Tonight: UCPG on the Coastal Rail Trail
At 6:00 pm tonight, the University Community Planning Group (UCPG) will select a preferred alternative for the Coastal Rail Trail Project. We ask that the board vote to recommend Alternative 2 as the preferred alternative, as detailed in our letter to the UCPG Chair below:
Dear UCPG Chair,
I write on behalf of BikeSD, a non-profit advocacy organization dedicated to transforming San Diego into a world-class city for bicycling.
I understand that the University Community Planning Group will be evaluating the Coastal Rail Trail at this week's meeting.
We ask that your board vote to recommend Alternative 2 as the preferred alternative. Our reasoning is simple: it ranks well ahead of the other four alternatives as evaluated by the City of San Diego's own consultants. This route connects UCSD with a huge population base and has all the environmental approvals. We want you to hold Caltrans and the City of San Diego accountable to their promise to build this alternative to ensure that residents, commuters, and other travelers have a safe and inviting route to get to and from their destinations.
Alternatives 5, 6, and 7 should be removed from consideration. In a city with limited open space, care should be given to ensure that we preserve our few accessible canyons. Let's not ruin Rose Canyon or Roselle Canyon in an attempt to provide a bicycle facility that is going to be expensive, invasive to our natural assets, and not welcomed by the University City community.
If the City absolutely requires a second "preferred alternative", we recommend Alternative 4 be carried into environmental analysis. It is a direct route that connects UCSD and is not as invasive as Alternatives 5,6, or 7.
The City has spent the last decade implementing only 4% of the 2002-adopted Bicycle Master Plan. Of that, over $10 million was spent on a 0.2 mile bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Lake Hodges. Although this is an asset and a source of pride in the local community, it failed to address the needs established in the Bicycle Master Plan to provide facilities where they would give a great return on investment and meet the needs identified by the bicycle-riding public. We want to avoid similar short-sighted attempts to spend valuable public funds to address a connectivity issue that could otherwise be addressed with fewer public funds and with more support from the community.
From an investment standpoint, spending only $4 million to connect the UCSD community to points north and south should be prioritized above alternatives with costs approaching $20 million. We typically advocate for protected bicycle facilities within existing road right-of-way by realigning existing vehicle traffic (such as realigning parking or placing barriers between vehicle and bicycle traffic). The funds saved by choosing Alternative 2 can be used to build cost-effective bicycle facilities in communities that have been neglected by the city for decades.
I hope that you will seriously consider our comments and reach out if you have specific questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Samantha Ollinger
Executive Director, BikeSD
Update: The UCPG unanimously voted to approve Alternative 2. Here is a map showing the alignments that I prepared for my own reference - Sam
Update on Year 1 Goals: Increasing City Funding for Bikes
When we launched last year, our board voted on a list of seven goals to help guide our advocacy efforts during our first year. We met many of our goals and are working towards or fine-tuning the remainder. We will provide a full update on how our first year transpired along with our annual report. Until then, I want to provide an update on our Goal #5:
Work to increase city funding for bikes from 0.1% of General Fund to 0.9% of General Fund to reflect existing bike mode share. Bike infrastructure, especially good quality bike infrastructure costs money and we’re going to advocate to increase funding in the City’s budget.
First, the good news: in this year's adopted budget, 3% of the city’s transportation budget will be spent on bikes.
Second, we need to dig deeper and learn more about what we uncovered.
Our board approved this goal last year based on the concept of induced demand. Induced demand also applies to bicycle facilities and within bike advocacy circles this translates into "build it and they will come".
In retrospect, the original goal as listed was a bit imprecise; for example, there was no need to base the amount off of the General Fund instead of the Transportation Department’s budget. However, this gave us an opportunity to learn about the complexity of bicycle facility funding.
In 2011, 0.9% of San Diegans (now 1.1%) were commuting by bicycle. We wanted to see a matching percentage of dedicated funding devoted to bicycle facilities and for that percentage to grow to facilitate bicycle ridership in the city.
We can see this correlation in other cities that have prioritized bicycling as a mode of transportation.
A more useful metric is per capita spending on bicycle facilities. We've been working towards the goal of $39 per capita to meet the Danish and Dutch funding reality. These two nations have figured out how to move nearly 50% of their population by bicycle in their largest cities.
What is being spent in San Diego?
In the city of San Diego a single bicycle facility can be built with funding from the city, the region (SANDAG), the state and/or the federal government. Tracking these numbers down has been a painful process, so we decided to start with the city.
Where does a tiny little organization even start? We started by making strategic alliances. In this case, I'm proud to state that we joined forces with the Center on Policy Initiatives (CPI) who created the Community Budget Alliance (CBA) - an alliance of over 40 organizations formed two years ago to advocate for a fair, equitable and transparent budget. When the former mayor released his draft budget earlier this year to the public for input, we worked with the CBA to dissect the budget.
Bicycle facilities can be both capital improvement projects (like the Mike Gotch bicycle/pedestrian bridge) or service-related projects (such as sharrows, bike route signs or the new buffered bike lanes being striped alongside the ongoing resurfacing efforts).
It's almost overwhelming to envision the facilities that need to be built in order to become a world-class bicycling city. However, in the last year we have focused on some of the deficiencies in the city, such as the deadly freeway on-ramps and off-ramps that are found in nearly every community. Freeway on-ramp redesigns would fall under the realm of a capital improvement project and since these facilities fall under the jurisdiction of two or more agencies (in this case, the city of San Diego and Caltrans), agency coordination is absolutely critical.
Through the training led by the CPI, we learned about the two categories of bicycle facilities: capital projects and service projects. But how much was the city spending on them? In April this year, I asked Corrine Wilson at CPI, who put me in touch with Nelson Hernandez, the city's Assistant Chief Operating Officer. I posed this question to him:
I was asked to contact you about getting some detail from the mayor's proposed budget. Since bicycle infrastructure comes under the umbrella of both capital improvement projects (assets) as well as service related projects - I find it an incredible challenge to break down what actually is being allocated toward bike projects in the city budget. Is there a way for you to send me that information and perhaps make it easier to find within the budget documents?
Hernandez directed me to the city’s Deputy Director of Transportation, Linda Marabian, who responded:
Sam, what I am familiar with and am working on is the CIP annual allocation projects I discussed at our last meeting regarding this issue. That is identified in the CIP Section of the budget.
This year’s budget lists both Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) and service-related projects (including some staff funding) for a total of $1.109 million. This is a per capita spending of $1.17 or 3% of the total Transportation Department's budget. The projects listed in the budget were as follows:
- Minor bike facilities, $639,000: this includes sharrows, signs, bike lanes, and facilities that can be built based on traffic service requests.
- State Route 163/Clairemont Mesa Blvd Interchange, $350,000: The budget detail states that "[t]hese improvements will eliminate existing pedestrian/bike high-speed crossings and all vehicle, bike and pedestrian moves will be controlled, thus improving safety. Transit movement through the interchange will be area will be greatly enhanced."
- Bicycle Program Manager, $120,744: This position was held by Ed Clancy, but according to Marabian this position was "reabsorbed" into the department after Clancy's resignation. This council-approved position has been vacant for months and, despite our letter to Interim Mayor Gloria, has not been filled. We are at-risk of losing our hard-fought momentum.
With the elimination of Clancy's position, the city is spending $989,000 on bikes.
City funds are not the only funds that are used to build bicycle facilities. SANDAG also provides funds via Transnet. How much was SANDAG allocating to the city of San Diego?
While browsing the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee report on Transnet expenditures, I found that the city seemed to be sitting on about $54 million. Could these funds be spent on bicycle facilities? I asked Marabian how the city determined its Transnet spending priorities and she responded that Council Policy 800-14 determines the prioritization factor.
Understanding Council Policy 800-14
The CBA, as led by the talented individuals at CPI, has been working with councilmembers and city staff on updating Council Policy 800-14. The purpose of the policy (which was adopted by the council last night) is:
to guide the Mayor’s Capital Improvement Program Review and Advisory Committee (CIPRAC) in its CIP deliberations. The goal of this policy is to establish a capital-planning process that ultimately leads to policy decisions that optimize the use of available resources for projects competing from the same fund source or multiple fund sources.
When the draft policy was scheduled to be released at the council infrastructure subcommittee last month, we worked closely with CBA and city and council staff to ensure that our needs were addressed in the policy. The draft language on prioritization was excellent and had a few gems, including the following:
scoring projects higher that result in:
reduction in accidents, main breaks, sewer spills and flooding problems.promote community walk-ability and use of bicycles or public transit.
Our input had two main points: account for the fact that some assets can have multiple owners (such as the on-ramps mentioned above), and recognize that the biggest return on investment (especially for bicycle facilities) would be had in areas of high population density like the urban core communities in Mid-City.
Last night, our city council unanimously approved the policy (with Council President Gloria absent). Although we joined in at the tail end of updating this policy document we're glad to have been a part of this historic moment. The newly-strengthened council policy will ensure that our second year of advocacy will be more deliberate and informed by policies to strengthen our advocacy efforts.
Thank you to all our members who showed up in support!
Two Years and One Death Later, Caltrans Fails to Prioritize Safety on SR-56 Bike Path
Earlier this year on May 10th, Dr. Dan Valentine encountered a sight on the SR-56 bike path that made him realize that he had missed death by five minutes
In a letter he wrote to the Del Mar Times, Caltrans, and us Valentine stated the following:
I came across this scene while on a bike ride along the CA State 56 freeway during the evening rush hour commute on Friday. The car in the picture went off the road, through a fence and came to rest on the bike path that parallels the freeway. The accident happened about 5 minutes before I arrived on scene. The scary part is that my bike ride was delayed by about 5 minutes when I returned home to retrieve my cycling gloves. If we had met, I would have been hit head on (I took the picture after passing the car).
A few years ago, one cyclist was killed by a motorist running off the road and onto this same bike path. This tragic incident, hearing stories about other “near-misses” and seeing numerous holes in the fence over the years makes me think this path is nothing more than a bike lane on a freeway.
While the concept of a walk/jog/bike path along this East-West corridor is commendable, the design is severely flawed. Simply put, distracted drivers in speeding cars and cyclists do not mix. I ride the bike path about 3 times a week and more often during the summer. Seniors, parents and their young children; people of all ages enjoy this trail. I preferred the path because it appeared safer than the surface streets for riding my bike. I have serious doubts now.
Valentine contacted us wanting guidance on how to move forward and put pressure on Caltrans and we provided him with a visual designed by Copenhagenize Design to highlight world-class design guidelines on what sort of bicycle infrastructure ought to be designed based on speed limits and road design to accommodate all road users:
One of Caltrans' top Strategic goals is to "provide the safest transportation system in the nation for users and workers." In not providing San Diegans with a safe way to ride on the SR-56 bike path, they are failing in meeting one of their own goals. A more substantial barrier than a flimsy fence should be erected to ensure no more preventable deaths like Venuto's happens.
We contacted State Senator Marty Block whose district covers the SR-56 bike path to ask that his office take a lead on ensuring that Caltrans move on installing a more substantial barrier.
By May 21st, after some level of media attention, Valentine wrote to the Rancho Penasquitos Planning Board requesting that the Planning Board support his request to compel Caltrans to put in a sturdy guardrail to make the bike path safe.
Guardrail - It would be nice to install a guardrail along SR 56 where the Bike Path is close to the freeway. Four cars have left the freeway and ended up on the Bike Path since SR 56 opened. Nick Vento was killed in May 2011 in an extremely rare event, but users of this path expect a level of safety higher than they are getting. Class II riders throughout the City have different expectations.
Caltrans then responded as follows
As an alternative to metal beam guard railing, Caltrans plans to install concrete barrier along the edge of shoulder of EB SR-56 in areas where the bike path is less than 30 feet from the edge of traveled way. In these areas, the barrier will not be introducing a fixed object where there would otherwise be the standard minimum clear recovery zone for errant vehicles. Funding to design and construct the proposed project is anticipated for FY 2013/14 or FY 2014/15.
Valentine wrote back to Caltrans thanking them but urging them to make the improvements this year
I am pleased to learn of your response to a recent Rancho Penasquitos Planning Board request regarding bike path safety concerns along the SR 56 freeway. Your understanding of this serious public safety issue and the proposed remedy is admirable. However, given the serious risk to a significant number of cyclists, joggers, parents and children who utilize this bike path, it is requested that you make every effort to allocate funds in this fiscal year. In addition, I would request guidance on how the public provides input into the design and construction of the barrier along the path. Again, I applaud your sensitivity and your action to make the SR 56 bike path a safer and more user-friendly experience for everyone.
--
Valentine then followed up with Senator Block on May 20th stating:
Caltrans has not responded directly to my initial request and have publicly stated they cannot comment due to pending litigation related to the death of the cyclist Nick Venuto almost 2 years ago.
The Caltrans response I obtained was from a March 6th Rancho Penasquitos Planning Board request via e-mail to look into the possibility of installing a barrier along the SR 56 bike path. The request apparently was not through the formal meeting process (since I couldn’t locate the request and Caltrans’ comments in the meeting minutes). I e-mailed the RPQ Planning Board chairman on Monday night requesting a copy of the e-mail with the Caltrans response but have received no response as of yet.
My concern is that the pending litigation against Caltrans could severely or even permanently delay action to mitigate this very serious public safety issue. Any action on your part to help ensure that Caltrans will follow through on their stated commitment would be greatly appreciated. As well, I believe my request to move up the timeline to install a barrier along the path is not unreasonable.
Again, I thank you for your interest and support in remedying this problem."
We haven't heard anything further from Block's office.
Earlier last month Valentine wrote to his State Senator Mark Wyland and the Rancho Penasquitos Planning Board stating the following (emphasis by Valentine):
After reviewing the Caltrans response documents (included below) provided by Michael Lieberman, I have a few observations and follow-up comments:
SR 56 BP 2008-2011 Collisions Report
It is noted that four traffic collisions were documented in the report. Incident #4 dated 5-31-11 was the Nick Venuto fatal incident (including another person experiencing major injuries). The diagram and summary were deleted from the document (I suspect due to “pending litigation” or severity of the event). My hope is that no other incidents were omitted from this report.
Since June 2008, counting the 4 Caltrans documented events, 2 additional photographed incidents in June 2011 and March 2012 (see attached photos) and my recent event on May 10, 2013 (attached photo), the number of documented traffic collisions on this bike path totals seven events. This equates to one bike path breach every 8.6 months. At least 2 of the events (almost 30%) occurred during rush hour- 6:20 pm and 5:00pm; a time when freeway traffic and bike path usage are correspondingly high. As well, alcohol or fatigue were not factors in the collisions. Conclusion: It is not a matter of if another fence breach will occur but when, where and who will be affected.
The Caltrans proposal calls for a total of 733 feet of barrier to be installed along the entire bike path that extends some 10 miles. As best as I can determine, none of the seven documented collisions occurred in areas where the barriers are proposed to be installed. These events took place in areas where ice plant or shrubs are part of the landscape, doing nothing to stop the vehicles from reaching the path. Conclusion: Install barrier along all areas where there is a possibility of a bike path breach.
I believe it is imperative that every public agency/planning group do their part to ensure there is an expedient and adequate solution to this public safety issue. It is encouraging to know that Michael Lieberman (Representative Brain Maienschein’s office) has pledged to take the lead in communicating with Caltrans to ensure progress is being made to resolve this issue. Senator Marty Block’s office is also aware of developments relative to SR 56 bike path safety.
I would ask the Rancho Penasquitos Planning Board to lend vigorous support in getting this project to completion. I appreciate all your efforts to ensuring the safety of the SR 56 bike path.
Sincerely,
Dan Valentine
Yesterday evening, we had another similar incident that sadly resulted in injuries for the bicycle rider when a car flew off I-5 and onto Santa Fe Road.
Car flies off freeway, through fence & hits cyclist on street RT @BikeSD Car Hits Cyclist in Bay Ho http://t.co/XB22KO4e4u via @nbcsandiego
— Ted Rogers (@bikinginla) July 17, 2013
As of today, no changes have been implemented on the SR-56 - two years after Venuto's death. Who knows how long it will take for Caltrans to implement changes along Santa Fe Street that adjoins the I-5. Will it take a lawsuit or a death before safety improvements are made?
We know Caltrans management can direct quick action when needed. Last year, Caltrans moved with incredible swiftness to remove Nick Venuto's ghost bike. However when it comes to the safety of San Diego's bicycle riders - Caltrans remains unwilling to move or act.
We would like you to write to Caltrans and ask them to install a protective and permanent barrier to protect the vulnerable road users from the vehicle operators who continue to put riders in danger and their lives at risk along SR-56 and I-5.
Email Caltrans at ct.public.information.d11@dot.ca.gov and copy your state elected official in your correspondence.
Foto Friday: San Diego's Leaders Are Committed to Implementing Protected Bike Lanes
Yesterday afternoon, we had almost a full city council session when the mayor, Councilmembers Alvarez, Gloria, Lightner, Sherman, along with staff for the Councilmembers who couldn't attend, showed up to listen to Martha Roskowski talk about how protected bike lanes (a bike lane with some sort of protection and space between a bike rider and a vehicle driver) are a game changer in transforming cities. Representatives from the business community including Tiffany Broomfield, Jeff Motch, Jacob McKean, Tootie, Staci Ignell and Janelle Riella, Mike Olson, Robert Winston were in attendance along with Nicole Capretz from the Environmental Health Coalition and Joe LaCava, Chair of the Community Planners Committee.
Cities like Chicago, New York City and Washington D.C. are moving with unprecedented speed in transforming their most valuable asset and public space - city streets - to be accommodating and welcoming to all its users. This transformation also happens to make good financial sense in that it saves municipalities money and also supports the local economy in a way that scales up extremely efficiently. Not only are these cities reallocating space on non-arterial streets, but they are making room for bikes on main thoroughfares in the hearts of the busy downtowns. This speed and transformation is a response to current and unavoidable realities - the next generation of residents don't have much of an interest in automobile ownership or in driving, but they are interested in living in cities that are friendly and inviting to walk and bike in. Cities are the nexus of creativity and talent and cities that cultivate and nurtures that spirit winds up supporting the city's business climate and its livability. Yesterday afternoon, there was a sense of urgency in the room to move San Diego along.
“I expect not only to take all of [Portland and Seattle’s] bikers but I also want all the jobs that come with this.”
- Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Chicago
“Mayor Rahm Emanuel called out Seattle, saying he wanted our bikers and our tech jobs. We’re going to work to keep them here.”
- Mayor Mike McGinn, Seattle
The Green Lane Project is a campaign to get protected bike lanes on the ground in the U.S. by helping six leading cities implement innovative bike facilities. Mayor Filner was unequivocal in his support to apply to be one of the six cities in the Green Lane Project's campaign next year. The mayor showed up at 12 pm on the nose and stayed for over an hour listening and emphatically stating in numerous ways how he would ensure that San Diego will implement the facilities needed to make our city streets inviting to all San Diegans and thus make San Diego a more friendlier city to live in. He stated that CicloSDias would be the first step to having the city's residents experience the city's streets in a manner that will be more inviting and friendly and he seemed annoyed that the mayors in Seattle and Chicago were getting so many accolades for pushing through innovative bike facilities. He expressed impatience that our own city was at the bottom of the barrel in terms of our bike friendliness.
Jacob McKean, who recently successfully crowdfunded his brewery, expressed his own perspective that he didn't think automobile traffic needed to be accommodated in any way at all - a perspective he wrote about on the Modern Times Brewery blog.
Jeff Motch stated how most of his 50 employees all bike or walk to work which makes them incredibly reliable since they aren't late for work due to vehicle breakdowns or mechanical issues. Motch went on to state how the biggest problem was having to deal with at least one employee getting into a collision with a vehicle every year because the city hadn't prioritized space for users not inside a vehicle.
Linda Marabian, Deputy Director for San Diego's Transportation Department was also in attendance. Marabian stated that her department was working on numerous initiatives to implement projects on the ground. She stated that there would be announcement made on May 22nd about her department's efforts and some projects that be ready for use and construction. She also stated that there were numerous roadblocks because her traffic engineers were hamstrung since they had to rely on standards like AASHTO and the California MUTCD.
When it comes to overcoming challenges - moving people safely isn't as complicated as some of the visionary (and possibly more outlandish) ideas that have been attained with incredible success in this country. For example in 1961, President John Kennedy articulated a vision that seemed very bold: sending an American safely to the moon before the end of the decade. We all know now that that goal was reached and with incredible success. And that goal was implemented with computers with far less computing power than the smartphone in our pocket. It seems absurd that San Diego's brilliant traffic engineers haven't figured out how to move people efficiently and safely on our roadways (including across intersections) when cities in Europe and in cities around the U.S. have not only figured it out but are moving with breakneck speed to implement these innovative bicycle facilities. If the existing standards are deterring efforts to transform our streets to be safe in moving all its users, then the standards have failed in their purpose and we should be looking for other solutions to ensure that we can allow people to transport themselves through our city's streets in a way that is safe, efficient and comfortable. Yesterday, we heard how San Diego's business and bicycling community and the city's leadership was eager to move along and move along quickly. Our own political leadership has already demonstrated unanimous commitment to get moving along. It's about time that we start seeing some projects on the ground.
Later yesterday evening, the results of the afternoon discussion were presented to the community.
The audience was attentive and eager to see changes, but left with a similar question - what is taking so long?
Our thanks to Councilmember David Alvarez to initiating this discussion committing to action. We look forward to all the leaders in the city ensuring that progress is made and made quickly.
Connecting the SR-56 Bike Path to the UTC Job Centers
We received an email from reader, Ryan Smith, who lives along the 56 corridor and wants to bike to work. His email stated the following:
I live around the 56 corridor and reluctantly drive the 56 for my daily commute to the UTC area. I know that the 56 corridor bike path doesn't directly connect to the UTC area, unless one risks a brief run on the 5 or 805. Would you know if there are plans to create a specific bike path (I don't trust shoulders on the highway) to connect El Camino Real to La Jolla Village Dr/Miramar Road which would go parallel with the 5 or 805, but not force bicyclists to brave those specific highways? I think this would be highly instrumental in making the 56 bike path corridor much more useful as a biking commute. The only alternatives are to (a) go all the way to Torrey Pines and bike up the steep hill into UTC, (b) head over to Miramar Rd and brave that street traffic (during commute hours!). Neither of those alternatives is highly desirable.
We didn't know the answer so we contacted SANDAG planner, Chris Carterette to learn if any plans were afoot. Carterette contacted Caltrans Bike/Ped Coordinator, Seth Cutter, who responded as follows:
Two of the projects associated with the North Coast Bikeway plan address the two major impediments that Mr. Smith encounters on his commute from the SR-56 corridor to the UTC area.
The "bike trail" that is proposed from Sorrento Valley Rd./Roselle St./Sorrento Valley Coaster Station that will go up the hill to Genesee Ave. and then cross over Genesee and continue on up to Voigt Dr. is expected to go to construction late this year or early 2014. It will likely take a good two years to construct, but will provide a separate bike path-type experience for users, as opposed to the current situation where cyclists must ride along the I-5 freeway shoulders or take the long way as Mr. Smith pointed out. Additionally, the path is expected to be shielded significantly by grade, landscaping, or a combination or the two for a better quality of experience.
The second impediment is the gap in the connection from the SR-56 bike path to the Old Sorrento Valley Rd. bike path, just south of Carmel Valley Rd. Currently bicyclists and pedestrians have to get off of the path and use Carmel Valley Rd. through the I-5 interchange to access Old Sorrento Valley Rd. Caltrans does have this connection identified as a project in the North Coast Bikeway, the I-5 North Coast Corridor EIR/EIS, and the Public Works Program within the large I-5 North Coast Corridor project. This proposed connection could be several years from being constructed, but we are trying to push up the schedule. We have been told that environmental clearance should not be an issue, due to the level of study that has already been performed in the lagoon. The problem with the current schedule is that freeway work is not expected to be performed in the area for quite a few years. Recently, however, Caltrans Design engineers started studying the proposal with the intent to come up with a set of design plans for the project. Perhaps the new Caltrans Active Transportation Program that is in the process of being set up for non-motorized and enhancement projects will provide a source of funding.
Carterette followed up and responded
The City of San Diego may also have some improvements in the vicinity, as they are working on alternatives analysis for Coastal Rail Trail from Roselle to Gilman. It is a challenging area.
Carterette also sent a pdf document showing what this North Coast Bikeway looks like on a map. The connection referred to by Cutter can be viewed in the image below.
Thank you Chris and Seth for the responses. We're looking forward to seeing the connection made complete.