Fwd: [SVBC SMC Committee] SR 35 (Skyline) widening project between Sneath Lane and 280

[John Murphy]

!!!!!

----- Original message -----

From: Adam Cozzette <acoz...@gmail.com>

To: bik...@googlegroups.com, svbc...@googlegroups.com

Subject: [SVBC SMC Committee] SR 35 (Skyline) widening project between Sneath Lane and 280

Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 21:25:38 -0700

I went to the workshop for the C/CAG county-wide transportation plan and happened to find out about a project to widen SR 35 (Skyline Blvd.) in San Bruno from Sneath Lane to where it meets 280. That particular segment is a 2-lane highway and it seems the idea is to make it 4 lanes wide to match the stretch of highway north of that (and of course to the south it gets much wider as it merges with 280).

Does anyone know offhand if any pedestrians or cyclists have had an opportunity to provide feedback on this project? I had a hard time finding much detailed information on it but there are a couple mentions of it in this PDF of meeting minutes from a C/CAG technical advisory committee in August of 2015 (see page 15): http://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Full-TAC-Packet-Aug-20-2015.pdf I gather it has been in some sort of planning stage since at least 2012.

It's hard to say for sure without seeing the details, but I worry that this will result in more drivers speeding on this segment and therefore less safety for cyclists. In my experience it's never congested outside of rush hour, and even then the congestion doesn't seem terrible. It seems to be a moderately popular route for cyclists and is part of the popular Skyline route used by the SF2G group in particular.

--

Topics posted to this list are visible to the public.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SVBC Peninsula Committee" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to svbc-pen+u...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to svbc...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/svbc-pen.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[pat giorni]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 9:25 PM, Adam Cozzette <acoz...@gmail.com> wrote:

I went to the workshop for the C/CAG county-wide transportation plan and happened to find out about a project to widen SR 35 (Skyline Blvd.) in San Bruno from Sneath Lane to where it meets 280. That particular segment is a 2-lane highway and it seems the idea is to make it 4 lanes wide to match the stretch of highway north of that (and of course to the south it gets much wider as it merges with 280).

Does anyone know offhand if any pedestrians or cyclists have had an opportunity to provide feedback on this project? I had a hard time finding much detailed information on it but there are a couple mentions of it in this PDF of meeting minutes from a C/CAG technical advisory committee in August of 2015 (see page 15): http://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Full-TAC-Packet-Aug-20-2015.pdf I gather it has been in some sort of planning stage since at least 2012.

It's hard to say for sure without seeing the details, but I worry that this will result in more drivers speeding on this segment and therefore less safety for cyclists. In my experience it's never congested outside of rush hour, and even then the congestion doesn't seem terrible. It seems to be a moderately popular route for cyclists and is part of the popular Skyline route used by the SF2G group in particular.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bikesmc" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bikesmc+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bik...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bikesmc.

[ammon]

Big inaccuracy on page 22 on the project "Widens Skyline Blvd. (SR 35) between I-280 and Sneath Lane. It is currently the last portion of what is otherwise a four lane roadway along Skyline Blvd. The project widens approximately 1.3 miles of the roadway into four lanes." Except that 1 mile north, Skyline is still single lane from Hickey to Sharp Park (1.7 miles).

The only widening Skyline needs is space for bikes on that bump heading north from Sharp Park -- the only missing shoulder on Skyline.

[Zak Jarvis]

Yeah, I really dislike that bump at Sharp Park. Feel like I'm throwing dice every time I ride it. Especially big trucks don't have any room to give me space if it's congested there, and it always is when I go through... and I'm going through that spot to get to anyplace I go.

If they close off the section between Sneath and the 280, I'll have to take routes I like much, much less to even get off the ridge.

[Marcelo V.]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 11:13:44 AM UTC-7, ammon wrote:

The only widening Skyline needs is space for bikes on that bump heading north from Sharp Park -- the only missing shoulder on Skyline.

Don't forget the fun bollards before Sharp Park. But I don't really see those going away, given previous discussions about their origin...

[ammon]

Forgot about that—the bollards weren't there when I lived in sf. These days when I visit that part of Skyline I ride the dirt instead: https://www.strava.com/segments/655236

[Zak Jarvis]

The bollards are kind of annoying, but I don't dislike them as much as the brief, slightly uphill shoulderless part, with heavy traffic.

Especially since someone was nice enough to carve a small path through the protected turn bumps. It isn't *too* bad to just swoop around to the right of them.

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 9:32:18 PM UTC-7, murphstahoe wrote:

[Marcelo V.]

There's an actual bike path, but it's always covered in all sorts of debris. It's easier to go around the right of all the bollards instead of taking the path, and by myself I generally do that to avoid riding the one lane road.

But, I've had drivers simply ignore the big stop signs there, almost making me crash into them (on a rainy day no less). With a group that becomes a lot more dangerous.

[Adam Cozzette]

Here's a quick update on this proposed Skyline widening. The San Mateo County Transportation Authority conducted a study on the project and I'm working on getting ahold of a copy--unfortunately it doesn't seem to be something available online although it is a public record. I heard that the San Bruno City Council is going to consider the issue some time next month and the San Bruno BPAC (bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee) is also going to consider it at its next meeting in January. I'll try to keep you all posted and let you know if and when it makes sense to show up at a meeting.

--
-- follow: http://twitter.com/sf2g | terms: http://sf2g.com/terms.html | bike prep: http://sf2g.com/bike-prep.html | unsub: http://groups.google.com/group/sf2g
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SF2G" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Adam Cozzette]

Another update: I was able to get a copy of the preliminary study for the proposed widening (see attached PDF).

The San Bruno city council is going to consider the proposed Skyline widening this Tuesday December 13th at 7 pm at the senior center (see the agenda PDF here). I think this is a good time to show up, politely express our concerns with the project, and make sure the council hears feedback from the public and not just from the city staff. I believe some members of the council are at least somewhat sympathetic to our side, but they will need political cover if they are to push back against the road widening.

If you care about this issue, please consider showing up at the meeting on Tuesday. It would be great if we could have, say, 10 people each say a few words of feedback to the council.

Unfortunately, it's forecasted to rain on Tuesday and may be inconvenient to get to the meeting on a bike unless you are well prepared for wet weather. If you would like to attend but do not have an easy way of getting there, reply to this email and we'll see if we can figure something out -- we can probably arrange carpools from the Caltrain station or whatever works.

Best,

Adam

P.S. If you read the report there are some interesting things in there. For example, it claims that widening the highway will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which seems highly dubious: "Increases in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), indicated by increased vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled, are likely to result from congested roadways. The capacity improvements of Alternative 1 and 2 are likely to improve traffic flow and reduce delay and emissions." It also claims to improve safety.

[ammon]

I'm at the meeting. They haven't gotten to the widening or public comment section yet. We just heard a high speed rail update where the interesting bits to me were:

- no extra passing tracks to be added in San Bruno.

- despite wanting to grade separate everything, as stopgap they're adding more gates "quad gates" at the many road crossings still at train level.

- the city of Mountain View wants to close auto access across the tracks at Castro St with a pedestrian (and bike?) under-crossing. That's awesome if they can get the public to agree.

Ammon

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+uns...@googlegroups.com.

[Adam Cozzette]

Hi Ammon, I don't think we've met in person before--were you the one who got up and spoke about the part of Skyline near Sharp Park Rd. where the shoulder disappears? Either way, thanks for coming to the meeting!

To give a quick recap, I think things went pretty well with respect to the Skyline issue. We had four people speak out with concerns about the project; only one person spoke out strongly in favor of it and even she agreed that it would be good to have bike infrastructure included as part of the widening if possible.

Council member Marty Medina said that he would not support the widening unless it included protected bike lanes. Council member Ken Ibarra also said he would like the BPAC (bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee) and the TSPC (traffic safety and parking committee) to examine the issue, so I believe that will be the next step. I'll try to keep you all up to date when this becomes an item on those committees' agendas, because at that point it may be worthwhile to show up again at the meetings.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Robert Griesmeyer]

I was hit by a car on that segment going around 40 mph. They need a protected bike lane because of the hravy fog in that area

[Adam Cozzette]

Quick update on this: the San Bruno BPAC (bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee) will be considering the proposed Skyline widening this Wednesday January 11 (agenda here). If you want to attend it's at 6 pm at San Bruno City Hall in conference room 115.

[Adam Cozzette]

Another update: the San Bruno City Council surface infrastructure subcommittee is meeting tonight at 6 pm, in city hall conference room 115, to discuss this proposed widening of Skyline. Here is the agenda but it does not have many details. This would be another good time to share concerns with the San Bruno City Council.