Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California

I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... I-1 II. STATUTES AND POLICIES .............................................................. II-1 Federal Statutes and Policies ............................................................................II-2 TEA-21.....................................................................................................II-2 A US DOT Policy Statement ............................................................................II-3 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ...............................................................II-3 Federal Statutes (MPO).................................................................................II-4 Federal Statutes (State)................................................................................II-4 State Statutes and Policies...............................................................................II-5 Caltrans Policies ...........................................................................................II-7 III. PLANNING............................................................................... III-1 Caltrans’ System Planning............................................................................... III-2 Regional Planning......................................................................................... III-4 City and County Planning................................................................................ III-6 IV. FUNDING SOURCES .................................................................... IV-1 Federal-Aid Funding ......................................................................................IV-2 State Funding..............................................................................................IV-3 Caltrans Loan Programs..................................................................................IV-6 Local and Regional Funding .............................................................................IV-7 V. STANDARD AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND TRAFFIC CALMING ................................................................................. V-1 Pedestrians: Analytical Tools ........................................................................ V-4 Pedestrians: Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) .............................................. V-5 Pedestrians: Crossings: Crosswalks .................................................................. V-6 Pedestrians: Crossings: Overcoming Movement and Information Barriers..................... V-7 Pedestrians: Crossings: Medians and Refuges...................................................... V-8 Pedestrians: Crossings: Mid-Block Crosswalks ..................................................... V-9 Pedestrians: Crossings: Skewed Intersections .................................................... V-10 Pedestrians: Crossings: Uncontrolled Crosswalk Siting Guidelines ............................ V-11 Pedestrians: Personal Mobility Devices: Segway HT ............................................. V-12 Pedestrians: Signals: In-Roadway warning Lights ................................................ V-13 Pedestrians: Signals: Countdown Signals .......................................................... V-14 Pedestrians: Signals: Accessible Signals: Verbal/Vibrotactile Tone........................... V-15 Pedestrians: Signals: Signal Actuation ............................................................. V-16 Pedestrians: Signals: Signal Faces .................................................................. V-17 Pedestrians: Signals: Signal Timing................................................................. V-18 Pedestrians: Signals: Flashing Yellow Beacons ................................................... V-19 Pedestrians: Signals: Signal Warrants .............................................................. V-20 Pedestrians: Sidewalks: Assessment Techniques ................................................. V-21 Pedestrians: Sidewalks: Maintenance .............................................................. V-22 Pedestrians: Sidewalks: Maintenance: Root Protection ......................................... V-23 Pedestrians: Sidewalks: Surfaces ................................................................... V-24 viii Pedestrians: Sidewalks: Zone System ............................................................. V-25 Pedestrians: Work Zones: Signing and Striping ................................................... V-26 Traffic Calming ........................................................................................ V-27 Traffic Calming: Chicanes and Chokers ............................................................ V-28 Traffic Calming: Curb Extensions ................................................................... V-29 Traffic Calming: Gateway monuments (Entry Treatments) .................................... V-30 Traffic Calming: Full Closures ....................................................................... V-31 Traffic Calming: Half Closures ...................................................................... V-32 Traffic Calming: Raised Intersections .............................................................. V-33 Traffic Calming: Modern Roundabouts ............................................................. V-34 Traffic Calming: Textured/Colored Pavement ................................................... V-35 VI. STANDARD AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES............. VI-1 Bicycle Parking: Location Criteria and Guidelines ................................................VI-3 Bicycle Parking: Lockers ..............................................................................VI-4 Bicycle Parking: Bike Stations ........................................................................VI-5 Bicycle Parking: Racks .................................................................................VI-6 Class I Bike Path: Rails-With-Trails (RWT)..........................................................VI-7 Class I Bike Path: Rails-To-Trails.....................................................................VI-8 Class I Bike Path: Rivers With Trails.................................................................VI-9 Class I Bike Path: Under-Crossings................................................................. VI-10 Class I Bike Path: Mid-block Crossings ............................................................ VI-11 Class I Bike Path: Operations ....................................................................... VI-12 Class II Bike Lanes: On-Street Parking ............................................................ VI-13 Class II Bike Lanes: Right Turn Lanes.............................................................. VI-14 Class III Bike Route: Bicycle Boulevards .......................................................... VI-15 Class III Bike Route: Wide Curb Lane .............................................................. VI-16 Class III Bike Route: Bicycle Pavement Markings: “Sharrows” ................................ VI-17 Signals: Loop Detectors ............................................................................. VI-18 Signals: Bicycle Signals .............................................................................. VI-19 Roadway Design: Freeway Ramps.................................................................. VI-20 Roadway Design: Retrofitting Streets For Bicycles.............................................. VI-21 Roadway Design: Reduce Travel Lane Widths ................................................... VI-22 Roadway Design: Removing Parking ............................................................... VI-23 Roadway Design: Removing Travel Lanes......................................................... VI-24 Roadway Resurfacing ................................................................................ VI-25 VII. APPENDICES ........................................................................... VII-1 Benefits of Walking and Bicycling..................................................................... VII-2 Transportation System Flexibility................................................................... VII-2 Health ................................................................................................... VII-2 Environment............................................................................................ VII-3 Community ............................................................................................. VII-3 Economy ................................................................................................ VII-5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility and Safety Data ................................................... VII-7 Mobility ................................................................................................. VII-7 Safety ................................................................................................... VII-8 Pedestrian Characteristics in California survey (DHS) ............................................VII-14 Safe Access to Transit..................................................................................VII-16 Design Issues ..........................................................................................VII-16 Pedestrian Facilities .................................................................................VII-16 Bicycle Facilities......................................................................................VII-17 Estimating Auto Trip Reduction by Non-Motorized Facilites.....................................VII-19 Assessing State DOT Performance....................................................................VII-20 ix Case Study: Davis – A Bicycling and Walking Laboratory for California ........................VII-25 Background ............................................................................................VII-25 The Comprehensive Bicycle Plan ..................................................................VII-26 Innovative Solutions..................................................................................VII-26 The Future of Davis ..................................................................................VII-27 Caltrans District Bicycle/Pedestrian Program Contacts ..........................................VII-28 VIII. REFERENCES...........................................................................VIII-1 IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................... IX-1 General Information and Design Resources........................................................... IX-2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Resources............................................................ IX-8 Trail Resources.......................................................................................... IX-16 ADA-related Resources................................................................................. IX-17 Traffic Calming Resources............................................................................. IX-19 Safety Resources........................................................................................ IX-24 Tables Table 1. Funding Sources ...................................................................................IV-8 Table 2. Comparison of Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Deaths, 2001 .......................... VII-9 Table 3. State DOT Benchmark Assessment (February 2003) .......................................VII-21 Table 4. Comparison of California HDM With Other States’ Manuals ..............................VII-23 Figures Figure 1. Simplified Statewide and Regional Planning and STIP Programming Cycle .............. III-5 Figure 2. Percentage of U.S. adults considered obese by state 1990 – 2001 ....................... VII-4 Figure 3. Private Costs per Passenger Mile............................................................... VII-5 Figure 4. External Public Costs per Passenger per Mile ................................................ VII-6 Figure 5. Bicycle Crash Rate in California, 1996-2000 ................................................VII-10 Figure 6. Pedestrian Crash Rate in California, 1996-2000 ............................................VII-11 Figure 7. Pedestrian Percentage of Traffic Fatalities by Select County, 2000 ....................VII-12 Figure 8. Pedestrian Fatalities and Spending on Walking and Bicycling by State.................VII-13 Figure 9. Average Minutes Walking Each Week by Caltrans District ................................VII-14 Figure 10. Pedestrian Crash Rates by Caltrans District.................................................VII-15 x I. INTRODUCTION I-1 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER The primary purpose of Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California—A Technical Reference and Technology Transfer Synthesis for Caltrans Planners and Engineers (“Technical Reference”) is to provide Caltrans staff with a synthesis of information on non-motorized transportation. It is intended that this “technology transfer” will assist the Department of Transportation in accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists on the state highway system throughout California, serving as a resource on policies, laws, programs, the Caltrans planning and design process, guidelines, and best practices. Although primarily intended for Caltrans planners and engineers, local agency staff and the general public may also find it useful. Other materials developed as part of this technology transfer project include a non-motorized training curriculum (which may be incorporated into the Division of Design’s existing training program), and a computer-based training course in interactive CD and web-based formats. Caltrans and the State of California have a long history of including the pedestrian and bicycle modes of travel into planning and design policies and practices. The original Bikeway Facilities Planning and Design section of the Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000) was one of the first of its kind in the country in the 1970s, was later used as the basis of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, and still has many common elements with that national document. In 2002, Deputy Directive 64 (DD-64) directed that the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) “fully considers the needs of non-motorized travelers (including pedestrians, bicyclists and persons with disabilities) in all programming, planning, maintenance, construction, operations and project development activities and products.” California has made a commitment to non-motorized transportation as expressed in all or part of the following documents: • Deputy Directive on Accommodating Non-motorized Transportation (DD64) • Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions (DP 22) • Highway Design Manual • Main Streets: Flexibility in Design and Operations Assembly Concurrent Resolution 211 • California Supplement to the MUTCD • California Blueprint for Bicycling and Walking • California Bicycle Transportation Act • California Vehicle Code • California Streets and Highways Code • California Access Compliance Reference Manual Innovative bike plates developed by Caltrans on S.R. 395 in Mono County help make cattle guards more bicycle-friendly. I-2 INTRODUCTION The non-motorized transportation field consists of a complex and fast-evolving mix of policies, procedures, guidelines, and standards. These elements are currently located in multiple publications. The Technical Reference is a ‘snapshot,’ providing an overview as of April, 2005, and references to more detailed materials on particular topics. For authoritative and current information on standards and guidance regarding pedestrian and bicycle facilities in California, there is no substitute for Caltrans manuals and policy documents, particularly the Highway Design Manual, the MUTCD 2003, and the MUTCD 2003 California Supplement. Adherence to Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design Manual is required by law for all bikeway design, on or off the State Highway System (California Streets and Highways Code, Sections 890.8 and 891). Relevant federal and state statutes and policies are summarized, as is the Caltrans planning process, regional and local planning efforts, and the project development process including facility design. A valuable tool for implementing these concepts is the “Context Sensitive Solutions” approach of involving stakeholders, in accordance with Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions (DP 22). Potential funding sources are described along with amounts, criteria, and typical applications. The Technical Reference portion concludes with concept sheets on pedestrian facilities, traffic calming, and bicycle facilities. These are followed by appendices on a variety of topics, including pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions in California. A secondary goal of the Technical Reference is to provide policy and design support for the ‘Smart Growth’ concepts proposed by the FHWA: • Managing and operating existing highway, transit, and other transportation modes to maintain or improve performance for each mode without adversely affecting neighborhoods or urban centers, • Knitting transportation improvement projects and public/private investments so that they merge as seamlessly as possible into the community, • Supporting the provision of mixed-use development so that transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities are viable options to driving. For more information on this topic, see http://www.mcb.fhwa.dot.gov/Documents/SmartGrowth/Prelimin.htm. I-3 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER As population and vehicle miles traveled continue to grow, transportation planners, engineers, and policy makers are looking to non-motorized transportation, often in combination with transit, to relieve some of the pressure on the framework of the traditional transportation system. Good walking and bicycle facilities extend the reach of transit systems, provide mobility options, improve accessibility for all persons, and help encourage people to have active lifestyles. Safe and efficient non-motorized facilities are essential to the development of a balanced, integrated multi-modal transportation system in California. Gilman Drive at I-5 after being restriped and signed for improved bicycle access (San Diego) I-4 II. STATUTES AND POLICIES II-1 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Federal Statutes and Policies Many of California’s laws and policies originate from Federal laws that require planning for non-motorized transportation. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), like its predecessor the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), has laws and policies that apply to non- motorized transportation. Congress recognized that bicyclists and pedestrians have the same origins and destinations as other transportation system users and that it is important for them to have safe and convenient access to airports, ports, ferry services, transit terminals, and other intermodal facilities as well as to jobs, services, recreation facilities, and neighborhoods. TEA-21 placed a strong emphasis on creating a seamless transportation system that all users can enjoy and use efficiently and safely. Federal transportation policy is to increase nonmotorized transportation to at least 15% of all trips and to simultaneously reduce the number of nonmotorized travelers killed or injured in traffic collisions by at least 10% (TEA-21, 1998). This policy, which was adopted in 1994 as part of the National Bicycling and Walking Study, remains a high priority for the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). TEA-21 provides the funding opportunities, planning processes, and policy language by which states and metropolitan areas can achieve these ambitious national goals. TEA-21 The transportation planning process established in 1991 as part of ISTEA continued as part of TEA-21 established in 1998. States and metropolitan areas with populations of more than 50,000 are required to plan for the "development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and facilities (including pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) that will function as an intermodal transportation system..." (§ 1203 and 1204 of TEA-21) Specific implementation criteria and laws include: • "Bicyclists and pedestrians shall be given due consideration in the comprehensive transportation plans developed by each metropolitan planning organization and State." (§ 1202(a) of TEA-21) • "Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways shall be considered, where appropriate, in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction and transportation facilities, except where bicycle and pedestrian use are not permitted." (§ 1202(a) of TEA-21) • "Transportation plans and projects shall provide due consideration for safety and contiguous routes for bicyclists and pedestrians." (§ 1202(a) of TEA-21) • "In any case where a highway bridge deck is being replaced or rehabilitated with Federal financial participation, and bicyclists are permitted on facilities at or near each end of such bridge, and the safe accommodation of bicyclists can be provided at reasonable cost as part of such replacement or rehabilitation, then such bridge shall be so replaced or rehabilitated as to provide such safe accommodations." (23 U.S.C. § 217) • "The Secretary shall not approve any project or take any regulatory action under this title that will result in the severance of an existing major route or have significant adverse impact on the safety for nonmotorized transportation traffic and light motorcycles, unless such project or regulatory action provides for a reasonable alternate route or such a route exists." (23 U.S.C. § 109(n)) II-2 STATUTES AND POLICIES • "Even where circumstances are exceptional and bicycle use and walking are either prohibited or made incompatible, States, MPOs, and local governments must still ensure that bicycle and pedestrian access along the corridor served by the new or improved facility is not made more difficult or impossible." (FHWA Guidance, Policy: Mainstreaming Nonmotorized Transportation (February 1999)) • Each State is required to fund a Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator position in its State Department of Transportation to promote and facilitate the increased use of nonmotorized transportation, including developing facilities for the use of pedestrians and bicyclists and public educational, promotional, and safety programs for using such facilities. Funds such as the CMAQ or STP may be used for the Federal share of the cost of these positions. In most States, the Coordinator position is a full-time position with sufficient responsibility to deal effectively with other agencies, State offices, and divisions within the State DOT." (FHWA Guidance, State Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator Position (February 1999)) A US DOT Policy Statement The USDOT encourages states, local governments, professional associations, other government agencies and community organizations to adopt its Policy Statement (A US DOT Policy Statement: Integrating Bicycling and Walking into Transportation Infrastructure, 2000) as an indication of their commitment to consideration of bicycles and pedestrian facilities as vital components of the transportation system. One of the key principles of the Policy Statement is that “bicycling and walking facilities will be incorporated into all transportation projects unless exceptional circumstances exist.” The USDOT calls on each organization or agency to explicitly adopt one, all, or a combination of the various TEA-21 implementation criteria above and to be committed to taking some or all of the actions listed here as appropriate for their situation: • Define the exceptional circumstances in which facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians will NOT be required in all transportation projects. • Adopt new manuals, or amend existing manuals, covering the geometric design of streets, the development of roadside safety facilities, and the design of bridges and their approaches so that they comprehensively address the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as an integral element of the design of all new and reconstructed roadways. • Adopt stand-alone bicycle and pedestrian facility design manuals as an interim step towards the adoption of new typical sections or manuals covering the design of streets and highways. • Initiate an intensive re-tooling and re-education of transportation planners and engineers to make them conversant with the new information required to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. Training should be made available for, if not required of, agency traffic engineers and consultants who perform work in this field. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted on July 26, 1990, provides comprehensive rights and protections to individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, state and local government services, and telecommunications. The goal of the ADA is to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living and economic self-sufficiency. The ADA prohibits all state and local governments and most private businesses from discriminating on the basis of disability. II-3 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER “No qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity." Federal Statutes (MPO) Title 23, CFR §450.322 The Metropolitan Transportation Plan shall include adopted congestion management strategies including, as appropriate, traffic operations, ridesharing, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, alternative work schedules, freight movement options, high occupancy vehicle treatments, telecommuting, and public transportation improvements (including regulatory, pricing, management, and operational options), that demonstrate a systematic approach in addressing current and future transportation demand and identify pedestrian walkway and bicycle transportation facilities in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 217(g). Title 23, U.S.C. Sec. 134 (a) (3) The plans and programs for each metropolitan area shall provide for the development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and facilities (including pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) that will function as an intermodal transportation system for the metropolitan area and as an integral part of an intermodal transportation system for the State and the United States. United States Department of Transportation: Design Guidance. Policy Statement on Integrating Bicycling and Walking into Transportation Infrastructure. The design guidance is comprised of three items: a policy statement that bicycling and walking facilities will be incorporated into all transportation projects unless exceptional circumstances exist; an approach to achieving this policy that has already worked in State and local agencies, and a series of action items that a public agency, professional association, or advocacy group can take to achieve the overriding goal of improving conditions for bicycling and walking. Federal Statutes (State) Title 23, CFR Sec §450.214 (b) (3) The State shall develop a statewide transportation plan for all areas of the State and contain, as an element, a plan for bicycle transportation, pedestrian walkways and trails which is appropriately interconnected with other modes. Title 23, CFR Sec §450.214 (b) (4) The State shall develop a statewide transportation plan that is coordinated with the metropolitan transportation plans required under 23 U.S.C. 134. Title 23, U.S.C. Sec. 135 (a) (3) The plans and programs for each State shall provide for the development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and facilities (including pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) that will function as an intermodal transportation system for the State and an integral part of an intermodal transportation system for the United States. Title 23 U.S.C. 217(g) Planning and Design. Bicyclists and pedestrians shall be given due consideration in the comprehensive transportation plans developed by each metropolitan planning organization and state in accordance with sections 134 and 135, respectively. Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways shall be considered, where appropriate, in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of transportation facilities, except where bicycle and pedestrian use are not permitted. II-4 STATUTES AND POLICIES State Statutes and Policies A key facet to understanding how California compares with other states in terms of laws, policies, standards, and other items, is its size. With about 34.5 million residents, California is the most populous state. The size of California poses a challenge that smaller states do not face. The enormous responsibilities of developing and maintaining thousands of miles of roadway, combined with many disparate local agencies and levels of responsibility, makes coordination and communication the single biggest challenge. For this and other reasons, local and regional agencies and advocacy groups have sometimes played more of a leadership role in the development of innovative bicycle and pedestrian treatments. At the same time, Caltrans is assuming more of a leadership role with policies such as Deputy Directive 64, the Bicycle Transportation Act, and the 2002 California Blueprint for Bicycling and Walking. State bicycle and pedestrian-related policies and laws can be found in numerous State documents, including: Assembly Concurrent Resolution 211 (ACR 211) (May 2002) acknowledges the importance of bicycling and walking to the State of California and encourages all cities and counties to “implement the policies of [Deputy Directive 64] and the United States Department of Transportation’s design guidance document on integrating bicycling and walking when building their transportation infrastructure.” California Bicycle Transportation Act, Streets and Highways Code 890-894 (1994) is legislation that seeks "to establish a bicycle transportation system...designed and developed to achieve the functional commuting needs of the employee, student, business person, and shopper as the foremost consideration in route selection, to have the physical safety of the bicyclist and bicyclist's property as a major planning component, and to have the capacity to accommodate bicyclists of all ages and skills." A city or county may complete bicycle transportation plan pursuant to Section 891.2 in order for their project to be considered by the Department for funding. Section 890.6 states the Department, in cooperation with county and city governments, shall establish minimum safety design criteria for the planning and construction of bikeways and roadways where bicycle travel is permitted. Section 890.8 states the Department shall establish uniform specifications and symbols for signs, markers, and traffic control devices to designate bikeways, regulate traffic, improve safety and convenience for bicyclists, and alert pedestrians and motorists of the presence of bicyclists on bikeways and on roadways where bicycle travel is permitted. And section 891 states, “All city, county, regional, and other local agencies responsible for the development or operation of bikeways or roadways where bicycle travel is permitted shall utilize all minimum safety design criteria and uniform specifications and symbols for signs, markers, and traffic control devices established pursuant to Sections 890.6 and 890.8.” Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) (1997) provides State funds for city and county projects that are included in an adopted local Bicycle Transportation Plan that complies with Section 891.2 of the Streets and Highways Code, and are designed and constructed in accordance with the Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design Manual. California Blueprint for Bicycling and Walking (2002) sets goals to increase bicycling and walking trips 50% by 2010, decrease bicycle and pedestrian fatality rates 50% by 2010, and to increase funding for bicycle- and pedestrian-related programs. Caltrans has established a Steering Committee to guide the Blueprint’s implementation. II-5 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER California Vehicle Code and Streets and Highway Code (CVC Sections 21200-21212 and 39000-39011 and SHC Sections 885-886, 887-888.8, and 890-894.2): Every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway has all the rights and is subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle by the California Department of Motor Vehicles. As such, bicycles are generally prohibited from riding on sidewalks or in crosswalks. An exception to this is on marked crosswalks of multi-use paths. On multi-use paths, bicyclists function as pedestrians at intersections by activating the pedestrian signal and waiting for the light to change in their favor. A bicycle operated on a roadway, or the shoulder of a highway, shall be operated in the same direction as vehicles are required to be driven upon the roadway. Unless otherwise directed by a bicycle signal, an operator of a bicycle shall obey the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle at all traffic signals. As set forth by Section 21202 of the California Vehicle Code, any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations: (1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. (2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge. A "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane. (4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized. Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable. California Vehicle Code (Sections 2149-21971). The California Vehicle Code describes the responsibilities of pedestrians when crossing the street, or walking along a street on a sidewalk. The Vehicle Code also addresses the roles and responsibilities of motorists in relationship to pedestrians and wheelchair users. California, like most other states, requires both pedestrians and drivers to exercise due care. All street intersections are legally considered crosswalks, whether marked or unmarked. The Vehicle Code states that drivers must yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway in a marked or unmarked crosswalk. The Vehicle Code does not prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways at places other than crosswalks, except between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic signals or police officers. Local authorities may adopt ordinances prohibiting pedestrians from crossing streets outside crosswalks. For signalized intersections, the Vehicle Code states that the pedestrian may cross with a green light at any marked or unmarked crosswalk unless expressly prohibited. The pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time the signal changed. For closely adjoining intersections, defined in the Vehicle Code as intersections where the outermost boundaries are confined in a distance of 200 or less feet, the Department of Transportation or local jurisdiction may designate a single intersection. When so designated, the single intersection shall be the legal intersection for the purposes of traffic movement and regulation. The Vehicle Code does not specifically state whether vehicles need to remain stopped until the pedestrian has completely crossed the street. This topic has become an important issue with regard to II-6 STATUTES AND POLICIES pedestrian safety due to the phenomenon known as the "multiple threat." This occurs when one vehicle stops for pedestrians who are in a crosswalk, and the car(s) in the adjacent travel lane(s) fail(s) to yield to the pedestrians. Section 21951 of the California Vehicle Code addresses this issue by stating that “[w]hen a vehicle is stopped at a marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway, vehicles approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle.” Because there is no law against driving through the crosswalk after the pedestrian has passed (but not reached the opposite curb), motorists from the rear may not see the pedestrian in the crosswalk due to the other vehicle continuing to move forward. According to the Vehicle Code, "it is the policy of the State of California that safe and convenient pedestrian travel and access, whether by foot, wheelchair, walker, or stroller, be provided to the residents of the state." The code also states that it is the intent of the Legislature that all government levels, especially Caltrans and other DOTs, will work to provide safe, convenient passage for pedestrians on or across all streets and highways, increase levels of walking, and reduce pedestrian fatalities and injuries. Government Code 4450 requires that buildings, structures, sidewalks, curbs, curb ramps, and related facilities that are built with State funds, the funds of cities, counties, or of other political subdivisions be accessible to and usable by the physically disabled. Government Code 65080 (a) Each transportation planning agency designated under Section 29532 or 29532.1 shall prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system, including, but not limited to, mass transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle, pedestrian, goods movement, and aviation facilities and services. The plan shall be action-oriented and pragmatic, considering both the short-term and long-term future, and shall present clear, concise policy guidance to local and State officials. The regional transportation plan shall consider factors specified in Section 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code. Each transportation planning agency shall consider and incorporate, as appropriate, the transportation plans of cities, counties, districts, private organizations, and State and Federal agencies. Streets and Highway Code 895-888.8 Non-motorized Transportation: The Department shall, in cooperation with local agencies, publish a statewide map illustrating state highway routes available for the use of bicyclists and where bicyclists are prohibited. The Department shall prepare an annual report to the Legislature summarizing programs it has undertaken for the development of non-motorized transportation facilities. Caltrans Policies Deputy Directive 64 (DD-64), “Accommodating Non-Motorized Travel” (March 26, 2001). The policy and definition/background sections are as follows: “POLICY: The Department fully considers the needs of non-motorized travelers (including pedestrians, bicyclists and persons with disabilities) in all programming, planning, maintenance, construction, operations and project development activities and products. This includes incorporation of the best available standards in all of the Department’s practices. The Department adopts the best practice concepts in the US DOT Policy Statement on Integrating Bicycling and Walking into Transportation Infrastructure. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/non motor-travel.pdf Director’s Policy 22 (DP-22), “Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions” (November 2001). Supports an approach to managing the transportation system that balances transportation needs with community goals. Solutions involve and integrate community goals in the planning, design, II-7 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER construction, and maintenance and operations processes, including accommodating the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. Context Sensitive Solutions is a collaborative approach that considers the needs and concerns of all stakeholders. http://t8web.dot.ca.gov/design/memos/112901.pdf Main Streets: Flexibility in Design and Operation emphasizes Caltrans’ production of transportation projects that make state highways that happen to be local main streets more walkable and livable. This summary identifies design concepts that may be compatible with community values while assuring safe and efficient operations for vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists and highway workers. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/context/main-streets-flexibility-in-design.pdf MUTCD 2003 and MUTCD 2003 California Supplement (May 20,2004). The MUTCD provides general standards and guidance for traffic control devices, nationally. The California Supplement clarifies which policies, practices or standards are different in California, by identifying and including them. It also enhances the federal standards by providing additional details. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/mutcdsupp/ Project Development Procedures Manual (Chapter 31: Non-motorized Transportation Facilities) outlines pertinent statutory requirements, planning policies, and implementing procedures regarding non-motorized transportation facilities. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm/pdpm.htm Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000, “Bikeway Planning and Design,” provides design standards and guidelines for on- and off-street bikeways. State and local transportation agencies are required to comply with Chapter 1000 mandatory standards as a minimum when implementing new bikeways. Chapter 1000 differs from the rest of the Highway Design Manual in that it also applies to facilities off the State Highway System (California Streets and Highways Code, Sections 890.8 and 891). www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/hdmtoc.htm Highway Design Manual, Chapter 100, “Basic Design Policies,” provides standards for basic highway design, including design speed, access control, construction, and coordination with other agencies. It devotes a section to pedestrian facilities and access, and also covers special considerations such as scenic values, air pollution, water pollution, and wetlands protection. The design of sidewalks and walkways varies depending on the standards of the local agency. Most local agencies in California have adopted design standards for urban and rural areas, as well as additional requirements for residential areas, downtowns, and special districts. According to the HDM, the needs assessment for bridges or undercrossings should consider: pedestrian- generating land uses, pedestrian crossing volumes, the type of highway to be crossed, location of adjacent crossings, zoning, and sociological factors. Where a grade-separated crossing is justified, the HDM recommends using an overcrossing because of the potential for vandalism and criminal incidents associated with undercrossings. The HDM also discusses the responsibilities for construction and maintenance of sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities. With regard to providing for accessibility, the HDM states that it is Caltrans policy to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and California Government Code 4450 by making all State highway facilities accessible to people with disabilities to the "maximum extent possible." The ADA requires that public agencies provide for accessibility following the guidelines set by the ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG). DIB 82-01 (see below) is an extension of the HDM (referenced in Chapter 100), and is used statewide for Caltrans projects. The Federal Highway Administration has approved Caltrans HDM and DIB 82-01. The DIB 82-01 procedures are per agreement with the California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect. II-8 STATUTES AND POLICIES Local agencies are not required to use the HDM, unless their project is on state highway rights of way, in which case they will be working with a Caltrans district office for review and approvals. Local agencies that are Federal-aid recipients are required to design using the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (under the responsibility of the Divison of Local Assistance) and the ADA subject and standards are listed in Chapter 11 “Design Standards.” www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/hdmtoc.htm Design Information Bulletin 82-01 (DIB 82-01), Pedestrian Accessibility Guidelines For State Highway Projects provides design guidelines for facilities that accommodate people with disabilities. www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/dib/dib82-01.pdf Caltrans Maintenance Manual is comprised of two volumes. Volume I describes the maintenance organization and the methods and procedures used in the maintenance program. Volume II of the Manual describes the Maintenance Management system (MMS) used to record, report, and monitor maintenance work planned and performed. The Manual is issued to secure, so far as possible, uniformity of practice and procedures in methods developed by past experience. It is the aim of the Department to practice restorative maintenance, and to maintain existing facilities as nearly as possible in the original condition as constructed or improved. www.dot.ca.gov/hq/maint/manual/maintman.htm II-9 III. PLANNING III-1 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Caltrans’ System Planning System planning is the Department’s long-range transportation planning process, and is conducted pursuant to Government Code 65086 (a) and the Department’s policy. It is part of a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive statewide transportation planning process that responds to federal law. The Department works with regional and local governments, and the public. The systems planning process is multi-modal and multi-jurisdictional and is used for evaluating and recommending for programming system-wide improvements to the State transportation system. The process considers the entire transportation system including the physical structures, vehicles and operators used for transporting people, goods and services and information. The primary elements of the transportation system include non-motorized (including bicycle and pedestrian transportation facilities and services), highways, streets and roads, transit, railroads, airports, seaports, pipelines, and telecommunications. Below are the planning documents produced in the systems planning process. Route Concept Reports (RCR) / Transportation Concept Reports (TCR) or their functional equivalents outline the results of corridor studies that are analyses of a transportation corridor service area. The reports establish a twenty-year transportation planning concept and identify modal transportation options, conditions, future deficiencies, route concept and concept level of service, and identify applications needed to achieve the twenty-year concept. Corridor studies are analyses of routes from beginning to end within a Department district and contain a formulated concept level of service and facility type. Corridor analyses are similar to the “Action Element” of a Regional Transportation Plan, but focus on a single route or corridor. The RCR/TCR identifies current operational and conceptual improvements for a route or corridor. Route Fact Sheets contain current information found in an RCR/TCR, including the ultimate route concept, and are used for quick reference within the Department and by local and regional agencies. The non-motorized section of an RCR/TCR should address the following issues: • Pedestrian programs and facilities. • Pedestrian design guidelines for transportation facilities. • Bicycle programs and facilities. • Bicycle transportation plans including commuter bike trails. • Transit interfaces with bicyclists and pedestrians. • Unmet non-motorized needs. • Non-motorized enhancement activities. • Bicycle routes to school. • Where people ride. • ADA constraints. The Transportation System Development Program (TSDP) is a bridging document between the RCR/TCR and the District System Management Plan. (Similar to the Regional Transportation Plan “Financial Element”) It includes the entire district area, identifies a reasonable, comprehensive, and effective range of transportation improvements on state highways and within modal and new technology categories, strategies, and actions, and demand and systems management options that improve mobility. III-2 PLANNING The TSDP is the Department’s statement of priorities for improvements in negotiation and joint planning with regional agencies. It provides an internal listing of candidate improvements by modal categories that the Department recommends for further analysis through federal, state, regional or local studies and broadens the basis of identifying solutions to transportation problems from identification of infrastructure improvements alone to a larger integrated identification of strategies and transportation system management options including need for revised polices. The TSDP separately identifies and emphasizes the importance of goods movement and intermodal transfer facilities, provides a “sketch level” analysis of multi-modal and intermodal considerations and provides reasonable consistency between districts and headquarters in types and categories of candidate improvement information. The TSDP provides an internal, ready, rough-cut “quick response” reference of potential future state highway, multi-modal and intermodal improvements at a statewide and district level. The District System Management Plan (DSMP) is a strategic and policy planning document that presents the Department’s district vision of how the transportation system will be maintained, managed and developed over a twenty year period and beyond. The DSMP is developed in partnership with regional transportation planning agencies and considers the entire transportation system, including all facilities regardless of jurisdiction, and addresses all modes and services that move people, goods, and services. The DSMP contains a description of overall Departmental goals and polices that relate to district transportation issues and establishes district objectives and strategies in support of the Department’s mission to improve mobility across California. The plan contains a multi-modal evaluation of the transportation system and a discussion and analysis of transportation issues. It provides a management tool for informing federal, state, regional and local agencies, and public and private sector interests of the plans the district intends to follow in its partnership role with local and regional agencies. The DSMP summarizes twenty-year planning concepts and proposes transportation improvements on a system-wide level, thereby influencing the development of future transportation concepts and transportation development plans. The DSMP is the Departmental counterpart to the Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Regional Transportation Plan. III-3 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Regional Planning Regional Transportation Plans are planning documents developed by Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation and other stakeholders. They are required to be developed by statute. (U.S. Code, Title 23, Section 134 and 135 et seq.) Each RTPA shall (Government Code 65080) prepare and adopt an RTP directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. An RTP must provide a long-term (20+ year) and a short-term (10 year), clear vision of regional transportation goals, policies, objectives, and strategies. This vision must be realistic and financially constrained. The RTP shall (title 23, CFR Sec 450.322(n)(3)) discuss the way in which the plan will conform to the State Implementation Plan including Transportation Control Measures implementation. In areas designated non-attainment for Federal or State air quality standards, and areas with adoptive “maintenances” plans, the RTP should include reference to air quality documents. In severe and worse non-attainment areas, land use and growth assumptions shall (Title 40, CFR Sec. 93.122(b)) be documented and compared with historical trends and must show consistency between transportation alternatives for different options. In addition the RTP should acknowledge and reflect consistency with other adopted plans and programs that impact the regional transportation system (California Transportation Plan, the Department of Transportation’s Systems Planning Documents, Bike Plans, California Clean Air Act, Federal Legislation). The California Transportation Commission cannot program projects that are not identified in the RTP. The Regional Transportation Plan shall (Government Code 65080) include the three following elements: • The Policy Element reflects the mobility goals, polices and objectives of the region. Statutes state that each RTP shall (Government Code 650870(b)) include a Policy Element that (1) describes the transportation issues in the region, (2) identifies and quantifies regional needs expressed within both a short and long-range framework: and (3) maintains internal consistency with the Financial Element fund estimate. The Policy Element is required to have the following three distinct components: goals, policies, and objectives: o Goals are end results toward which effort is directed and they are expressed in general terms and are timeless. o Policies are direction statements that guide future decisions with specific actions. o Objectives are the results to be achieved by an identified point in time. • The Action Element identifies programs and actions to implement the RTP and implements the Policy Element. The Action Element identifies the investment strategies, alternatives, and project priorities beyond what is already programmed. It is divided into two sections. The first section includes a discussion of preparatory activities such as identification of existing needs, assumptions, and forecasting, and potential alternatives. III-4 gure 1 Project Initiation Document Links Planning to Programming PLANNING Simplified Statewide and Regional Planning and STIP Programming Cycle Fi - PROGRAMMING y Regional Transportation Plan y Corridor Studies y Major Investment Study District System Planning y Route & Transportation Corridor Concepts y Transportation System Development Program (TSDP) y District System Management Plan y Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan - Focus Routes - High Emphasis Routes - Key Gateway Routes - Priorities in TSDP y Other State Routes y Regional Transportation Plan Priorities (Action Element) y Congestion Management Programs (CMP) C A L T R A N S R E G I O N S Cooperative Comprehensive Continuing y Determine PSR's for ITIP Proposals y Determine PSRs for RTIP Proposals y Negotiate Resources Assign Project Manager and Develop Work Programs Develop PSRs y Scope y Cost y Schedule Project Teams (includes regions) y Complete PSRs y Approved by District Director y ITIP Proposals formalized y _________ y RTIP Proposals finalized ITIP and RTIPs to CTC CTC Adopts STIP PROJECT INITIATION PHASE SYSTEM PLANNING REGIONAL PLANNING PARTNERSHIP STUDIES Ongoing Continuous annual cycle to determine priorities and workload for each fiscal year. Includes new PSRs as well as PSR development/preparation continuing into the next fiscal year Preparation of PSRs per developed PSR delivery plan Continuous Yearly July/Dec. Bienneial Odd Year Dec. 15 Biennial Odd Year April 1 Biennial Even Year May/June Yearly May/June Yearly July June Yearly PSRs are continuously approved, but must be approved by Jan. Odd Years to meet next programcycle The length of the STIP programming cycle is determined by Statute Figure 1. Simplified Statewide and Regional Planning and STIP Programming Cycle III-5 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER The second section addresses data and conclusions. All transportation modes are addressed. Each Regional Transportation Agency shall (Government Code 56080 (a)) include a discussion of non- motorized transportation (including bicycle, pedestrians, and accessibility or persons with disabilities. Bicycle facilities and pedestrian walkways shall (U.S. Code, Title 23. Sec/135(a) and Title 23 CFR Sec. 540.322 (b)(3)) be identified in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of transportation facilities. Transportation plans and projects shall (Title 23, Sec. 135 (c)(3)) consider safety and contiguous routes for bicyclists and pedestrians. The Action element also describes a future transportation system that serves the safety, mobility, air quality, and other environmental objectives. The non-motorized section should address the following: o Pedestrian programs and facilities. o Pedestrian design guidelines for transportation facilities. o Bicycle programs and facilities. o Bicycle transportation plans including commuter bike trails. o Transit interfaces with bicyclists and pedestrians. o Unmet non-motorized needs. o Non-motorized enhancement activities. • The Financial Element summarizes the costs of implementing the projects in the RTP within a financially constrained environment. It identifies the current anticipated revenue sources and financing techniques available to fund the planned transportation investments described in the Action Element. The intent of the Financial Element is to define realistic financing constraints and opportunities. With this information, alternatives are developed and used by State and local decision-makers in funding planned projects. The Financial Element contains the following seven major components: o Summary of cost to operate and maintain the current transportation system. o Estimate of costs and revenues to implement the projects indemnified in the Action Element. o Inventory of existing and potential transportation funding sources. o List of candidate projects if funding becomes available. o Potential funding shortfalls. o Identification of alternative policy directions that affect the funding of projects. City and County Planning GENERAL PLAN Every city and county must adopt “a comprehensive, long-term General Plan” (§65300) that must cover a local jurisdiction’s entire planning area, and address the broad range of issues associated with a city’s or III-6 PLANNING county’s development. The general plan is used to express the community’s development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future land uses: both public and private. The general plan is presented as a collection of the following seven “elements” or subject categories: • Land Use • Open-Space • Circulation • Noise • Housing • Safety • Conservation For the purpose of non-motorized transportation the focus is the circulation element. The Circulation Element must correlate directly with the land-use element, and be directly related with the housing, open-space, noise and safety elements. A city or county may not ignore its regional setting. The local planning agency should coordinate its circulation element provisions with applicable State and regional transportation plans (see §65103(f) and 65080, et seq.). Likewise, the State must coordinate its plans with local governments (§65080(a)), while the Federal government is under a similar obligation (§134, Title 23 of the U.S. Code). The circulation element should contain objectives, policies, principles, plan proposals and/or standards for planning the infrastructure that supports the circulation of people, goods and communications. These development policies should be consistent with regional air quality and transportation plans. With respect to the requirements of the circulation element cities and counties may undertake the following activities by which they can begin the process of incorporating development policies for bicycles and pedestrians into their general plans. • Assessing the adequacy of existing bicycle routes and facilities and the need for improvement. • Examining trends in bicycle ownership and usage. • Assessing the level-of-service of pedestrian facilities (both current and future). • Assessing historical data and trends with regard to bicycle and pedestrian collisions. • Developing and improving bicycle routes and pedestrian walkways. • Insuring the safety of the traveling public; including pedestrians and bicyclists. TRANSPORTATION/LAND USE CONNECTION Planners and designers need to consider the importance of land use and transportation connections, and the huge impact that the land use and transportation connection has in promoting (in cases inhibiting or denying) non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle activities. The importance of human scale in building designs (particularly short blocks and distances scaled to the pedestrians) cannot be overestimated, nor can the elimination of obstructions, the distance requirements to promote walking and bicycling to and from activities, and, above all, the importance of traffic calming and street design. All of these enhance pedestrian and bicycling activities and contribute neighborhoods that encourage non-motorized transportation. III-7 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER The Ahwahnee Principles (Corbett and Velesquez, Ahwahnee Principles for Resource Efficient Communities, 1994) support land use and transportation connections as well through emphasis on street design and intermodal connectivity: “Streets, pedestrian paths, and bike paths should contribute to a system of fully-connected and interesting routes to all destinations. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being small and spatially defined by buildings, trees and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic.” Where land use and transportation are connected, people are more likely to understand and support compact development. Urban infill and mixed-use buildings can provide residents a choice of travel to most destinations, particularly if most people live within walking distance (1/2 mile) of 40% of the products and services they need (Burden, Ten Keys to Walkable/Livable Communities 2001). BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Although not legally required, a city or county must complete a bicycle transportation master plan if either expects to receive funding from the California Department of Transportation’s Bicycle Transportation Account. The bicycle plan must include an estimate of the following: • The number of existing bicycle commuters in the plan area, and • The potential increase in the number of bicycle commuters resulting from the implementation of the plan. The bicycle plan must include the following maps and descriptions: • A map and description of existing and proposed land use and settlement patterns, bikeways bicycle transportation and parking facilities, and facilities for changing and storing clothing and equipment. • A description of bicycle safety and educational programs. • A description of the extent of citizen and community involvement in the development of the plan. • A description of how the plan has been coordinated and is consistent with other local or regional plans. • A description of the proposed projects and their relative priority. • A description of past expenditures for bicycle facilities. • A description of future financial needs for bicycle projects. III-8 IV. FUNDING SOURCES IV-1 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER There are a variety of potential funding sources including local, regional, State, and Federal funding programs that can be used to construct bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Most Federal, State, and regional programs are competitive, and involve the completion of extensive applications with clear documentation of the project need, costs, and benefits. Local funding for bicycle projects typically comes from Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding, which is prorated to each community based on return of gasoline taxes. Funding for many of the programs would need to be funded either with TDA, general fund (staff time), or possibly private grants. Table 1 presents a summary of available funding along with timing, criteria, and funding agency. Federal-Aid Funding THE TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY (TEA 21) Several categories of federal transportation funding may be expended for bicycle and pedestrian projects. This section summarizes the federal funding sources available for non-motorized transportation projects and estimates the fiscal impact of these sources. At the time of preparation of this report, TEA-21 has been extended. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TEA) PROGRAM Ten percent of each state’s annual Surface Transportation Program (STP) must be set aside for Transportation Enhancement Activities. Three of the twelve defined TEA categories are bicycle and pedestrian related: • Provision of Facilities for Bicyclists and Pedestrians • Provision of Safety and Educational Activities for Pedestrians and Bicyclists • Preservation of Abandoned Railway Corridors TEA funds may be used for the construction of bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or non-construction projects such as training, brochures and route maps related to safe bicycle use. CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The CMAQ Program directs funds to transportation projects in Clean Air Act non-attainment areas for ozone and carbon monoxide. These projects should contribute to meeting the attainment of national ambient area air quality standards (NAAQS). CMAQ funds may be used for construction of bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or non-construction projects such as brochures and route maps related to safe bicycle use. Bicycle projects must be primarily for transportation rather than recreation, and be included in a plan developed by each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the State. TEA 21 made projects that bring sidewalks into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) eligible for these funds. REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (RSTP) The Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) is a block grant program that annually makes approximately $320 million available statewide for roads, bridges, transit capital and bicycle and IV-2 FUNDING SOURCES pedestrian projects. MPOs can transfer monies from other federal transportation funding sources to the RSTP program if they want more flexibility in how they allocate their funds. TEA-21 requires states to set aside 10% of their RSTP funds for safety construction activities and another 10% for the Transportation Enhancement activities (TE) program. The State of California distributes sixty-two and one half percent of RSTP funds according to regional population. The remaining thirty-seven and one half percent may be spent anywhere in the state. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) may reprogram the RSTP funds if they are not obligated within three years of federal eligibility. Applicants eligible for RSTP funds include cities, counties, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), transit operators, and the California Department of Transportation. Non-profit organizations and special districts also may apply for funds, but they must have a city, county or transit operator sponsor and, in some cases, administer the project. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM (SR2S) The Safe Routes to School program is a state program using federal transportation funds. This program is meant to improve school commute routes by eliminating barriers to bicycle and pedestrian travel through rehabilitation, new projects, and traffic calming. A local match of 10% is required for this competitive program, which allocates $18 million annually. Since it is a capital program, planning grants are not available through this program. HAZARD ELIMINATION SAFETY (HES) PROGRAM The Hazard Elimination Safety Program (HES) is a federal safety program that provides funds for safety improvements on all public roads and highways. These funds are intended to eliminate or reduce the number and/or severity of traffic accidents at locations selected for improvement. The amount of funds allocated to the local HES Program each FFY may range from $10 million to $16 million. Each year, local agencies compete for HES funds by submitting candidate safety projects to Caltrans for review and analysis. Caltrans prioritizes these projects statewide, and releases an annual HES Program Plan that identifies the projects that are approved for funding. State Funding PROPOSITION 116 - CLEAN AIR AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ACT Proposition 116 provided approximately $50 million for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The bicycle and pedestrian elements of the program are essentially completed. BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT The Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funds a maximum of 90% of city and county projects to improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters. BTA funds are available for the following types of projects: • New bikeways serving major transportation corridors. IV-3 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER • New bikeways removing travel barriers to potential bicycle commuters. • Secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park-and-ride lots, rail and transit terminals, and ferry docks and landings. • Bicycle-carrying facilities on public transit vehicles. • Installation of traffic control devices to improve the safety and efficiency of bicycle travel. • Elimination of hazardous conditions on existing bikeways. • Planning, safety, and education. • Improvement and maintenance of bikeways. The Department convenes a committee consisting of representatives from the Department, other State agencies, and advocacy organizations to evaluate applications and recommend projects for funding. The total amount of BTA funds requested by an applicant for a project should not exceed 25% of the total amount transferred to BTA in a single year. In Section 891.2 of the Streets and Highways Code, eleven criteria are specified to help shape local bicycle transportation plans. The criteria must be met in order to obtain BTA funding for bicycle projects. They include: • The estimated number of existing bicycle commuters in the plan area and the estimated increase in the number of bicycle commuters resulting from implementation of the plan. • A map and description of existing and proposed land use and settlement patterns which shall include, but not be limited to, locations of residential neighborhoods, schools, shopping centers, public buildings, and major employment centers. • A map and description of existing and proposed bikeways. • A map and description of existing and proposed end-of-trip bicycle parking facilities. These shall include, but not be limited to, parking at schools, shopping centers, public buildings, and major employment centers. • A map and description of existing and proposed bicycle transport and parking facilities for connections with and use of other transportation modes. These shall include, but not be limited to, parking facilities at transit stops, rail and transit terminals, ferry docks and landings, park and ride lots, and provisions for transporting bicyclists and bicycles on transit or rail vehicles or ferry vessels. • A map and description of existing and proposed facilities for changing and storing clothes and equipment. These shall include, but not be limited to, locker, restroom, and shower facilities near bicycle parking facilities. • A description of bicycle safety and education programs conducted in the area included within the plan, efforts by the law enforcement agency having primary traffic law enforcement responsibility in the area to enforce provisions of the Vehicle Code pertaining to bicycle operation, and the resulting effect on collisions involving bicyclists. A description of the extent of citizen and community involvement in development of the plan, including, but not limited to, letters of support. IV-4 FUNDING SOURCES • A description of how the bicycle transportation plan has been coordinated and is consistent with other local or regional transportation, air quality, or energy conservation plans, including, but not limited to, programs that provide incentives for bicycle commuting. • A description of the projects proposed in the plan and a listing of their priorities for implementation. • A description of past expenditures for bicycle facilities and future financial needs for projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters in the plan area. OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY (OTS) PROGRAMS The Office of Traffic Safety’s mission is to obtain and effectively administer traffic safety grant funds to reduce deaths, injuries and economic losses resulting from traffic related collisions. Each October - November, OTS mails Requests for Concept Papers to more than 3,000 eligible agencies outlining the opportunity to participate in the program and the requirements to compete for available funds. OTS grants touch as many state and local agencies as possible. There are eight program priority areas earmarked for grant funding: Alcohol and Other Drugs, Occupant Protection, Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety, Emergency Medical Services, Traffic Records, Roadway Safety, and Police Traffic Services. ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM (EEMP) In 1989, Assembly Bill (AB) 471 allowed the Legislature to allocate $10 million annually for projects to mitigate the environmental impacts of public transportation facilities. Proposed projects must show how they mitigate the impacts of the transportation project. Grants are awarded in three general categories: highway landscape and urban forestry, resource lands, and roadside recreational. The State Resources Agency recommends projects for approval to the California Transportation Commission for funding. In 1999 Senate Bill 117 made the EEM program permanent. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (SB 821) Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article III funds are state block grants awarded annually to local jurisdictions for bicycle and pedestrian projects in California. These funds originate from the state gasoline tax and are distributed to local jurisdictions through the Regional Transportation Planning Agencies. Maintaining of such artwork does not create safety concerns on the state highway. COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CBTP) GRANTS The CBTP grant program is primarily used to seed planning activities that encourage livable communities. CBTP grants assist local agencies to better integrate land use and transportation planning, to develop alternatives for addressing growth and to assess efficient infrastructure investments that meet community needs. These planning activities are expected to help leverage projects that foster sustainable economies, increase available affordable housing, improve housing/jobs balance, encourage transit oriented and mixed use development, expand transportation choices, reflect community values, and include non-traditional participation in transportation decision making. IV-5 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CBTP grant funded projects demonstrate the value of these new approaches locally, and provide best practices for statewide application. Funding is provided by 80% Federal/State and 20% local match. Caltrans Loan Programs (See http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/innovfinance/about_us.htm) CALTRANS SHA LOAN PROGRAM (AB 1012) This program offers short-term (maximum four-year) construction loans to local entities for State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)-eligible projects included within an adopted Regional Transportation Plan. Total project costs must be greater than $10 million; however, for counties with populations under 500,000, this requirement may be waived. Loan Officer (916) 324-7624 CALTRANS GRANT ANTICIPATION REVENUE VEHICLES (GARVEE BONDS) GARVEE Bond funding offers local entities the means to accelerate construction of critical transportation projects to provide congestion relief benefits significantly sooner than traditional funding mechanisms. Debt service on the bonds is repaid through future county or interregional share allocations. Projects must be STIP-eligible for federal funds apportioned to the State, have environmental clearance, a completed project design, and must meet all applicable federal requirements. Funding is limited to right-of-way and construction costs. Finance Manager (916) 324-7623 TRANSPORTATION FINANCE BANK (TFB) The U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) designated California to participate in its State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Pilot Program, authorized under the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995. The SIB Program was established to provide flexible project financing through loans, debt service guarantees, lines of credit, and other capital financing support. California established its SIB, the Transportation Finance Bank, to offer credit assistance to public and private entities for any stage of an eligible highway construction or transit capital project. Loan Officer (916) 324-7624 IV-6 FUNDING SOURCES Local and Regional Funding TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT The 1971 Transportation Development Act created a Local Transportation Fund (LTF) in each county. The LTF is funded from one-quarter cent of the seven-cent sales tax collected statewide. The one- quarter cent is returned to the county in accordance with the amount collected in the county. Local agencies may expend a portion of the LTF to develop pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Public Utilities Code Sections 99233.3, 99234, and 99400 describe types of projects that are eligible and how funds are to be administered. SPECIAL TAXING AUTHORITIES Voters in seventeen counties have approved local ballot measures that permit the collection of additional local sales taxes for transportation purposes. IV-7 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Table 1. Funding Sources Acronyms: AQMD - Air Quality Management District Caltrans - California Department of Transportation CMA - Congestion Management Agency CTC - California Transportation Commission FHWA - Federal Highway Administration MPO - Metropolitan Planning Organization RTPA - Regional Transportation Planning Agency State DPR - California Department of Parks and Recreation (under the State Resources Agency) TEA-21 - Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century Jurisdictions for Contra Costa County, California: AQMD – Bay Area Regional Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Caltrans - Caltrans District 4 MTC – Metropolitan Transportation Commission ABAG – Association of Bay Area Governments CCTA – Contra Costa Transportation Authority Resources: Caltrans TEA-21 website - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/TransEnhAct/ Due Annual Matching Eligible Eligible Bikeway Projects Grant Source Date Agency Total Requirement Applicants Commute Recreation Safety/Ed Comments Federal Funding TEA-21 Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) varies by RPTA RTPAs, Caltrans $320 m 11.47% non- federal match cities, counties, transit operators, Caltrans, and MPOs X X RSTP funds may be exchanged for local funds for non-federally certified local agencies; no match may be required if project improves safety. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/report s/Official_RSTP_Web_Page.htm TEA-21 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (CMAQ) Dec. 1 yearly RTPAs, Caltrans $400 m 11.47% non- federal match Federally certified jurisdictions X Counties redesignated to attainment status for ozone may lose this source. TEA-21 Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) varies by RTPA RPTAs, Caltrans $60 m 11.47% non- federal match Federally certified jurisdictions X X Funds are dispersed through the four shares listed below. Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) program November Caltrans $10-16 m Local agencies X X Beginning with the FY 2003/2004 HES Program, the maximum federal reimbursement ratio for any HES project will be 90% and the maximum federal reimbursement amount for any project will be $360,000. Regional Share varies by RTPA RTPAs, Caltrans $45 m “ Federal, State, or local, depending on category X X Funding share to RTPAs. Caltrans Share varies by RTPA Caltrans $6.6 m “ Caltrans X X Funding share to Caltrans. Available only if regional TEA funds are not used Statewide Transportation Enhancement Share varies by RTPA Caltrans, State Resources Agency $20-30 m “ Federal, State (except Caltrans), regional and X X Funding share for all 12 TEA categories except conservation lands. local agencies with a State partner IV-8 FUNDING SOURCES Comments Conservation Lands Share varies by RTPA Caltrans, State Resources Agency $11 m “ RTPAs, counties, cities and non-profits. X X Funding share for conservations lands category - acquisitions of scenic lands with high habitat conservation value. TEA-21 Recreational Trails Program (RTP) Oct. 1 State DPR $3 m 20% match jurisdictions, special districts, non profits with management responsibilities over the land X For recreational trails to benefit bicyclists, pedestrians, and other users. Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program pending FHWA $25 m nationwide -- State, local, MPO’s -- -- -- Projects that improve system efficiency, reduce environmental impacts of transportation, etc. Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) May 1st State DPR $7.7 m statewide 50%, including in- kind Federal, State, city, county, eligible districts X Federally-funded. Projects that acquire and develop outdoor recreation areas and facilities. State Funding Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP) Nov. State Resources Agency, Caltrans $10 m statewide not required but favored local, State and Federal government non-profit agencies X X X Projects that enhance or mitigate future transportation projects; can include acquisition or development of roadside recreational facilities. Safe Routes to School (SB 10) May 31 Caltrans $18 m 10% min. city, county X X X Primarily construction program to enhance safety of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Caltrans Headquarters Habitat Conservation Fund Grant Program October 1 State DPR -- 50% non-state city, county, eligible districts - - - Includes a trails/program/urban access category. Bicycle Transportation Account December Caltrans $7.2 m min. 10% local match on construction city, county X X State-funded. Projects that improve safety and convenience of bicycle commuters. Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) December 15, odd years RTPA -- -- city, county, transit operators, Caltrans X X Part of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the main state program for transportation project funding. For “improving transportation within the region.” RTPA must program funds. Petroleum Violation Escrow Account (PVEA) On-going State Legislature $5 m -- city, county, transit operators, Caltrans -- -- -- Bicycle and trail facilities have been funded with this program. Community-Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) Grant Program Nov. Caltrans $1.5 m 20% local match, including up to 10% in-kind Transit agencies and public entities as applicants or sub- applicants X Transportation and land use planning that promotes public involvement and supports livable community concepts. Due Annual Matching Eligible Eligible Bikeway Projects Grant Source Date Agency Total Requirement Applicants Commute Recreation Safety/Ed IV-9 Due Annual Matching Eligible Eligible Bikeway Projects Grant Source Date Agency Total Requirement Applicants Commute Recreation Safety/Ed CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Comments Office of Traffic Safety Grants Jan. 31 Office of Traffic Safety -- -- State, city, county X Bicycle and pedestrian projects have been funded through this program. Local Funding Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 (2% of total TDA) Jan. RPTA -- -- -- -- -- -- Allocated by MTC Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) June 30 BAAQMD $10 million 20% for requests >$100,000 City, county, transit agencies X X For construction and design of new Bay Trail segments Bay Trail Grant Program On-going Association of Bay Area Governments -- encouraged Local governments, special districts, qualified non-profits X X -- State Gas Tax (local share) -- Allocated by State Auditor Controller -- -- -- X X -- Developer Fees or Exactions (developer fee for street improvements - DFSI) -- Cities or County -- -- -- -- -- -- Mitigation required during land use approval process IV-10 V. STANDARD AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND TRAFFIC CALMING V-1 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER This section presents concept sheets on a variety of topics, many of which are not currently addressed in Caltrans policy documents. They are organized under two related main topic areas: Pedestrians and Traffic Calming. Topics are organized from the broadest topic element to the most detailed. For example, mid-block crosswalks would be found under Pedestrians: Crossings: Mid-Block Crosswalks. Since there is considerable overlap between the two main topic areas, users may wish to search more than one category to find their topic. The sheets provide a succinct description and discussion of the topic, a drawing or photo, and the sources of the information. These concepts may serve as a starting point, or part of a solution. Full implementation requires design in accord with Caltrans policies. Caltrans adopts and approves specific standards, which its designers must follow (exceptions are allowed, as discussed in the Introduction). Standards are set forth in Caltrans documents such as the Highway Design Manual and the California Supplement to the MUTCD 2003. For the latest versions of these documents, be sure to consult the appropriate web sites. Caltrans designers may also consider various external advisory and informational resources including (but not limited to): • Federal standards, policies, and guidelines • Recommended practice from major agencies and organizations such as FHWA, AASHTO, and ITE • Published research; experiences and practices of other states and local agencies; international experience Pedestrian facilities are unique facilities that must accommodate a wide variety of user types, needs, and abilities. Aside from using resources in this and other publications, it is recommended that planners and designers should conduct field reviews of proposed locations, walk the corridor if possible, and that the planning and design be conducted by, or in consultation with, persons with a specialized knowledge of these facilities and are active pedestrians themselves. EXCEPTIONS FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES • All efforts should be made to adhere to the best possible designs consistent with standards set forth in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual and guidance provided in the MUTCD 2003 as modified by the MUTCD 2003 California Supplement (May 20, 2004). However, sometimes project conditions may warrant an exception to design standards or MUTCD guidance. • Pedestrian Facilities (ADA) -- Deviations from State pedestrian standards regarding ADA shall be approved by the Division of the State Architect as outlined in Caltrans Design Information Bulletin 82-01, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/dib/dibprg.htm. • Pedestrian Facilities (non-ADA) -- Deviations from standards as defined and indicated in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual require approval in accordance with the design exception approval procedures described in Chapter 11 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/lam/lapm.htm, Chapter 80 of the HDM, http:www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/hdmtoc.htm, Chapter 21 of the Project Development Procedures Manual, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm.htm, and memorandum entitled Fact Sheet for Exceptions to Mandatory Design standards, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/design/m092500.htm. • No deviations are allowed from standards set forth in the MUTCD 2003 and MUTCD 2003 California Supplement (May 20, 2004). MUTCD guidance establishes a default recommendation that may be superseded based on an engineering study or engineering V-2 STANDARD AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND TRAFFIC CALMING judgment. There is no requirement to follow MUTCD options, and MUTCD “support” is for informational purposes only. V-3 CALTRANS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PEDESTRIANS: ANALYTICAL TOOLS D E S C R I P T I O N Planners and designers of non-motorized facilities have a need for the same range of analytical tools that are available for other transportation modes. Many of these tools are still being developed and researched with varying degrees of acceptance. Demand Projections A wide variety of methodologies exist to help predict bicycle and pedestrian usage, either area wide or on a specific corridor. Methodologies include gravity models, latent demand models, and aggregate models. The Guidebook on Methods to Estimate Non-Motorized Travel (FHWA-RD-98-166) determined that the reliability of all of the models was uncertain due to the lack of empirical data on before and after usage. The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) developed a region-wide model using a method based on before and after counts on bikeways to help predict future usage levels. Pedestrian Level of Service Chapter 18 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual includes methods of estimating pedestrian levels of service based on qualitative measures of pedestrian flow (delay, flexibility, etc.). This methodology can be used to assess walkway, stairway, cross flow, and queuing area requirements based on expected pedestrian volumes, all using a square feet per pedestrian formula. S O U R C E Federal Highway Administration (1998) The Guidebook on Methods to Estimate Non-Motorized Travel Washington, D.C. (FHWA-RD-98-166) Federal Highway Administration (2000) Highway Capacity Manual. Washington, D.C. V-4 STANDARD AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND TRAFFIC CALMING PEDESTRIANS: AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) T H E L A W (Source: Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, 2003) The State of California has adopted regulations specifying that all buildings, structures, sidewalks, curbs and related facilities constructed in California by the use of State, county or municipal funds, or the funds of any political subdivision of the State, shall be accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. The Division of the State Architect (DSA) is given responsibility for developing regulations and standards to ensure full accessibility. These regulations and standards are to prescribe no lesser a standard of accessibility or usability than provided by the Accessibility Guidelines prepared by the Federal Access Board to implement the ADA (ref: Government Code Section 4450). Based on both the federal and State laws and regulations, all newly- constructed facilities must allow full accessibility. When existing facilities are being reconstructed or modified, the contract must also include work to make these facilities fully accessible. "Title II-6.6000" of the Department of Justice's "Technical Assistance Manual" further clarifies this by stating: "When streets, roads, or highways are newly built or altered, they must have ramps or sloped areas wherever there are curbs or other barriers to entry from a sidewalk or path. Likewise, when new sidewalks or paths are built or are altered, they must contain curb ramps or sloped areas wherever they intersect with streets, roads, or highways. Resurfacing beyond normal maintenance is an al