|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After getting mixed reviews for its plan to replace parking spaces with bike lanes all along El Camino Real, the California Department of Transportation submitted fresh plans last week that aim to quell local anxieties about traffic safety.
The plans, which Caltrans submitted on May 20, aim to respond to the council’s determination in April that the initial proposal doesn’t go far enough in ensuring bike safety along the busy and car-heavy thoroughfare. While the Caltrans proposal has been embraced by many local bike advocates, others suggested that placing bike lanes on the state route would in fact make conditions more dangerous for cyclists.
The Palo Alto City Council shared this view when it voted on April 1 to request a host of additional safety enhancements as part of the El Camino plan. Council member Pat Burt, who made the motion to demand more revisions, was among those who noted that most of the collisions on El Camino take place at intersections and that bike lanes are unlikely to address that problem.
“We do not have the support at this point in time to merely move forward with just the bike lanes in isolation,” Burt said at the meeting.
Since then, he and Vice Mayor Ed Lauing have been working with Caltrans to revise the plans and add more safety features. The new plans call for reducing the width of vehicle lanes that are closest to the center median by seven inches (from 11 feet to 10 feet 5 inches), widening the proposed bike lanes and installing Qwick Kurb channelizing systems that separate bike lanes from driving lanes by installing a temporary curb with bollards.
The plans show Qwick Kurb installed at various stretches along El Camino, including around Embarcadero Road, Churchill Avenue, El Camino Way and numerous stretches of the Ventura and Barron Park neighborhoods. According to the city’s summary of the changes, the plans now include “extended separation treatments on Class IV bike facilities to increase the total amount of physical separation provided along the corridor.”
The plans also now include dedicated bike lanes at four locations: at northbound El Camino Real near Charleston Road and near Sheridan Avenue; and at both southbound and northbound El Camino near Churchill Avenue. They also show a redesigned bus stop area near the northeast corner of El Camino and Park Boulevard with a dedicated bike lane and a separate pill-out area for buses.
The plans aim to make the bike lane proposal more consistent with Design Information Bulletin 94, a Caltrans regulation that calls for a “safety system” approach that considers all types of transportation modes, including biking and walking. While Caltrans has maintained that its plan was driven by safety concerns along El Camino, a March review from the firm Fehr & Peers concluded that its initial design falls short in meeting these goals.
Specifically, the consultant concluded that the proposed design “does not address the high-speed conditions for through and turning movements, which contribute to the greatest kinetic energy risk (and therefore severe injury and fatality risk) for vulnerable road users in the corridor.”
“In particular, the proposed design retains the number of vehicle travel lanes, retains wide travel lanes, removes the ‘friction’ associated with on-street parking, and does not address turning movement speed at the intersections/conflict points,” the report stated.
The consultants also concluded that with no protected treatments for bicyclists at intersections, “high stress conditions persist for bicyclists traveling the corridor and these weakest links lead to an overall high stress condition that is likely to limit mode shift potential.”
The Palo Alto bike lane project is part of a broader effort by Caltrans to repave and enhance El Camino, which is a state highway. Mountain View and Los Altos have already endorsed the state plan to bike lanes, which Caltrans plans to install over the next year.
One has to wonder how many bikes are going to use these new improved bike lanes with temporary bollards. Most bike people I know say they wouldn’t use El Camino except for the shortest distance to get to a business, certainly not for more than a block.
Are we trying to solve something that few will use?
Motorized vehicles will still have to cross bike lanes to get to driveways and parking lots. They will also have to wait behind buses stopped for passengers. Bikes will still need to be able to do U turns to get back for their return trip.
Some streets just should be no bikes allowed. There are plenty of other streets where bikes can be encouraged.
The California Vehicle Code prohibits banning of bikes except in a few limited cases, such as bridges and limited-access highways.
The law is an ass.
Bikes belong. The first paved roads were built through the advocacy of cyclists, not motorists.
Glad to see these improvements. With more electric bikes I think the bike lanes will get a lot of use. In many ways it is easier for cars to use other streets. We need a unified approach to Bay Area transit. Los Altos and Mtn View are moving forward with bike lanes. Palo Alto needs to do it too. These will especially help South Palo Alto — which is still waiting for a tunnel under the train tracks.
I think if you ask the residents of these other streets if they want to see more cars and other motorized vehicles to use their streets or bikes, they would say bikes please. I can’t think of any street except perhaps Alma where more cars would be wanted.
You are right about electric bikes though, I think we are seeing more electric bikes and even these riders prefer the quieter bike boulevards. Children crossing El Camino on bikes or on foot are not the same thing as bike lanes as they are crossing traffic, not riding alongside traffic. I personally would like to see less children using electric bikes as they don’t have enough awareness of how to use the traffic laws.
4Gtoday
In what way would it be “easier for cars to use other streets” than ECR? ECR is a main thoroughfare for cars, taking the stress off of residential streets.
Let’s remember that a number of parcels on El Camino Real have been upzoned for high density housing. People who live those future homes will need to walk and bike for local trips, including school commutes which may take them along and across El Camino Real. In fact, today hundreds of PAUSD youth school commuters cross El Camino Real on foot and on bicycles every day. I hope this repaving opportunity will be used to improve the safety of El Camino Real school route crossings: Churchill Ave, Stanford Ave, Cambridge, California Ave, Margarita/Matadero, Curtner, Ventura Ave, Los Robles/El Camino Way, Maybell/El Camino Way, Charleston/Arastradero, Cesano Court. Safety should be a primary concern at these locations.
1) What’s being done to ensure the survival of El Camino retailers?
2) What’s being done to push for the timely repaving of El Camino which has been in such pathetic shape for years and which has cost us $$$$ in car repairs and the cost of new tires?
3) Has anyone noticed the CA budget lately? Many “sustainable” programs like solar energy and credits for EV purchases have been cancelled along with “basics” like education, public transit, affordable housing etc etc.
I ask because I’m wondering how a vocal minority like the bike advocates allowed to destroy our neighborhoods by rerouting cars from El Camino onto residential streets!
I also wonder how they’re allowed to destroy retail while Palo Alto continues to waste OUR tax dollars on at least 3 retail consultants with no local knowledge while $$$$ projects like El Camino bike lanes are proceeding.
I guess they’re thrilled that our utility rates will increase even more to cover the lost sales tax revenues while forgetting that the more we conserve, the more rates are increased to cover the lost revenue.
Joseph Heller and Kafka would be proud.
Kudos to Pat Burt and Ed Lauing and the City of Palo transportation staff for working with Caltrans to improve their plans for bikeways on El Camino in Palo Alto.
El Camino Real needs this transformation to a Complete Street where peds and bikers will want to come – this welcomes a growing hyper-local customer base that feels unsafe on today’s car-centric road. Bikeways improve the safety and predictability for all ages and abilities. Removing on-street parking will daylight the entire street, improving sightlines and safety at intersections and driveways.
Businesses that educate their customers about available off-street and side street parking AND welcome new customers that arrive by bike or walking can improve their business. Embracing and managing change can be win-win. Build it; support the future we need and deserve.
Online Name raises a larger question. The Palo Alto’s FY25 and 26 operating budge and capital improvement plan are nearing their adoption by our City Council. I hope city staff and Council Financing Committee have factored contingencies as Gov Newsom and state legislators pare back their budget aspirations.
During recent years the our Council Finance Committee and City Staff have a good track record. Let’s hope for the best while state government scrambles.
Are commuters hyperlocal? Of course not, regardless of all the “no one wants cars” fairy tales preached by those trying to give developers even higher density than they now are allowed.
Are you even aware that in San Francisco merchants and restaurant owners are conducting month-long hunger strikes because the replacement of parking with bike lanes have been destroying their businesses?
Biking is not for everyone. When was the last time you saw a parent and toddler(s) biking down El Camino? How about pet owners? Or those using wheelchairs?
What a sad vision of the future where life, shopping, dining, entertainment and friendships are confined to a 10? mile radius.
(And don’t recommend taking public transit because A) the public transit budget’s been cut and B) parking at the public transit stations is / has been replaced by new dense market-rate housing near “transit-rich corridors”)
Why does no one seem to care about the hundreds of people who park, particularly near Palo Alto High School? Seems to make little sense vastly to inconvenience hundreds for the sake of 10 bikes.
Think of the hundreds, possibly thousands, of apartments that are being added along El Camino between Page Mill/Oregon and Charleston/Arastradero in the next couple of years. The number is staggering! El Camino will see a HUGE increase in vehicle trips multiple times per day. People in the apartments are going to drive to work, the grocery store, etc — they will NOT be riding bikes or walking along El Camino. El Camino is going to become even more of a nightmare. Bikes can ride much more safely along Park Blvd. Between the increase in traffic due to the coming onslaught of Builder’s Remedy Projects and the increased density/zoning changes, and the loss of a lane on El Camino, I fear we will lose whatever businesses remain along this portion of El Camino.
The inner lanes are 10.5′ not 10’5″ as stated in the article. Parking will be maintained between Encina and Quarry for NB travel and between Embarcadero and Quarry for SB travel and bicyclists will be directed to the perimiter trail on Stanford land.
Parking is needed between Churchill and Embarcadero. Or at least that is the most heavily parked area of El Camino.
My bet is the thousands of apartments that will be built will not include two parking places per unit. Where are all the cars going to go? Let’s support Palo Alto having a mindset like many places in Europe where families share one car and rely on public transportation and bikes to get places. Palo Alto has an excellent track record of students biking to middle and high schools. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Safe-Routes-to-School It can be faster for students to bike to and from school than drive. Read the High Cost of Free Parking, an urban planning book by UCLA professor Donald Shoup, about the costs of “free parking on society” to learn more.
” Palo Alto has an excellent track record of students biking to middle and high schools. ”
Yup but look at what’s already planned:
1)Closing/limiting access to Churchill for the high-speed-rail crossing.
2) Years of Casti construction that will make Embarcadero traffic even worse and biking there even more dangerous.
The Churchill closure will be coupled with a completely grade separated bike/pedestrian dedicated crossing at a nearby location. This is much better than many kids in south Palo Alto have right now. The dedicated bike/pedestrian crossings should be completed FIRST, before the Churchill and Meadow/Charleston projects, in south and north Palo Alto. Drivers have a number of east/west options. Bike and peds have ZERO existing grade separated bike/ped rail crossings in south PA, compared to FIVE in north Palo Alto. The Paly kids will still have great routes. Biking to high school is easy, no matter where you live in Palo Alto. There really is no reason for able-bodied teens in this flat, great weather town to be driving to school. Biking here is easy. It supports mental and physical health, reduces congestion and auto emissions, improves community safety, and it is FUN to ride with friends.
Bringing back school buses would be the safest option to get children to school if they have to cross the Caltrain tracks as well as El Camino.