134 registered statements
Bryan Colson inside Neighborhood 7
December 6, 2017, 3:34 PM
As a Senior having a safe way to access downtown should be just the beginning of walking & elecric / bike paths in SLO.
November 26, 2017, 6:21 AM
While I am all for riding bikes, many riders in the city do not obey the traffic laws and should not be given specialized treatment because they are on bicycles. I’ve continually have to cross over the double yellow line in order to avoid riders riding to close to the outer bike line just because, or due to debris near the curb or riding double or even triple wide instead of single file. And many times there is oncoming traffic.
In addition Broad St. in that section is a major thoroughfare to the freeway and is far too narrow for a bike lane unless there it was made into a one way street. That raises the question of which direction ? Both ways are equally as important. And what about the residents who live there and need to park on the street since those homes are older and may not have enough driveway area?
Chorro (if an option) would also be a bad choice.
I do have an option for consideration. What about using Lincoln as the bike blvd.? It’s the widest in the area and does link to Chorro.
dia Hurd inside Neighborhood 7
November 24, 2017, 1:32 PM
There is absolutely No reason to carry through this proposal! Bicycles are currently given room on most major and minor thoroughfares in this City and in rural areas adjacent as well. Not only are the City staff misrepresenting the actual count of individuals who ACTUALLY LIVE AND PAY TAXES HERE that WANT the project to proceed. They make this empty statement at meetings and in writing primarily to shut down opposition to this horrendous plan, and further insult the City current residents who live on that street and in that vicinity, who do NOT want this plan. This has been the ongoing disrespect of longtime City residents and taxpayers, whom pay through our taxes for many plans we do not agree with. So often at council meetings we hear from outsiders who want what the City is proposing. It is a slap in the face of the folks who live here. This plan will fail in a spectacular fashion. The first resident on North Broad who needs emergency services at their residence either a medical emergency or a fire emergency will either be put in extreme house or health jeopardy due to lack of normal curbside parking space. When the City is sued under these circumstances, or some life is lost to jeopardy of the situation, we the taxpayers and friends of those who live on North Broad will pay for this shortsighted project that pits cyclists against homeowners. Do those multitudes of cyclists that ride down NorthBroad daily (as if) feel safer when an emergency vehicle or UPS vehicle is suddenly parked right in front of them, forcing them to dart out in traffic? How many cyclists will see the danger of the complacency of this change and likely stay away from this section of road now dedicated to them? This is a lose lose proposition. The cyclists will lose and the homeowners will be permanently stuck with an unsaleable home due to the project. You ruin this street at the risk of continuing to ruin the City you claim to love. Preservation is the only way you will keep this City one of the most desirable in the state.
November 24, 2017, 1:32 PM
How about Northbound bike traffic utilizes Lincoln and southbound bike traffic uses Broad street? One way bike lanes for Bikes.....not for auto traffic. When I ride, that's how I get around.
Also, let's be sensitive to the seniors in these neighborhoods. They are plentiful. They need to park in front of their homes. Many don't have the luxury of good health to park across the street or a block down to get to their homes safely. They are already challenged to stay in their homes. Let's not make it more difficult.
Lee Todd inside Neighborhood 10
November 23, 2017, 6:23 PM
Don't make bike blvds. in old neighborhoods with streets narrow enough to take away their street parking! Build bike blvds. into new streets that will still allow street parking for residents.
Robert Shanbrom inside Neighborhood 1
October 7, 2017, 5:05 PM
There are two major technological disruptions on the radar that are highly germane to the BSBB discussion. The first is that electric bikes are now becoming commonplace and relatively inexpensive, much cheaper than a car. The second is that somewhere around 2021-2023 we will begin a rapid switchover to autonomous (electric) vehicles. This means that many families will own just one car and will use inexpensive autonomous e-cars for many of their local trips, even sending their kids to school that way. This means that much less parking will be needed. There's already an electric bike leasing business in town with 150 bikes on the road. E-biking/biking is a huge overall benefit to the users and to our community and the globe. So, my opinion is that taking away parking spots to create bike boulevards should not be a major concern. This is not to say that I necessarily agree with the BSBB, it's just to say that parking loss should not be a concern.
Pete Evans inside Neighborhood 7
October 6, 2017, 9:31 PM
I don't think the City is giving adequate attention to the concerns of the residents of this neighborhood. I think all the alternatives could seriously disrupt life for those folks living in the upper Broad/Chorro neighborhood. You would serve your constituents by listening to them instead of imposing your own attitudes.
September 1, 2017, 6:22 AM
I live off Tassajara from Foothill & work downtown. I have not only driven this route daily for the past 8 years to work, but also to pick up kids and deliver them to school.
I find the thought of making this a one way street absurd and bias to the few that are trying to change the "look" of our community. I have seen limited bikers on the route that would not demand this change not to mention the ones I do see fly through stop signs ignoring traffic signs as previous responders have indicated. Just a cursory glance of the feedback even indicates this to be a small minority trying to be the "squeaky wheel". Now let's talk COST! There is already tremendous traffic during work hours on Santa Rosa and California, so to push for closures or one way streets for Chorro and Broad is an obvious misguided and personally agenda oriented idea.
August 15, 2017, 4:38 PM
I find the idea of changing Chorro Street into a one way street extremely short sighted. Chorro Street is one of four streets that connect the North and South parts of San Luis Obispo bisected by Highway 101. This road serves as a major thoroughfare for private, commercial and emergency vehicles. What greater need is there that necessitates this change ? A safer bike route balanced with the major inconvenience to the homeowners and commuters ? Going by that logic the bike boulevard on Morro Street would have been placed on Osos and Santa Barbara Streets.
Bicycle safety would be better served establishing a Class 1 or 2 bike lane on Lincoln Street. I live on Chorro Street and I regularly use Lincoln Street to cycle because of the lack of traffic and lack of stop signs. While a bicycle/pedestrian bridge on Broad Street over Highway 101 may be a long term goal, it is unlikely to be realized without a great deal of money. For a fraction of that cost a bicycle/pedestrian bridge, over the creek, on Montalban Street, would better serve to promote bicycle commuting to and from the Anholm neighborhood.
Perry Irwin inside Neighborhood 1
August 15, 2017, 3:43 PM
I live on Serrano Drive off of Broad Street. My observation is that the way bicyclists ignore the existing stop signs on both Broad Street and Chorro Street is what creates problems for both themselves and those driving these routes. It is not unusual to safely pass a bicyclist on either street only to have them blow through the next stop sign and then have to pass them again. If they stopped, they would stay in the flow of traffic and things would be safer for them. Changing the neighborhood to cater to these relatively few users does not seem logical. Instead of catering to these unsafe riders, the City should enforce the traffic laws already in place which would put money into the City coffers. Aggressive enforcement would also be a big deterrent to the cyclists who fail to follow the same traffic laws that the rest of us must. That being said, I am against any alternative that would put more traffic on Chorro, Meinecke or Lincoln Streets. Why should the tax paying citizens of these streets be penalized for the unsafe actions of a few. This is a classic example of if it isn't broken, don't fix it. These are thorough fares for all our citizens to use. If traffic laws are adhered to, they can be safely used by all just the way they are.
Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.