The H Street Bikeway to Sacramento Valley Station project is presenting at the SacATC meeting this week, Thursday, February 19, starting at 5:30 PM. A community workshop will be held Thursday, February 26, starting at 5:30 PM at city hall, room 1119. This project is part of a large grant-funded project (TIRCP – Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program) to improve Sacramento Valley Station. H Street is the main access route from the station for bicyclists. There are no safe routes to the station, at this time.

The project will create a two-way separated bikeway (also called a cycle-track) on H Street between 5th Street (the station) and 10th Street and 9th Street with existing bicycle facilities.

The presentation for SacATC is easier to interpret, but it does not include cross-section measurements. By default, StreetMix diagrams include measurements, but these do not. These diagrams in the staff report are harder to interpret, but do include cross-section measurements. The cross-section measurements are critical for determining the safety and usability of the bikeway.

Preliminary comments:

I support the double-tracking of light rail in the segment between 5th Street and 7th Street. Single-track light rail segments create pinch points where one train may need to wait for another, slowing the entire light rail system. The diagrams also seem to indicate a crossover between 5th Street and 6th Street, which is valuable for routing trains where there are blockages at some point.

The segment between 6th Street and 7th Street shows a light rail track sharing with motor vehicle traffic. This is inappropriate, and removes the advantage of double-tracking, since trains can be stuck in congested motor vehicle traffic. The southern or right hand lane should be a combined through and right turn lane, and the northern or left hand lane should be eliminated. The design constrains the bikeway to 4.5/4.75 feet, rather than the desired minimum of 10 feet. Diagrams below.

---

The preservation of parking in the section between 7th Street and 8th Street is ridiculous. There is a parking garage of large capacity directly north across the street, so there is no reason for on-street parking here. The city’s desire to maintain parking in this section is in fact the reason why the existing Class III (sharrows only) bike facilitiy on H Street is dangerous and unpleasant. Again, retention of parking constrains the bikeway to 4.0/5.0 feet rather than the desired minimum of 10 feet. Diagrams below.

---

The segment design for 8th Street to 9th Street is reasonable. However, since there are no driveways in this block, the separation between motor vehicles and bikeway should be a hard concrete curb, not a stripped buffer. The 10 foot bikeway is the desired minimum width. Section diagram below.

---

I like the design of the segment 9th Street to 10th Street, a sidewalk level completely separated bikeway. However, the width is 4.0/4.9 rather than the desired minimum of 10 feet.

The related segment of 10th Street between I Street and H Street seems reasonable, though higher quality bike facilities would be greatly desired.

Signals

The staff report diagrams use the phrase ‘Traffic Signal (Eastbound/Westbound) to be Modified or Replaced’. I am very concerned with ‘replaced’. The city has a penchant for replacing signal, and controller boxes, that do not need to be replaced, raising the cost of projects or wasting money that could be better spent on other parts of the project.

The presentation diagrams show bicycle signal faces at 5th Street and 6th Street, but not 7th Street, 8th Street or 9th Street. Bicycle signals are necessary for the safe operation of two-way separated bikeways. It is possible they were neglected on the diagrams, but they cannot be neglected in the project.