CityofSantaBarbara
By the City of Santa Barbara
Construction for the Westside Community Paseos Project, will continue this month (weather permitting) on the 600 block of W. Micheltorena Street.
The Paseos Project will provide strong walking and biking connections within the Westside, and from the Westside to Downtown and will last for two months in this location.
The total Project duration is approximately eight months.
Read More about the Project and view the Project website.
As a frequent bike rider who normally uses Micheltorena to get from the Westside to downtown, this improvement might just help save my life. I’ve been almost sideswiped by cars a number of times in this area, so I have no issues with this project.
I applaud the new bike paths, but I hope the City isn’t doing both that the same time. If so, it would cut off the Westside from downtown leaving only Carillo st open to get downtown or go all the way around the Mesa…Have they completed Mission St yet? I’m avoiding it lately.
I don’t think they have painted lines on the new path, but I haven’t seen too much construction this week (that may be due to rain).
This is an absurd project. All they have done is tear out the existing sidewalk and replace it with a somewhat wider sidewalk that will have to be shared between pedestrians and bicycle riders. This “paseo” is about yards long and was unnecessary as there are few bicycle riders taking this route to nowhere. These riders could easily have dismounted and walked on the existing sidewalk. Instead seven or more beautiful Jacaranda trees were ripped out and parking places were lost. And to add insult the telephone poles that were made visible by the removal of trees were not removed but merely moved. This is all about the agenda of the bicycle lobby, not about the community impact which is very negative at these intersections.
I think you are confusing this particular part of the project (W. Micheltorena near Super Cucas, in the image above) with the part of the project on Mission between Modoc and San Pascual (not pictured).
The one-block section on Mission is where the Jacaranda trees were removed – although there are still many left on the rest of Mission towards Robbins.
Both of these changes are very great changes for bicycle safety. There is no sinister “bicycle lobby”. I, for one, am happy about these changes. Contrary to your opinion, I see MANY bicycles riding in this area (Mission) every day on my commute – on their way to from the Westside to downtown, etc. I also see many students biking and walking to La Cumbre junior high every day.
Personally, as a parent with 2 kids in this neighborhood (who often bike to school), and who bikes to work once in a blue moon, I think these changes are a net positive to the community.
In addition, the openness in this area of Mission makes people far more visible. Prior to the changes, with telephone poles and trees lining one side of Mission, it was easy to “overlook” pedestrians trying to cross.
“Riders can easily dismount and walk” is spoken like a true driver.
letmego: There is no confusion. The city has spent millions of dollars on really unneeded infrastructure to accommodate a few bikers. Why do pedestrians and people pushing carts and baby carriages have to “share” a “paseo” with a few bike riders that could easily get off and walk to the next bikeway about 50 yards away? I live in this neighborhood as well and see almost no bicycle traffic at San Andres and Micheltorena or San Andres and Mococ/Mission. Most of the few who ride bicycles to the junior high school avoid this area and easily escape the campus out the back. I agree that MANY students walks this route. They are now endangered by the bike rides. The “bike lobby” sobriquet is a short hand for those who advocate for these lanes without regard to the community need or use. These people are either so brainwashed by the urban planning folks who now push the idea of this unused alternative or they are actual bikers themselves and want to see their needs met. Almost all bicycle riders in the SB area are recreational riders. This is not going to change by bullying through these “paseos.” Much more realistic to get reliable tram and bus services through the Westside and other communities with limited resources.
6632, your comment is short sighted.
First, about the lack of current ridership…that is equivalent to saying decades ago we barely see any cars travel to Goleta, why build the 101 freeway? You build it, they will come. Increasing ridership improves multiple metrics from health to lowering car congestion. Drivers benefit too from good bike infrastructure. Road wear and tear is much more expensive for cities to maintain. And cars take up magnitudes more public land in parking an overall infrastructure. Bikers are essentially subsidizing drivers with their tax money.
Second, path to nowhere? That is not true. If you look at the master plan, there’s going to be a new bike path along modoc all the way to Las Positas, connecting with the protected bike path all the way to UCSB to the north, and Ventura and beyond to the South. Also, this will connect to the cross town route over Micheltorena to downtown.
Dismounted and walked? What about making car drivers get out and push their cars across intersections? Oh, because FREEDOM? Where is my freedom to travel the way I want to travel and the freedom to spend $500 on a bike instead of $30,000 on a car with expensive maintenance and fuel and parking issues? And the freedom to be safe while doing it? True freedom is configuring the roads for all sorts of safe accessible travel options for all people. Not everyone can own or operate a car.
Bike riders aren’t a sinister lobby. We are all about FREEDOM. What is more American than that?
SBGRIZ–What nonsense and Brave New World lexicon you offer. This is not about “freedom” but about forcing others to submit to your agenda!
I’ve almost never gone over the Micheltorena bridge (by bike usually, sometimes by car) without seeing (other) cyclists on it.
And there’s certainly confusion when you write about “this route to nowhere” and ripping out Jacaranda trees that never existed on Micheltorena.
You use a lot of inflammatory hyperbolic hyper-emotive language that I suppose is emotionally rewarding for you somehow but isn’t going to sway anyone who doesn’t share your views, and isn’t a very good framework for you to develop rational accurate beliefs. And ranting here on EdHat isn’t going to change anything. The post provides factual information of value to the community. It’s hard to see what value your comments have.
It goes both ways. The damn car lobby is so used to being in charge that now they’ve invented a sinister bike lobby. I’m done with having to submit to the car owners agenda! *I* also live in this neighborhood and commute almost every day – every time I commute, I see MULTIPLE cyclists in the 1 minute and 30 seconds it takes me to go past this area.
Bicycle commuters aren’t recreational cyclists.
I don’t want my kids being hit by cars.
It’s a block.
The strollers can deal with slow moving bikes for a block. On the other hand, it’s very clear that drivers in that stretch from Modoc to the 101 aren’t happy about sharing the road way with bikes…hence the construction of the new multi-use path.
I agree. I don’t want to be forced to submit the car agenda. To compromise, let’s just make streets compatible and equally safe for cars, bikes, and pedestrians. I’m willing to meet you halfway to your agenda. Are you willing to meet me halfway?
You sound like you would have been the person in the early 1900s speaking against the radical sinister motor vehicle agenda taking away horse infrastructure. Life moves on.
I agree. I don’t want to be forced to submit the car agenda. To compromise, let’s just make streets compatible and equally safe for cars, bikes, and pedestrians. I’m willing to meet you halfway to your agenda. Are you willing to meet me halfway?
You sound like you would have been the person in the early 1900s speaking against the radical sinister motor vehicle agenda taking away horse infrastructure. Life moves on.
I agree. I don’t want to be forced to submit the car agenda. To compromise, let’s just make streets compatible and equally safe for cars, bikes, and pedestrians. I’m willing to meet you halfway to your agenda. Are you willing to meet me halfway?
You sound like you would have been the person in the early 1900s speaking against the radical sinister motor vehicle agenda taking away horse infrastructure. Life moves on.
This intersection at Almond-Dutton and Micheltorena needs improvement; I hope this is the right plan. With the upcoming expanded WestSide Community Clinic, that crosswalk will be even more necessary than it already is. But it’s going to be a mess during construction; I hope they move quickly.
What are bunch of clowns spending our money go throw it De La Guerra Plaza and then give yourself a pay raise
I hope you will consider making higher quality comments that reflect better on you in the future. It might help to not click the anonymous button, so that you feel a greater sense of responsibility for what you write.
Thank the workers.
They didn’t design it, they just build it per plan
Not quite directly related, but as long as people are discussing bike infrastructure and lobbies, here’s a good balanced article by Ray Ford about the Modoc Multiuse Bike Path project and the opposition from CAMP ( Community Association for Modoc Preserve): https://www.noozhawk.com/ray-ford-its-time-to-come-together-on-modoc-multiuse-bike-path-project/
This is a project to slow down traffic for bikes and pedestrians.
Trust the process
These kinds of changes are popular AND face opposition in many places, not just here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2023/pedestrian-safety-covid-pandemic/