City, review for compliance with City Engineering
Standards, and upgrade during regular maintenance and/or when
funds are available.
Policy 3.5 and 3.6 Policy 1.35, Page 33 Policy 3.5 removed, and 3.6 modified with BAC approved text, "Vandal
resistant…", along with, "all Class I bikeways…".
n/aPolicy 2.6, Page 45
New Policy: Bicycle Racks shall be installed pursuant to City
requirements and the manufacturer’s specifications for placement and
clearance from obstructions.
n/a Policy 2.7, Page 45 New Policy : The City shall maintain bicycle parking standards in its
Engineering Standards.
n/a Policy 2.9, Page 45 New Policy : …Bicycle racks should be mounted off the street, …
The following table highlights changes made to the 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Draft since the March 2012 Bicycle Advisory
Committee meeting. Note that this is a subset listing of the complete plan changes ("Summary of changes for 2012 Plan" table) as
listed in the "Draft 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Introduction". Notes have been added here to highlight differences from past
versions reviewed by the BAC.
Draft Plan Modifications for BAC Consideration
Notes: BAC approved policy included specifications and actions. Action items above replace these items. (See BAC agenda from
7/21/11 - attachment 2 for BAC approved text.)
Notes: Changes as noted
Notes: Changed "should" to "shall" which is consistent with Highway Design Manual direction.
Notes: Revision covers all Class I bikeways. Street lighting covers all Class II bikeways - no need for BTP policy.
Notes: Modified BAC approved language, "shall" to "should" to allow in-street mounting as a possibility.
Notes: Staff added new policy 2.7 to help support policy 2.6.
1
Attachment 4 - 1
Location in 2007 PlanLocation in 2012 Plan Description of Change
Policy 2.7 Policy 2.15, Page 47
Reordered and organized for "Siting" and "Design and Installation" -
Added: "Provide for both front-in and back-in parking, allowing…",
"Install at highly visible locations...", "Parked bicycles should neither
be in jeopardy of damage...", "Avoid locations that require bicycles to
travel over stairs".
Policy 2.11 Policy 2.21, Page 49 Added: "… with at least one wheel touching the ground" to "b".
Policy 3.8 Policy 2.22, Page 49 Removed: "will", and Added : "shall"
Supports Circ. Element Policy 4.1.5
pg. 16 (not in 2007 BTP)Policy 2.27, Page 50
New Policy (modifies Circulation Element Policy and reflects updates
to the zoning regulations done since the writing of the Circ. Element.):
The City shall establish requirements for the provision of shower
facilities at work places.
n/a Implementation Action
3.1.1, Page 57
Implementation Action: Maintain the current 50% Principal
Transportation Planner position and 25% Transportation
Programs Assistant staff position, and propose funding to
increase staffing as the City’s fiscal health improves.
n/a Implementation Action
3.7.2, Page 59
Implementation Action: Continue to provide annual bicycling behavior
training to City transit drivers, preferably just prior to the start of the
Fall school term.
n/a Implementation Action
3.7.4, Page 59
Implementation Action: Pursue other opportunities such as
presentations and online materials to inform residents and
businesses of typical bicycling behaviors, common collision
patterns and bicycle facility treatments within the City.
n/a Implementation Action
3.8.1, Page 59
Implementation Action: As funding is available, design, create,
erect and maintain signage for routes /facilities/destinations
identified as routes supporting the promotion of bicycling as a
transportation mode, especially in conjunction with tourism and
through-town linkages.
Notes: Vertical storage systems that require lift of the bike are not usable by some people.
Notes: Modified to strengthen policy.
Notes: Additionally, there were many small wording changes to BAC approved text (agenda from 7/21/11 - attachment 2), but no
intent changes.
Notes: Staff added policy to support the Circulation Element Policy 4.1.5, recognizing changes in zoning regulations that have already
occurred since the Circ. Element was last updated.
Notes: Modified BAC approved language to include Principal Transportation Planner information.
Notes: BAC approved policy broken in to two pieces, both presented as "Implementation Action".
Notes: Added by staff to support BAC discussion on topic.
2
Attachment 4 - 2
Location in 2007 PlanLocation in 2012 Plan Description of Change
n/a Implementation Action
3.10.1, Page 60
Implementation Action: Support efforts by local organizations or
individuals to nominate and maintain the City’s League of American
Bicyclists (LAB) Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) award status by
providing the necessary information.
n/aPolicy 3.11, Page 60
New Policy: Focus implementation of this plan’s policies and projects
utilizing feedback from the BFC process “key measures” and reviewer
recommendations.
n/a Implementation Action
3.11.1, Page 60
Implementation Action: The BAC shall consider BFC review
feedback when recommending projects during the City’s goal
setting process and during the update process of this plan.
Policy 5.2 Implementation Action
4.10.1, Page 72
In 2007 read: "Continue to include major bicycle capital projects,
including the Railroad Safety Trail, in the City’s Capitol Improvement
and Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) programs."
In 2012 reads: "Integrate Bicycle Transportation Plan projects in to the
City’s five year Capital Improvement program budget and
Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) programs."
Policy 5.5Policy. 4.9, Page 72
In 2007 read: "… establish a financial partnership with Cal Poly..."
In 2012 reads:"…develop financial partnerships with others…"
n/a Policy 4.11, Page 73 New Policy: The City will continue to gather bicycling related
data for City facility evaluation purposes.
Notes: Staff added policy
Notes: Staff modified policy
Notes: Staff added action
Notes: Changes as noted
Notes: BAC approved policy changed to an action, with underlined text inserted.
Notes: Staff added policy
3
Attachment 4 - 3
Date: May 3, 2012
To: Bicycle Advisory Committee
From: Peggy Mandeville, Principal Transportation Planner
Re: Bicycling Compliments from Lisa Bugrova
I received the following email this week and wanted to pass the compliments on to the Committee. The
project she is requesting was considered by the Committee last year and has been included in the draft
2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan.
“I'm so impressed with all the work the City has done for bikeway planning and improvements and the
extensive effort that has been done with prioritization of improvements. It’s wonderful to come back to
SLO after living away for several years and see all that has been completed. Having always lived near
downtown, I had not closely considered the bike connections from Laguna Lake, but am now looking at
a house out there so am vitally interested in getting a safe connection for our family to downtown, and
avoiding riding on Madonna Road.
I've reviewed the Laguna Lake connections proposed in the plan to Foothill, and am wondering if a
connection from Laguna Lake, along Madonna property behind the hotels on the north side of Madonna
Road has been considered, or disregarded due to environmental or private property issues? As the
extension to Madonna Inn was used for air quality mitigation from the Irish Hills development, it would
seem actually creating a viable connection from these improvements to downtown should be put in
there to consider, especially with the increase in hotels, getting those people downtown without their
cars would be so cool. I can imagine the increase in bicycle trips that would occur if families had a safe
path to get them directly to downtown, and alternatively, out to Laguna Area.
Again, thank you to the City staff involved directly with bike planning and to the supportive culture for
alternative transportation that exists in SLO.
Before moving back to SLO, I worked for San Dimas Public Works and took on an update of their
antiquated Bike Master Plan. I checked out SLO's 2007 plan during that effort since I knew how much
work went into it and how successful the City has been with funding acquisitions. It is one of the best
I've seen, and to see how much has been accomplished is just so awesome.”
Attachment 5