Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-19-2011 BAC minutes MINUTES Regular Meeting of the SAN LUIS OBISPO BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Council Hearing Room, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo May 19, 2011 Thursday 7 p.m. MISSION: The purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Committee 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: Present: Bill Bradlee (Chair), Catherine Machado, Kristina Seley, and Howard Weisenthal Absent: Peter Deragon (Vice Chair), Chris Black, and Jim Woolf. Staff Members: Kevin Christian, Chrissy Ford (intern), Jake Hudson, and Peggy Mandeville SWEARING IN: Peggy Mandeville swore in new members, Catherine Machado and Howard Weisenthal. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. MINUTES: March 17, 2011 meeting: Action: CM Seley moved, seconded by CM Bradlee, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION ITEMS: Agenda Item #1: 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update-request for public input Ms. Mandeville discussed the staff request for the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) to receive public comment on the Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Update. She outlined the BTP update process, along with inclusion of possible new projects from the Unmet Bicycle Needs listings generated by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), and previously received public comment. As the meeting was opened for public comment, Mr. Christian noted that staff had received public input from Brad Forde and Roger Longden, Allan C ooper, and the SLO Bicycle Club, which will be attached to the meeting minutes. Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, stated he supported the traffic calming efforts for the benefit of bicyclists and pedestrians and favored bicycle boulevards. He specifically would like the Broad Street Bike Blvd. plan implemented, including a grade separated crossing of Hwy. 101. He felt there was a need for more bike parking racks downtown, cited a personal survey of individuals downtown that favor a centralized bike parking area, and suggested creating an electronic bike parking management system. He stated the BTP update should be coordinated with a draft pedestrian plan. Gary Havas, San Luis Obispo, discussed the Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC) meeting last week and the efforts to facilitate signage to increase pedestrian traffic in the downtown area. He felt bike paths should have signage that directs cyclists to amenities within town (citing a system in Santa Barbara), and that this would meld with PCC efforts. Dan Rivoire, Director of the San Luis Obispo County Bicycle Coalition (SLOCBC), stated the SLOCBC supports the Unmet Bicycle Needs projects listing. He was concerned about the slow progress on the Railroad Safety Trail and Prefumo Creek bridge projects. Agenda Item #2: California/Monterey Intersection – proposed improvements Jake Hudson, City Traffic Operations Manager, discussed bicycle vs. vehicle collisions at the intersection and the improvements considered to address the collision pattern, including a bike box design, solid green painted bike lanes, and new signage. He reported that he had been working with Cal Trans and representatives from Seattle on potential design solutions. He asked for BAC and public input. Ms. Mandeville noted that any improvements will be monitored to measure their effectiveness. Frank Owen, San Luis Obispo, asked about project signage. Steve Scarich, Oregon resident, suggested that staff consult with the City of Portland, where bike boxes had been implemented with varying levels of success. He felt bike boxes gave cyclists a false sense of security. Dan Rivoire, San Luis Obispo, felt options discussed by Mr. Hudson were an improvement to the area but shared concerns about the false sense of cyclist safety. He suggested implementing a green “sharrow” lane through the intersection in the middle of the lane similar to an installation in Long Beach, CA. Paula Sigman, San Luis Obispo, discussed the Long Beach lanes and felt wider lanes were preferred. Mr. Hudson reiterated that currently California Blvd. has Class II bike lanes and that the proposed solution works with those lanes. Use of “sharrows” would mean elimination of the bike lanes and require a different classification being authorized within the Bicycle Plan. Staff agreed that consulting with representatives from Portland, Oregon was a good idea and asked the BAC members to email staff with any further input. Agenda Item #3: Bicycle Transportation Plan Update (Consent of material presented at last meeting) BTP text - Plan pages 6-10: Staff requested input on any further changes to the consent items, or that members state an agreement with the consent item direction. CM Weisenthal noted a couple of language clarifications for the draft policy section in Attachment 3. All BAC members agreed with the consent items. BTP projects - Pavement Areas 1 and 2: Islay St. Bicycle Blvd.: Frank Owen, San Luis Obispo commented that he felt the street was OK as is and may not need to become a Bike Blvd. During discussion of this project, the subject of the crossing of Santa Barbara St. at Upham was brought up as a concern. Staff requested the BAC provide any input they may have for improvement. Ella St. Neighborhood Bicycle Blvd.: During discussion of this project it was decided that the BAC should rank both options for this project to help differentiate implementation priorities. French Hospital Connection Trail Cuesta Park / Loomis South bound Hwy. 101 Exit Southwood shared lane markings Jennifer St. Bridge access to Morro St.: During discussion of this project Ed Jaster, San Luis Obispo, expressed his concern that the City keep the vision of the Railroad Safety Trail running continuous from the north to south sides of town. Website Travel Routes: Discussion on this item garnered public input suggesting use of existing web sites, or links to them (Car Free, SLO Regional Rideshare, and SLOCBC). The BAC agreed to provide staff with input on their desire to include this as a new project and if so, how to clarify the project intent. (Presentation of new material) BTP text- Plan pages 10-14: BAC members agreed to review and provide input to staff. Staff will bring a draft version of the section to the BAC for discussion as a consent item at the July meeting. CM Weisenthal requested that there be a policy for bollards on bike paths, and noted a report done by the Santa Barbara Bicycle Coalition. Staff indicated that they were aware of the report and that some aspects of it have been included in other City planning documents, and they would look at the BTP for proper inclusion. BTP projects - Pavement Area 3: Staff intern Ms. Ford presented the projects and staff discussed as noted: Acacia Creek Class I Trail System: Staff noted that the 2012 plan will include descriptive names for each trail section. El Capitan / Poinsettia Class 1 Connection Margarita Area Bikeways: Staff noted that these projects will be implemented as part of the Margarita Area Specific Plan Prado East extension to Broad Industrial/Capitolio Class II: The Class II bike lane on Sacramento has been installed, as well as shared lane markings on both Industrial and Capitolio as an interim measure to removing on-street parking to install bike lanes. Staff proposes the bike lane project be retained in the BTP until post construction traffic counts/studies are conducted to determine if the bike lane designation continues to be necessary. Bike/Cart Ramp on UPRR Undercrossing (between Spanish Oaks and Poinsettia): Suggestions were made that a ramp be provided on the edge of the steps to aid in walking bikes up/down the steps rather than a ride -able ramp. Staff will provide a draft project for review at the July meeting. Class II Bike Lane Widening on Tank Farm (between Santa Fe and Old Windmill): This project has been listed on the SLOCOG Unmet Bikeway Needs list in multiple years. Although this area is currently in the County, it was presented in this meeting because the area is in the Airport Area Specific Plan and is proposed to be annexed to the City. Current City BTP policy would require the lane to be wider due to traffic speed and volume. The project area will be discussed again during Pavement Area 5 review, as there are multiple Airport Area Specific Plan bikeways in that section. Marigold Shopping Center (Von’s) Shortcut Class I: This proposed new project was left without a consensus as to if it should be included. Concerns were expressed about how the entrance/exits would function safely where they meet the roadways. BAC members were asked to provide additional input to staff on the project. It will be further discussed at the July meeting. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Agenda Item #4: Committee Member Items There were no items identified for discussion Agenda Item # 5: Staff Items There was general discussion on updates to the following: Grant funded bike projects: o The Laguna Middle School Connection project, known also as the Prefumo Creek Bridge project, will proceed as a 2 -way Class I Bikeway adjacent to the westbound Los Osos Valley Road at sidewalk level. This is in lieu of the creek crossing and pathway on the Windermere property, as they withdrew their project that provided an easement on their property. o Railroad Safety Trail, Hwy. 101 Bridge crossing, and Amtrak to Marsh Street projects. Funding extensions have been filed, along with route changes needed for Union Pacific Railroad approval. The route that has been identified extends the trail from Hathway along California, behind the California Highway Patrol office, and across the tracks to Pepper Street. Johnson Ave, bike facility improvements: The project design calls for traffic diverter on south bound Johnson at Buchon to be moved and a dedicated right turn only lane and bicycle slot installed. In the north bound direction, a Class II bike lane will be added between San Luis Drive and Buchon. This is facilitated by the elimination of a travel lane. 2011-2013 Financial Plan: Staff informed the BAC that ½ of the Principal Transportation Planner position is proposed to be transferred to the Parking Services division. ACTION: CM Bradlee moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:27 p.m. CM Seley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary To promote safe and legal riding of bicycles and encourage bicycle riding as an accepted mode of transportation May 17, 2011 To: Bicycle Advisory Committee, City of San Luis Obispo From: SLOBC Advocate – Dale Sutliff Re: SLO City Bike Plan Update for 2012 This letter is to inform you of the San Luis Bicycle Club’s interest in working with the BAC as you update the current Bike Plan. Please keep us posted as to times and format for our input and feedback. We commend you for all of your good work in planning and implementing bicycle improvements in San Luis Obispo. I have reviewed the minutes of the SLO BAC of the last few meetings and am impressed with the program for updating your bike plan and the projects you’ve tentatively identified. Also, the list of unmet bicycle needs, as applies to San Luis Obispo, should be rolled into those considerations. For now, let me say that San Luis Obispo has an exceptional bike plan. However, there is always room for additions and improvements as conditions and knowledge changes. Here are just a few items to consider, initially, which I’ve gotten much input on from bike club members: • Ensure a continuity of Class I and Class II bikeways, and Class III bike routes, that accomplish an unbroken continuum of bike travel across the city. • Associated with the above, provide clear and adequate signage for cyclists and drivers that would better delineate bicycle travel ways. This includes both on pavement and post signage. • Make LOVR from Madonna Road to Higuera Street more bike friendly. Consider installing solid painted, continuous (unbroken) bike lanes and plenty of signage. This need would apply to any streets in the city with both heavy automobile and bicycle use. • Do something about bollards at entries to bike paths, bridges, etc. They are hazardous to bicyclists – both in the center, and at the edges. Not enough room is provided, and tandem, trike and quad bikes can’t negotiate them. Check for good solutions by other cities, particularly Santa Barbara Bike Coalition recommendations. • Assure that the city’s bike plan is assimilated with the recently adopted SLO County Bike Plan 2010, especially in regard to closing gaps for commuters using Class I and Class II bikeways. SLOCOG has recently put together a Regional Bikeway Corridor Assessment that will be very helpful for this. We look forward to working with you as the 2012 SLO City Bike Plan Update develops further. Sincerely, Dale A. Sutliff SLOBC Advocate Cc: Robert F. Davis, SLOBC President From: robert strong Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 12:02 PM To: Mandeville, Peggy Cc: Mandeville, John; James Bergman; Teresa McClish; Subject: Bike plan priorities Hi John and Peggy, I missed last night's meeting after reading yesterday's article in the slocity news, but do have some ideas. Also my former planning manager in AG is now the CDD in Windsor, CA so I copied him as another bike advocate. My biggest comment is keep up the greast work getting new paths and lanes in SLO, particularly for cross-town travel. That supports the two top prirrities, but also identifies the single most apparent gap: the connection of the trail south of Prado Road past the STP and creek to LOVR. Even if it requires wading, it needs to do more than make the dead end loop. Knowing how expensive bridges are, it is only because the trail is already there that this link is #1. The railroad trail has gaps too, but few that are as essential or cheaply corrected. In general, however, the addition of bike lanes and bike boulevards that facilitate commutes and cross town travel are more miles for fewer dollars. Maybe Broad Street from Foothill to Lincoln should be considered to the northwest. On a professional basis, I would like any data you have on the increase in bike use resulting from the recent improvements. And because I want to help AG and GB finish their bike plans, I would appreciate any cost per mile info you have for Class 1,2 and 3 facilities completed in SLO. The AG plans so far is all done with local and road funds: without cost estimates for the bike elements done or needed, they have been developed without BTA grants. Please call me at 7045716 or reply email if you can help, and advise when the plan update in SLO will go to public hearing at PC or CC. Thanks, and keep up the fine example and leadership in the County- Rob From: Allan Cooper Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 1:59 PM To: Mandeville, Peggy Subject: Bike Plan Update Dear Peggy- I thought I should add a "number 4" to my list. Thanks! - Allan May 19, 2011 Dear Peggy - The following are my thoughts regarding the proposed Bike Plan Update: 1) Advocate incorporation of grade separated crossings (including 2 over Highway 101) and all seven new bicycle boulevards for BOTH pedestrians and bicyclists as indicated 2) Incorporate traffic circles, one way chokers, raised medians and bulb outs at intersections leading into bike boulevards to enhance traffic calming for BOTH pedestrians and bicyclists 3) Provision of bike racks encourages pedestrian activity downtown. We need more than the current 24 racks that are downtown. Advocate centralized bike parking and a parking management system that provides advanced real time electronic monitoring of available bike parking spaces (see Nippon Signal technology) 4) Advocate that the Bike Plan Update be coordinated with the development of a draft SLO Pedestrian Plan Thanks for your timely notifications regarding this workshop. See you there! Allan Cooper, Chair Save Our Downtown From: Roger Longden Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 5:32 PM To: Mandeville, Peggy Cc: Brad Forde Subject: Upcoming Transportation Meeting May 19th. Dear Ms Mandeville, The two way stop at Capitolio and Sacramento is obviously a benefit to those driving Capitolio, especially when they are not turning onto Sacramento. However, oblique turns onto Sacramento and reduced site distances due to the oblique nature of the intersection can create confusion. For the drivers who are familiar with the intersection it is probably not much of a problem. People new to it may be surprised by the traffic crossing Sacramento without stopping. At this time it has not been a problem for our building occupants at 3485 Sacramento. Drivers must be careful when negotiating the intersection. Additionally, the arrangement for shared road with bicyclists instead of parking space eliminations for bicycle lanes is very important and much appreciated by the individuals who have their businesses at 3485 Sacramento. We are sorry that we are not able to attend the meeting on May 19th. Thank you for keeping us in the loop. Cheers, Roger Longden Brad Forde