Agda Pkt 2026.01.26 Joint SA PFA

Browse Search

2 corridor to slow speeds. Figure 1 shows an example of horizontal deflection. The design maintained all existing vehicles lanes and existing bikeway designation on the corridor as a Class III bikeway (bike route). Key Community Feedback:  Support for enhancing parallel bike corridors, for example one block away since Alternative 1 would not include a dedicated bike lane. Figure 1 – Example of Horizontal Deflection Alternative 2 Still focused on enhanced ADA curb ramps, crossings and access for pedestrians and also proposed removing all on-street parking along Jefferson Avenue to make room for a Class II bikeway (bike lanes) and, where space allowed, a Class IV bikeway (physically separated bikeway). These additions would visually narrow the roadway to improve safety. The design maintained all existing vehicles lanes and because of existing roadway width constraints, there was not enough space to install dedicated bike lanes continuously on all blocks, so those segments remained a Class III bikeway (bike route). This design created safer crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists using PHBs at few intersections. Key Community Feedback:  Concern about the bike lanes being discontinuous  Concern that vehicles would drive faster without parking along the street Alternative 3 Still focused on enhanced ADA curb ramps, crossings and access for pedestrians and also proposed that one travel lane in each direction be removed so that a continuous Class IV bikeway (physically separated bikeway) or Class II (bike lane) could be installed along the corridor. It enhanced pedestrian and bicycle crossings with median islands, curb extensions, and PHBs at a few intersections. Medians and crossing islands introduced horizontal deflections along the corridor to slow speeds. Key Community Feedback:  Concern that the lane reduction would slow traffic 11.B. - Page 12 of 17 189