Active Transportation Plan - City of Pomona

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Pomona Active Transportation Plan November 2012 Chapter 3 – Existing Conditions • Journey-to-work reports information for adult work trips, but does not request data on school trips, which are much more likely to be bicycling trips because school-aged individuals cannot drive until the latter half of their high school years. The SCAG’s Year 2000 Post-Census Regional Travel Survey, which surveyed 17,000 households in the sixcounty Los Angeles area, found that one percent of all trips in the region are by bicycle. Bicycle commuting rates in Los Angeles County have risen since 2000 (from 0.6% to 0.8%), so it is likely that overall bicycle trips have risen as well. Table 3-2 summarizes bicycle ridership estimates for commute and non-commute cyclists. According to the 2010 American Community Survey (5-year estimates), there were 31,847 enrolled students from grades 1 to 12 in Pomona, and 10,329 college students. A roll-call tally conducted at three Pomona Unified School District Schools, indicates that approximately 2.1% of grade-school students bike to school. According to local surveys cited in the Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan BTA Compliance Document, a similar percentage (2%) of local college students commute by bicycle. Based on these assumptions [(31,847 x 2.1%) + (10,329 x 2.0%)], Pomona would have an estimated 876 student cyclists. Approximately 2,594 of Pomona workers commute by transit (4.3% of employed population, 60,742). According to on-board bus and rail surveys conducted by Metro in 2001, approximately 1.2% of transit riders cycle to transit stops; therefore, Pomona would have about 31 home-to-transit cyclists. TABLE 3-2 – POMONA BICYCLISTS BY TRIP GROUP Trip Group Daily Bicycle Commuters Workers (Home-to-Work Trips) 501 36% Students (Home-to-School Trips) 876 62% Transit Riders (Home-to-Transit Trips) 31 2% Total 1,408 100% Source: Census 2000; Fehr & Peers, 2010 Commute trips represent a minority of bicycle trips. To get a fuller sense of bicycling in Pomona, one must account for the other reasons for which people use bicycles. The National Bicycle & Walking Study, published by the Federal Highway Administration in 1995, estimated that for every commute trip made by bicycle, there were 1.74 trips made for shopping, social, and other utilitarian purposes. We can estimate these types of trips in Pomona as follows: • Number of daily bicycle commuters: 1,408 • Number of daily trips per commuter: 2 (assuming each commuter bikes to work or school and then bikes home again later) • Number of daily bicycle commute trips: 2,816 (1,408 x 2) • Daily bicycle trips for non-commute purposes: 4,900 (2,816 x 1.74) 23
Pomona Active Transportation Plan November 2012 Chapter 3 – Existing Conditions Lastly, cycling is a popular recreational activity for all age groups. While most of this plan is focused on encouraging bicycling as a form of transportation, recreational riders, with encouragement, may transition to bicycling commuters. Similarly, recreational cycling can be a popular family activity, and children who ride with parents may be more likely to bike to school or with their friends. Regardless, Pomona has a mild climate, mostly flat terrain, and many parks within a 10-minute bicycle ride of downtown or residential neighborhoods. The Federal Highway Administration and U.S. Department of Transportation released in May 2010 the National Bicycle & Walking Study: 15 Year Status Report. The agencies found that between the initial report in 1995 and household survey data collected in 2009, bicycling activity had increased in general, though not to the goal of doubling walking and biking trips that was set in 1995. Interestingly, though only one percent of respondents in the 2009 National Households Transportation Survey said that they made everyday trips by bike, 12 percent said that they had ridden a bike in the past week. Future Bicycling Activity Future bicycle trips will depend on a number of factors such as the availability of well-connected facilities, appropriate education and promotion programs designed to encourage cycling, and location, density, and type of future land development. Cities with thoughtful bikeway plans and meaningful implementation programs have found high levels of correlation between bicycle facilities and number of cyclists. Three cities with such plans – Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle – found that the number of cyclists on a bicycle corridor after it was improved was double or triple the previous count. More generally, the 2010 National Bicycle & Walking Study: 15 Year Status Report found that between 1990 and 2008 funding for bike and pedestrian projects increased from less than 0.5 percent of federal transportation funding to about one percent. Over that same time, pedestrian and bicycle trips increased by about 50 percent. With appropriate bicycle facilities in place and implementation of employer trip reduction programs, the bicycle mode split could increase significantly above its current rate. According to the methodology adopted by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and outlined in their Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (Volume 2), cities can expect to see a 279% increase in bicycling upon buildout of a complete bicycle network. By expanding bicycle facilities that encourage a broad cross section of bicyclists and improve safety, Pomona could increase the current mode split, which would result in over 25,000 bicycle trips daily by 2020, as shown in Table 3-3. 24
Page 1 and 2: “ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN: Bicy
Page 4 and 5: APPENDICES Appendix A: Public Input
Page 6 and 7: LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 7-1 - San
Page 8 and 9: Pomona Active Transportation Plan N
Page 36 and 37: Bonita Ave D i San Dimas Ave San Di
Page 52 and 53: Bonita Ave D i San Dimas Ave San Di
Page 62 and 63: TABLE 4.2 - PROPOSED PROJECT LIST F
Page 64 and 65: Bonita Ave Indian Hill Blvd Arrow R
Page 80 and 81:
Pomona Active Transportation Plan N
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
TABLE 7.2 - BICYCLE FACILITY PHASIN
Page 126 and 127:
Exhibit 7-1 - San Antonio Avenue Bi
Page 128 and 129:
Exhibit 7-2 - San Jose Creek Bicycl
Page 130 and 131:
Exhibit 7-3 - Park Avenue Bicycle L
Page 132 and 133:
Exhibit 7-4 - Monterey Avenue Bicyc
Page 134 and 135:
Exhibit 7-5 - Garey Avenue Bicycle
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
IN-PERSON AND ON-LINE BIKEWAY FACIL
Page 210 and 211:
POMONA STAKEHOLDER FACILITY PRIORIT
Page 212 and 213:
Question 1: What type of bicycle fa
Page 214 and 215:
Question 3: Would you like to share
Page 216 and 217:
As part of the Pomona Bicycle Maste
Page 218 and 219:
Existing Lanes Width Needed (feet)
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
APPENDIX C: POMONA PEDESTRIAN POLIC
Page 226 and 227:
-- Information kiosks -- District-w
Page 228 and 229:
• Policy 6A.P3, which states, “
Page 230 and 231:
Mixed Land Use • Mixed land uses
Page 232 and 233:
• 6A.P5 - Encourage consolidated,
Page 234 and 235:
Not this … This Disconnected and
Page 236 and 237:
• Culs-de-sac separate streets an
Page 238 and 239:
Integrating Trails into the Street
Page 240 and 241:
APPENDIX D: PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
Page 242 and 243:
PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS In order to
Page 244 and 245:
N Mountain Ave EAST AVE S College A
Page 246 and 247:
1) FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND GAREY AVE
Page 248 and 249:
3) BONITA AVENUE AND GAREY AVENUE E
Page 250 and 251:
5) ARROW HIGHWAY AND GAREY AVENUE E
Page 252 and 253:
7) MCKINLEY AVENUE AND WHITE AVENUE
Page 254 and 255:
9) SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE AND INDIAN
Page 256 and 257:
11) LINCOLN AVENUE AND WASHINGTON A
Page 258 and 259:
13) HOLT AVENUE AND FAIRPLEX DRIVE
Page 260 and 261:
15) HOLT AVENUE AND GAREY AVENUE Ex
Page 262 and 263:
17) HOLT AVENUE AND PALOMA DRIVE Ex
Page 264 and 265:
19) HOLT AVENUE AND INDIAN HILL BOU
Page 266 and 267:
21) 2ND STREET AND GAREY AVENUE Exi
Page 268 and 269:
23) 4TH STREET AND GAREY AVENUE Exi
Page 270 and 271:
25) MISSION BOULEVARD AND GAREY AVE
Page 272 and 273:
27) MISSION BOULEVARD AND SAN ANTON
Page 274 and 275:
29) PHILLIPS BOULEVARD AND GAREY AV
Page 276 and 277:
31) LEXINGTON AVENUE AND WHITE AVEN
Page 278 and 279:
33) PHILADELPHIA STREET AND GAREY A
Page 280 and 281:
35) OLIVE STREET AND GAREY AVENUE E
show all

Active Transportation Plan - City of Pomona

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?