Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/14/2018 Item 2, Cooper Sheffield, Alexis From:Allan Cooper <allancoope@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, August To:Fukushima, Adam; Advisory Bodies Subject:Letter to SLO Planning Commission Regarding Anholm Bikeway Adam - Would you kindly forward this letter to the Planning Commission in time for the Commissioners to see it tonight? Sorry for the late submittal! - Allan To: SLO Planning Commission and Adam Fukushima Re: Anholm Neighborhood Bikeway From: Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo Date: August 14, 2018 Honorable Chair Fowler & Commissioners - As with 790 Foothill, you are once again being asked to force the hand of the Council by reviewing a project that could in many fundamental ways be altered were the Council allowed its discretionary right to do so. As with 790 Foothill, where the two zoning concessions granted by the Director were “assumed” to be satisfactory to the Council, staff is again “assuming” that the City Council will approve the installation of a traffic diverter on Broad Street even after hearing opposing testimony from the public. It appears that staff is driving this agenda at the risk of marginalizing input from the public and undermining our Council’s final authority in this matter. The Broad Street “diverters” at Broad, Ramona and Meinecke will dramatically increase traffic volumes on Chorro and Lincoln as well as all side streets connecting Broad to Chorro. Using the city’s own figures, this alternative would lower traffic volumes on Broad St. considerably. However, traffic volumes on Chorro (Foothill to Palm) will rise to approximately 8,500 and on Lincoln (Broad to Chorro) will rise to approximately 5,300, without accounting for additional mode shift. With the proposed diverter on Broad Street and neighborhood wide traffic calming, and in the worst case forecasted daily volume for the Meinecke & Murray (Broad to Santa Rosa), street segments will rise to a range of approximately 1,500 to 1,600. Because of the impacts of the diverters to shift traffic volumes from Broad to Chorro and their side streets, staff previously deemed that such an alternative was “infeasible”. On May 10, 2018, the City hosted a “Neighborhood meeting” in the City/County Library where those in attendance resoundingly opposed the introduction of traffic diverters but rather proposed the introduction of partial diffusers. As of July 2018 an “Alternative B” was developed by a group of neighborhood residents and represented by Broad Street 1 resident Keith Gurnee. This alternative proposed partial diffusers (or diverters) on Broad Street and Chorro Street with the ultimate goal of diverting most through traffic away from Broad and Chorro Street to Santa Rosa Street. Your staff report includes a critique of this proposal without allowing the residents an opportunity to respond. Hopefully you will hear their response tonight. The initial study makes recommendations using a nebulous metric assuring some level of “low-stress” for both pedestrians and bicyclists. It further critiques “Alternative B” because it does not achieve its ultimate goal of diverting most through traffic away from Broad and Chorro Street to Santa Rosa Street. Now one diverter is being proposed by staff on a one year test basis. Staff will then return to Council with performance test results and seek direction on whether to complete installation in a permanent fashion or to remove it. In conclusion, I urge you to reject the question staff has presented you with. Staff is asking you the following: “Is accepting volume increases along effected streets, by virtue of their reclassification, an acceptable tradeoff to improve the cycling environment along Broad Street as a means to increase ridership?”. You should instead select a third alternative which is to recommend that the neighborhood residents, staff and the City Council continue to work together to further tweak “Alternative B” with the ultimate goal of diverting most through traffic away from Broad and Chorro Street to Santa Rosa Street. After all is said and done, what is the rush? Thank you. 2