Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan - sacog

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A.4.4 Connectivity 29 In many areas in the Sacramento Region, bicycling or walking to schools, employment centers, shopping centers, or other activity centers can be challenging. While distances may be short, the route may require traveling on a roadway that is unsuitable for bicyclists or pedestrians, or accessing the facility through a large parking lot. Unfortunately this situation is all too common, and discourages the use of bicycles or walking. To improve connectivity in communities, it is essential to include bicycling and pedestrian considerations in all transportation and development projects. Circulation studies investigating potential access routes and crossings to adequately accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians gather important information for project implementation. Programs that offer incentives to retrofit existing suburban and urban neighborhoods can also lead to increased connectivity. Neighborhoods should be planned in a way that is conducive to walking and biking. Studies have shown that distances less than or equal to one-half mile are the most acceptable to pedestrians. 30 Street crossings must also be convenient. Pedestrians do not want to go more than 150 feet out of their way to cross a street. 31 With fewer available crossings people are more likely to cross sporadically or spontaneously, creating an unsafe environment for both pedestrians and motorists. Therefore cul-de-sacs and gated or walled communities should be discouraged, unless they include convenient bicycle and pedestrian connections. Well-designed streets should have convenient pedestrian crossings every 300 feet. 32 A.4.5 Principles for Pedestrian Design 33 • The pedestrian environment should be safe and attractive • The pedestrian network should be accessible to all • The pedestrian network should connect to places people want to go • The pedestrian environment should be easy to use • The pedestrian environment should provide good places to rest • The pedestrian environment should be used for many things • The pedestrian environment should be economical A.5 Safety An important goal of this plan is to reduce bicyclist and pedestrian injury and fatality rates while increasing bicycling and walking. Bicyclists and pedestrians should be given increased priority in road safety programs. Education programs will help children and adults bicycle and walk safely, while increasing motorists’ awareness of bicyclists and pedestrians. The personal safety and security of bicyclists and pedestrians is also a key consideration in facility design and maintenance. Bicyclists and pedestrians are often difficult for drivers to see and therefore are vulnerable to injury if hit by a vehicle, particularly when traffic speeds are moderate or high. Pedestrians are particularly sensitive to traffic congestion, detours, roadway conditions, street aesthetics, and street crime. 29 Ibid 30 Ibid 31 Ibid 32 Ibid 33 Pedestrian Transportation Program, City of Portland, “Pedestrian Master Plan” 1998 Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan Amended June, 2011 A-11
Pedestrians are injured and killed in much higher proportion to their trip making than travelers using other modes of transportation. In California pedestrians are involved in 3% of all collisions, but account for 22% of the traffic fatalities statewide. 34 Those who have a choice will not walk if there is a lack of safe facilities. Therefore pedestrian-friendly facilities are essential to achieving an increase in walking. Bicycle and pedestrian planning involves more than just providing and maintaining bike lanes, sidewalks and paths. It also requires consideration of bicycle and pedestrian needs in roadway design. Designing streets with narrower roadway widths, median refuge islands, lower traffic speeds, smaller corner radii, and vertical curbs greatly improves bicycle and pedestrian safety. 35 Planter strips, street trees, crosswalks with audible or countdown signals, and adequate lighting also enhance the safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian environments. 36 A.5.1 Street and Intersection Crossings Safe and convenient street crossings are essential for bicycle and pedestrian travel. When pedestrians must travel substantial distances out of their way to use a controlled intersection, there is an increase in jaywalking, which increases the risk of pedestrian/vehicle collisions. On multilane roads, long crossing distances also increase the potential for bicycle or pedestrian/vehicle collisions. Therefore it is important to design intersections that are safe for bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities to cross the road, with safe crossings at convenient intervals. The following measures can improve the safety of street and intersection crossings: • Traffic signals, and signal timing to enable safe crossings • Signal detection for bicycles • Advance signing and other devices that alert drivers to pedestrian crossings • Enhanced crosswalk facilities, with textured and/or raised surfaces, and pedestrian activated signals • Curb extensions that improve the visibility of pedestrians, and reduce crossing distances • Pedestrian refuge islands and medians • Crossings on all four legs of an intersection • Implement intersection crossing guidelines consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act A.5.2 Sidewalks To maximize pedestrian mobility, there must be a safe place to walk on both sides of the street. Pedestrians walk on the side of the street that is most advantageous to them in terms of time, comfort, and convenience. Gaps in sidewalks can lengthen walking trips, which often is the deciding factor in choosing not to walk. Meandering sidewalks are aesthetically pleasing, but they increase the distance pedestrians must walk to reach his/her destination, and therefore are not suitable for walking trips made for utilitarian purposes. Suggested sidewalk widths are 5’ minimum, 34 California Pedestrian Safety Task Force Report: Walking Towards a Brighter Future. March 1999 35 Dan Burden, Walkable Communities, Inc. 36 Ibid Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan Amended June, 2011 A-12
Page 1 and 2: Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and T
Page 4: Table of Contents Executive Summary
Page 7 and 8: The projects included in this plan
Page 9 and 10: Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and T
Page 11 and 12: expected to be located around the r
Page 13 and 14: 2 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM GO
Page 15 and 16: Blueprint growth concepts for land
Page 17 and 18: • Predominantly grid street patte
Page 19 and 20: • City of Winters Bikeway System
Page 21 and 22: • Class II bike lanes • Bike bo
Page 23 and 24: 5 DESIGN GUIDELINES The State Stree
Page 25 and 26: 6 METRICS FOR IMPROVEMENT AND SUCCE
Page 27 and 28: 7 RECREATIONAL TRAILS Recreational
Page 30 and 31: APPENDIX A—BACKGROUND AND SUPPORT
Page 32 and 33: Table A.3 14 Activity Distribution
Page 34 and 35: Other sources for evaluating bicycl
Page 36 and 37: these policies, a priority should b
Page 38 and 39: esponsibility of individual propert
Page 42 and 43: with 8’ minimum in front of schoo
Page 44 and 45: Table A.7 39 Bicycle Injuries, 1991
Page 46 and 47: A.8 Bicyclist Education Bicyclist e
Page 48: Appendix B Regional Project List an
Page 52 and 53: PROJECT LIST ID COUNTY JURISDICTION
Page 60 and 61: SHANLEY RD MILLER OAK DR FRONTIER R
Page 62 and 63: DIRT RD THELIN DR NORTH AVE DEER ST
Page 64 and 65: SHERWOOD CT GRAND VIEW WAY Colfax P
Page 66 and 67: FOWLER RD GLADDING RD HUNGRY HOLLOW
Page 68 and 69: MEYERS ST BARRINGTON HILLS DR MIRA
Page 74 and 75: LORIMER WAY WINFIELD CT CARBURY WAY
Page 76 and 77: OAKS BLVD ALBATROSS WAY BRANT WAY L
Page 90 and 91:
PROJECT LIST ID COUNTY JURISDICTION
Page 92 and 93:
WINDING WAY JAN DR BARRETT RD RALEY
Page 94 and 95:
MILLIE ST RICH LN GARRY OAK DR STAN
Page 96 and 97:
KIMBLES LN LOS GARCIAS LN ARTESIA R
Page 98 and 99:
COUNTY ROAD 104 JEFFERSON BLVD TULE
Page 100 and 101:
RED JASPER WAY WHYTE AVE PUTICE LN
Page 102 and 103:
VICTORY AVE IONA WAY SPIVA RD DEER
Page 104 and 105:
TOMLINSON DR FAIRCHILD DR KESWICK D
Page 106 and 107:
EMILEE LN UNNAMED RD UNNAMED RD OWN
Page 108 and 109:
TERMINOUS RD Isleton Proposed/Plann
Page 110 and 111:
CHERYL LN SUE PAM DR WHITFIELD WAY
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
PALM ST MALLOTT RD Sutter Proposed/
Page 122 and 123:
RICHMOND WAY ELLIS CT LEYTON CT RAN
Page 124 and 125:
AMES RD LORINDA LN HUSTON ST HALL S
Page 126 and 127:
WILLIAMSBURG DR LYNDSEY LN YORKTOWN
Page 128 and 129:
COUNTY ROAD 97 NICOLAUS RD WEBB RD
Page 130 and 131:
AVOCET AVE NORTE AVE PEREGRINE AVE
Page 132 and 133:
RIVER RD MALCOLM ISLAND ST ARMFIELD
Page 134 and 135:
COUNTY ROAD 90 BUCKEYE RD COUNTY RO
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
HWY 99 SHELL NO 2 RD ARMSTRONG RD F
Page 143 and 144:
APPENDIX C—TRANSIT INFORMATION Tr
Page 145:
Transit Operators Unitrans Yolo Cou
Page 149:
APPENDIX D—LINKS TO REGIONAL BICY
Page 153 and 154:
Appendix E—Glossary of Terms AASH
Page 155 and 156:
Class I Bicycle Parking Facility—
Page 157 and 158:
MUTCD—The Manual on Uniform Traff
Page 159 and 160:
Right of Way—The right of one veh
Page 161 and 162:
What we do The Sacramento Area Coun
show all

Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan - sacog

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?