Thank you for passing on the info. This is really helpful to all of us.

I have actually seen a little bit of the roadway "improvement" myself
on Foothills Blvd (at Baseline/Main). The bike lane was canned due to
recent additions of more left turn lanes.

Having said that I do want to remind everyone that while bike lanes
are nice they do not replace the necessity of safe riding. And this
includes sometimes having to leave the bike lane (CVC 21208). This is
especially helpful in right turn lanes to avoid being cut off by
motorists. Going north on Woodcreek Oaks and turning right into Blue
Oaks is such a scenario and I believe was the intersection discussed
in the November meeting where the bike lane was removed. This was an
area where it was safer to approach the intersection outside the bike
lane.

And having said that I do agree with the general points made below and
the removal of the Foothills bike lane is one such example where
bicyclists are getting left in the cold. I actually wonder when they
will invent the first intersection in Roseville that has more left
turn lanes than lanes in the street to turn into - wouldn't that be
interesting :)

bjorn


--- In bikingroseville@yahoogroups.com, "bikesafenorcal"
<bikesafenorcal@...> wrote:
>
> The City of Roseville has issued a Subsequent Draft Environmental
> Impact Report (SDEIR) for the City's proposed 2020 Transportation
> System Capital Improvements Program Update (CIP Update). Comments
> on the City's SDEIR can be submitted to the City through March 19,
> 2007 and should be sent to Rob Jensen, City of Roseville Public
> Works Dept., 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95678. Individuals
> interested in promoting safe and efficient bicycle transportation
> within the City should consider submitting comments. The following
> might prove useful:
>
> As an advocate for safe and efficient pedestrian, bicycle and motor
> vehicle use of public transportation/roadway systems, I am concerned
> about the disconnect between the City's current Bicycle Master Plan
> (BMP) update process and the City's review of the proposed CIP
> Update. I am also concerned that the City has failed to identify
> the significant impacts that occur to bicycle transportation and
> public safety when additional motor vehicle trips are added to
> public roadways, especially when those roadways are of substandard
> design and/or do not contain adequate bicycle facilities.
>
> At the BMP update workshop hosted by the City on November 28, 2006,
> there was considerable discussion regarding the bicycle community's
> concerns with the removal of existing bicycle facilities as a result
> of roadway "improvement" projects. At that workshop, City of
> Roseville staff indicated that they agreed this was an issue that
> needed to be addressed to ensure that the potential impacts on
> bicycle transportation/safety were considered for any project that
> could affect existing bicycle facilities.
>
> The City's SDEIR for the CIP Update
> (http://www.roseville.ca.us/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?
> BlobID=8199) identifies at Impact 4.1-8 (page 4.1-48) that CIP
> roadway improvements could be inconsistent with the City's BMP. No
> reference to specific BMP policies is provided and the document does
> not acknowledge that the City has formally initiated a process to
> update the BMP. Although Impact 4.1-8 speaks to a potential
> inconsistency with the BMP, the impact (and remainder of the DSEIR)
> fails to address the direct effects that would occur as a result of
> the removal of bicycle facilities in association with a
> roadway "improvement" project. Direct effects include reduced
> bicycle use for transportation as a result of disruption of
> efficient bicycle circulation, reduced bicycle safety at
> intersections, and increased air pollutant emissions and traffic
> congestion due to the increased number of individuals who will
> choose to drive motor vehicles instead of cycling as a result of
> these combined increased risk and inconvenience factors. The DSEIR
> fails to identify these direct impacts of the proposed CIP Update.
>
> The DSEIR also fails to discuss that the City has collected
> statistical information during its BMP update (as presented during
> the November 28, 2006 workshop) which identifies that the
> predominant factors influencing individual decisions to ride or
> drive are associated with interaction with motor vehicles and the
> availability of safe and adequate bicycle transportation
> facilities. These statistics provide substantial evidence that any
> removal of existing bicycle facilities from public roadways within
> the City will have a direct effect on bicycle use, public safety,
> air quality, and traffic congestion.
>
> The mitigation identified for Impact 4.8-1 merely suggests that the
> City might look into acquiring right of way to enable the retention
> or relocation of bicycle facilities, but does not require the City
> to ensure that bicycle facilities be retained or replaced. The
> DSEIR suggests that this measure would mitigate the impact on
> bicycle transportation to a less than significant level, but, in
> fact, there is no performance standard identified and no evidence
> presented with regard to how this mitigation would serve to make the
> proposed CIP Update consistent with the City's BMP. Further,
> because the DSEIR fails to acknowledge the actual impacts of
> removing bicycle facilities (including those discussed above) the
> DSEIR also fails to identify mitigation measures that might be
> available to minimize the direct impacts that would occur with
> adoption of the proposed CIP Update.
>
> The DSEIR also identifies several significant and unavoidable
> impacts associated with increased motor vehicle trips on roadways
> outside of the City. Many roadways in Placer County and other
> adjacent jurisdictions are used by bicyclists for transportation
> and/or recreation. Although impacts to motor vehicle circulation
> may be adequately evaluated using level of service projections for
> roadways and intersections, the same approach can not be used for
> determining impacts to bicycle operation. Bicycle safety and
> individual's decisions to use bicycles for transportation is
> directly associated with safety and convenience. The addition of
> motor vehicle trips on any roadway (especially roadways with
> substandard bicycle facilities such as bike lanes/shoulders, signal
> operations, etc.) compound the existing deterrents to bicycle use.
>
> The absence of the City's acknowledgement of these significant
> effects on bicycle transportation result in an inadequate assessment
> of the proposed CIP Update and, more importantly, result in the
> City's failure to explore true mitigation measures that may be
> available to minimize the effects of transportation system
> improvements and increased motor vehicle trips on the City's (and
> adjacent jurisdictions') roadways. Transportation system
> improvements implemented by the City should address bicycle and
> pedestrian facilities and circulation with the same priority as that
> given to motor vehicle circulation. As such, the City should
> consider the following:
>
> 1. Modify the proposed CIP Update to include a requirement that any
> and all roadway improvements shall not eliminate or otherwise
> adversely affect existing bicycle facilities.
>
> 2. Modify the proposed CIP Update to require that any and all
> roadway/intersection improvements on City streets which do not
> currently include bicycle facilities shall install bicycle
> facilities (Class II bike lanes, bicycle-activated signal detection,
> etc) as part of the improvement project.
>
> 3. Recirculate the DSEIR with revisions to identify and explore
> mitigation for all impacts associated with substandard bicycle
> facilities and increased motor vehicle trips, and include the
> following mitigation commitments:
>
> a) The City of Roseville shall include in any and all roadway
> improvement projects the retention or installation of bicycle
> facilities adequate to promote safe and efficient bicycle use.
>
> b) The City of Roseville Bicycle Transportation Planner shall review
> all proposed roadway improvement projects and shall identify any
> aspect of a proposed roadway improvement project that could
> adversely affect bicycle transportation (including construction-
> related impacts) and shall advise Public Works of these potential
> effects. Modifications to the project shall be incorporated to
> eliminate all such adverse effects on bicycle transportation and
> bicycle facilities.
>
> Thank you for considering these important issues.
>