DOCSLIB.ORG

Union City's Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Union City's Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan CITY OF UNION CITY PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 2011 January 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS MAYOR Mark Green CITY COUNCIL Vice Mayor Pat Gacoscos Emily Duncan Lorrin Ellis Jim Navarro PLANNING COMMISSION Chairperson Roy Panlilio Vice Chair Lee Guio Raymond Gonzales, Jr. Jo Ann Lew Gary Singh Harpal Mann (Alternate) Dave Sweilem (Alternate) BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Barry Ferrier Eva Kamakea Glenn Kirby Rick LaPlante Jo Ann Lew Jim Lewis TECHNICAL ADVISORY TEAM Steve Adams Farooq Azim Carmela Campbell Mintze Cheng Murray Chang Kris Fitzgerald Joan Malloy Thomas Ruark Avalon Schultz CONSULTANT TEAM Alta Planning + Design TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Purpose of the Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.1. Improve Conditions for Walking and Bicycling ....................................................................... 1-1 1.1.2. Support Economic Development Goals ................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.3. Maximize Funding Sources for Implementation ...................................................................... 1-2 1.2. Strategy for Implementation ......................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2.1. Prioritized Capital Improvements ............................................................................................... 1-2 1.3. Vision for the Future ...................................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.1. 2005 General Plan Amendment .................................................................................................. 1-3 1.4. 2011 Master Plan Update ............................................................................................................................... 1-8 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1. Setting ............................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1. Union City Land Uses ................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1. Major Pedestrian Generators and Attractors ............................................................................ 2-2 2.2.2. Definition of Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.3. Existing Sidewalks, Walkways and Multi-Use Trails ................................................................ 2-3 2.2.4. Roadway Crossings and Intersection Design ............................................................................ 2-4 2.3. Existing Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.3.1. Definition of Bikeways ................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.3.2. Existing Off-Street Bike Paths .................................................................................................... 2-6 2.3.3. Existing On-Street Bike Lanes and Routes ............................................................................... 2-6 2.3.4. Signage ............................................................................................................................................. 2-7 2.3.5. Bicycle Detector Loops ................................................................................................................ 2-7 2.3.6. Bicycle Parking ............................................................................................................................... 2-8 2.3.7. Bikeway Support Facilities ......................................................................................................... 2-11 2.4. Bicycle Facility Maintenance ....................................................................................................................... 2-11 2.5. Past Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Expenditures ................................................................................ 2-11 2.6. Encouragement and Education Programs ................................................................................................ 2-12 2.7. Multi-Modal Connections ............................................................................................................................ 2-12 2.7.1. Union City Transit ....................................................................................................................... 2-14 2.7.2. AC Transit .................................................................................................................................... 2-14 2.7.3. Bay Area Rapid Transit ............................................................................................................... 2-14 2.7.4. Dumbarton Express .................................................................................................................... 2-15 2.8. Safe Routes to School Conditions .............................................................................................................. 2-15 2.8.1. Rates of Walking and Bicycling to School ............................................................................... 2-15 2.8.2. Existing Safe Routes to School Grants and Projects ............................................................. 2-15 3. PLANNING AND POLICY CONTEXT 3. Planning and Policy Context ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1. City of Union City ........................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Union City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan i 3.1.1. City of Union City General Plan ................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.2. Union City Municipal Code ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.3. Climate Action Plan ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.4. Redevelopment Plan ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.5. Park and Recreation Master Plan ................................................................................................. 3-3 3.1.6. Intermodal Station District and Transit Facility Plan .............................................................. 3-3 3.1.7. Station District Strategic Action Plan ......................................................................................... 3-5 3.1.8. Standard Specifications and Design Criteria ............................................................................. 3-5 3.2. City Of Hayward ............................................................................................................................................. 3-5 3.3. City Of Fremont.............................................................................................................................................. 3-5 3.4. City Of Newark ............................................................................................................................................... 3-5 3.5. Alameda Countywide Pedestrian Plan ......................................................................................................... 3-6 3.6. Alameda Countywide Bicycle Plan ............................................................................................................... 3-6 3.7. MTC Regional Bicycle Plan ........................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.8. ABAG Bay Trail Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 3-8 3.9. East Bay Regional Park District .................................................................................................................... 3-8 3.9.1. EBRPD Master Plan ..................................................................................................................... 3-8 3.9.2. Planned EBRPD Projects in Union City ................................................................................... 3-8 3.10. Dumbarton Rail Corridor Project .............................................................................................................. 3-9 3.11. Caltrans ........................................................................................................................................................... 3-9 3.11.1. Interstate 880 ................................................................................................................................ 3-9 3.11.2. East
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Designating Scenic Bikeways: a Framework for Rural Road Owners
    Designating Scenic Bikeways: A Framework for Rural Road Owners Publication No. FHWA-FLH-19-004 June 2019 FOREWARD The Federal Lands Highway (FLH) promotes development and deployment of applied research and technology applicable to solving transportation related issues on Federal Lands. The FLH provides technology delivery, innovative solutions, recommended best practices, and related information and knowledge sharing to Federal Agencies, Tribal Governments, and other offices within the FHWA. The objective of this project was to develop a resource to help road owners navigate the Oregon Scenic Bikeway Designation Process. In addition to helping road owners in Oregon, it was the intent of the project that the resource be useful to road owners across the country who are similarly involved with bikeway designation. The resulting Designating Scenic Bikeways: A Framework for Rural Road Owners is a toolkit intended to assist land management agencies, road owners, and proponent groups to communicate and work together in a positive way to develop bikeways. The project included a literature review covering rural road safety, bikeway designation, and liability of bikeway designation. A Technical Advisory Committee guided the work and participated in three bicycle road safety site visits in Oregon to better understand specific issues facing road owners. Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Review- Resource Guide for Separating Bicyclists from Traffic
    Literature Review Resource Guide for Separating Bicyclists from Traffic July 2018 0 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. REPORT NO. 2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NO. FHWA-SA-18-030 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE Literature Review: Resource Guide for Separating Bicyclists from Traffic 2018 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Bill Schultheiss, Rebecca Sanders, Belinda Judelman, and Jesse Boudart (TDG); REPORT NO. Lauren Blackburn (VHB); Kristen Brookshire, Krista Nordback, and Libby Thomas (HSRC); Dick Van Veen and Mary Embry (MobyCON). 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME & ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. Toole Design Group, LLC VHB 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. 8484 Georgia Avenue, Suite 800 8300 Boone Boulevard, Suite 300 DTFH61-16-D-00005 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Vienna, VA 22182 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE FHWA 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The Task Order Contracting Officer's Representative (TOCOR) for this task was Tamara Redmon.
    [Show full text]
  • People to Walk More
    MORE PEOPLE TO WALK MORE The Pedestrian strategy of Copenhagen 2 More People to Walk More... ... it’s healthy ... you protect the environment ... you contribute to a living city ... you get new ideas ... you discover more ... you meet other people ... it’s free 3 PREFACE We are all pedestrians – every day. Sometimes we’re just out for a walk, other times we have a specific goal in mind. Even when we take our bike or car, go by bus, train or metro the trip usually starts and ends on foot. Most of us can walk in the city with no problems, whereas some of us need a bit of help on our walk. If you use a walking stick, a walker, a wheelchair or something similar, then you’re particularly dependent on the pavements, roads and so on being easy to access. This, however, does not change the fact that we are all pedestrians. In Copenhagen, we are very keen to focus on pedestrians so we can achieve an even better city life for everybody even more healthy citizens and a better environment. It is essential for us to create an even more interesting, exciting and safe city. For this reason, I would like to introduce here one of the goals in the City of Copenha- gen’s proposal for city life entitled “Metropolis for People”: ”More People to Walk More”. The pedestrian strategy “ More People to Walk More” contains a number of proposals as to how Copenhagen can become an even better city for pedestrians, showing how to achieve the goal of 20 % more pedestrians by 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • How Long Distance Foot Travel Shaped Views of Nature and Society in Early Modern America Brian Christopher Hurley University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2016 Walking in American History: How Long Distance Foot Travel Shaped Views of Nature and Society in Early Modern America Brian Christopher Hurley University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Hurley, Brian Christopher, "Walking in American History: How Long Distance Foot Travel Shaped Views of Nature and Society in Early Modern America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1530. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1530 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Walking in American History: How Long Distance Foot Travel Shaped Views of Nature and Society in Early Modern America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment Of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by Brian C. Hurley Colby College Bachelor of Arts in History and Religious Studies, 2003 May 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________________________ Dr. Elliott West Dissertation Director _____________________________________________________ Dr. Michael Pierce
    [Show full text]
  • BIKEWAY DESIGN and MANAGEMENT GUIDE Contents
    BIKEWAYDESIGNANDMANAGEMENTGUIDE Contents 1. ABOUT THE BIKEWAY DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT GUIDE................................................ 2 2. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 3 3. BIKEWAY DESIGN.................................................................................................................... 4 A. Types of Cyclists ................................................................................................................. 5 B. Types of Bikeways .............................................................................................................. 6 C. Development of a Master Plan.................................................................................... 8 4. BIKEWAY MANAGEMENT..................................................................................................... 10 A. Bikeway Riding Surfaces ................................................................................................. 10 B. Drainage Inlet Grates...................................................................................................... 11 C. Bikeway Signage.......................................................................................................... 12 D. Pavement Markings......................................................................................................... 13 E. Entry Treatments..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lemon Grove Bikeway Master Plan Update
    LEMON GROVE BIKEWAY MASTER PLAN UPDATE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA06-001 ADOPTED NOVEMBER 1, 2006 Prepared for: City of Lemon Grove Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design 1. INTRODUCTION The Lemon Grove Bikeway Master Plan provides a blueprint for making bicycling an integral part of daily life in Lemon Grove. After nearly a decade of bicycle facility development guided by the Bicycle Facilities Sub-Element of the General Plan, Lemon Grove now has a solid network of primary bikeways that provide connections to destinations throughout the city as well as links to the regional bikeway system. This Bikeway Master Plan seeks to build upon this foundation– to enhance and expand the existing bikeway network, connect gaps, address constrained areas, provide for greater local and regional connectivity, and encourage even more residents to bicycle. The Bikeway Plan provides for an updated system of bike lanes, bike routes and bike paths, identifies necessary support facilities such as bicycle parking, and recommends a variety of programs to allow for safe, efficient and convenient bicycle travel within Lemon Grove and connecting to regional destinations. The Plan covers the “4 E’s” of planning for bicyclists – Engineering, Education, Encouragement, and Enforcement – recognizing that an approach that draws from all 4 E’s will be the most successful in improving safety and increasing the number of Lemon Grove residents bicycling for work, shopping, school, and recreation. 1.1. WHY BICYCLING? The bicycle is a low-cost and effective means of transportation that is quiet, non- polluting, extremely energy-efficient, versatile, healthy, and fun. Bicycles also offer low-cost mobility to the non-driving public.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhyming Dictionary
    Merriam-Webster's Rhyming Dictionary Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Springfield, Massachusetts A GENUINE MERRIAM-WEBSTER The name Webster alone is no guarantee of excellence. It is used by a number of publishers and may serve mainly to mislead an unwary buyer. Merriam-Webster™ is the name you should look for when you consider the purchase of dictionaries or other fine reference books. It carries the reputation of a company that has been publishing since 1831 and is your assurance of quality and authority. Copyright © 2002 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Merriam-Webster's rhyming dictionary, p. cm. ISBN 0-87779-632-7 1. English language-Rhyme-Dictionaries. I. Title: Rhyming dictionary. II. Merriam-Webster, Inc. PE1519 .M47 2002 423'.l-dc21 2001052192 All rights reserved. No part of this book covered by the copyrights hereon may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems—without written permission of the publisher. Printed and bound in the United States of America 234RRD/H05040302 Explanatory Notes MERRIAM-WEBSTER's RHYMING DICTIONARY is a listing of words grouped according to the way they rhyme. The words are drawn from Merriam- Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Though many uncommon words can be found here, many highly technical or obscure words have been omitted, as have words whose only meanings are vulgar or offensive. Rhyming sound Words in this book are gathered into entries on the basis of their rhyming sound. The rhyming sound is the last part of the word, from the vowel sound in the last stressed syllable to the end of the word.
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Bicycle Transportation Planning and Design Guidelines
    Minnesota Bicycle Transportation Planning and Design Guidelines ESO INN TA D M E N P O I A T R A T T M R E O N P T S OF TRAN Minnesota Department of Transportation June 1996 JUNE 17, 1996 BIKEWAYS MANUAL summary CHAPTER SUMMARY CHAPTER TITLE 1 INTRODUCTION 2 DESIGN FACTORS AND MAINTENANCE 3 THE BICYCLE NETWORK PLANNING PROCESS 4 ON-ROAD DESIGNS 5 PATHS 6 BRIDGES AND GRADE SEPARATIONS 7 TRAFFIC CONTROLS 8 BICYCLE PARKING JUNE 17, 1996 BIKEWAYS MANUAL contents (1) Chapter One INTRODUCTION 1-1.0 PURPOSE 1-2.0 POLICY AND GOALS 1-3.0 SCOPE 1-4.0 DEFINITIONS 1-5.0 THE TYPICAL BICYCLE, RIDER, AND DIMENSIONS 1-6.0 OPERATING SPACE 1-7.0 THE DESIGN BICYCLE 1-8.0 DESIGN APPROACH Chapter Two DESIGN FACTORS AND MAINTENANCE 2-1.0 GENERAL 2-2.0 SURFACE QUALITY AND UTILITY WORK 2-3.0 VEGETATION CONTROL Chapter Three THE BICYCLE NETWORK PLANNING PROCESS 3-1.0 GENERAL 3-2.0 DEVELOPING A COMMUNITY BICYCLE NETWORK PLAN 3-2.01 Establish Performance Criteria for the Bicycle Network 3-2.02 Inventory Existing System 3-2.03 Identify Bicycle Travel Corridors 3-2.04 Evaluate and Select Specific Route Alternatives 3-2.05 Design Treatments 3-2.05.01 Select Appropriate Facility Options 3-2.05.02 Factors Used to Determine Grade Separations (Tunnels and Bridges) 3-2.06 Evaluate the Finished Network Plan Using the Established Performance Criteria 3-2.07 Bicycle Parking and Security Chapter Four ON-ROAD DESIGNS 4-1.0 GENERAL 4-2.0 TYPES OF FACILITIES 4-2.01 Bicycle Lanes 4-2.02 Bicycles, Buses and Combination Bus/Bike Lanes contents (2) BIKEWAYS MANUAL JUNE 17, 1996 4-2.03
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Non-Motorized Crash Data October 3, 2018 Patricia Kovacs
    Analysis of Non-Motorized Crash Data October 3, 2018 Patricia Kovacs Ohio Bicycle Federation Improving Ohio bicycling through legislation, education and shared ideas. Outline • Uses of crash report data • Motivation for understanding crash types and contributing circumstances • NHTSA Crash Report Criteria and OH-1 • Analysis of crash causes • Examples of bikeway safety Why look at crash report data? • Crash type analysis helps to focus education and advocacy • Roundabout safety • Traffic signal removal safety • Legislative advocacy – Hit & runs - 26% bicycle, 28% pedestrian crashes – Rear-ends and Sideswipes to support and evaluate 3’ law • US: 9.4% in 1999 (Bicycling & Law, Bob Mionske, JD) • Ohio: 10.1% in 2017 – Increase highway speed limits to 70 in 2013 – highway injury and fatal crashes increased 8.7% in 2014. • Note: due to change in reporting, total reported crashes decreased 10.4% from 2010 to 2013 Cross study of Car/Bicycle Crashes Car/Bike Accident causes Cyclist Wrong-way riding facing traffic - drive on right side of road Cross 1974 5 Cyclist Left turn from the right side of the road - 3 14 scan, signal, move to left side of lane Cyclist Failure to yield from driveway - stop at 6 street and look left, right, left again Cyclist Running a stop sign or signal - stop at stop signs and red lights 7 Cyclist Swerving in front of car - ride in straight 11 line, practice scanning Motorist Left turn in front of bicyclist - take lane at intersection, keep pedaling, make eye contact, watch for turn signal, prepare to stop 8 Motorist
    [Show full text]
  • BICYCLE SURVEY Abstract
    BICYCLE SURVEY Abstract: Background report on bicycle use in America and Europe as a basis ·forformulation of an EPA policy on bicycle use. Office of Planning and Evaluation Environmental Protection Agency August, 1973 900-011 'C -. Acknowledgements Several persons outside of EPA have contributed inordinate efforts to recommend sources for this report and to review the preliminary draft. Marie Birnbaum of the DOT Office of the Assistant secretary of Transportation for Environment, Safety and Consumer Affairs (TES) and Cary Shaw of the Washington Area Bicycle Association contributed invaluable information without which the report research would have been impossible within the time constraints. In addition, John Cummins of Federal Highway Administration's Office of Chief Counsel, Steve Charnovitz of DOT's TES, and Vince Dearage of the Urban Bikeway Design Competition were instrumental in review and comment of the draft report. Their cooperation and assistance has been greatly appreciated~ · ~. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Summary 1 II. Introduction III. General Use in America 9 A. Some Statistics--Market Data B•. Ownership ·C. Use Patterns 1. Types of Users 2. Urban work Trip--Potentials 3. An Economic Appraisal of Bicycle Commuting IV. The Cycling Environment 20 A. Incentives 1. Energy/Efficiency and Savings 2. Health/Recreational Opportunities 3. Other Contributing Factors B. Disincentives 1. Personal Safety 2. Exposure to Pollutants 3. Bicycle Security C. Support Facilities V. Federal Posture 44 A. Existing Federal programs and Policies 1. Environmental Protection Agency 2. Department of Transportation 3. Department of Interior 4. Consumer Products Safety Commission 5. Council on Environmental Quality 6. Other Federal Activities B.
    [Show full text]
  • World Transport Policy & Practice Volume 7, Number 3, 2001
    World Transport Policy & Practice ISSN 1352-7614 Volume 7, Number 3, 2001 Mission Statement World Transport Policy & Practice is a quarterly journal which provides a high quality medium for original and creative work in world transport. WTPP has a philosophy based on the equal importance of academic rigour and a strong commitment to ideas, policies and practical initiatives that will bring about a reduction in global dependency on cars, lorries and aircraft. WTPP has a commitment to sustainable transport which embraces the urgent need to cut global emissions of carbon dioxide, to reduce the amount of new infrastructure of all kinds and to highlight the importance of future generations, the poor, those who live in degraded environments and those deprived of human rights by planning systems that put a higher importance on economic objectives than on the environment and social justice. WTPP embraces a different approach to science and through science to publishing. This view is based on an honest evaluation of the track record of transport planning, engineering and economics. All too often, these interrelated disciplines have embraced quantitative, elitist or mechanistic views of society, space and infrastructure and have eliminated people from the analysis. To help it to reach a wide readership, encompassing advocates and activists as well as academics and advisers, WTPP is available free of charge as PDF files on the internet at http://www.ecoplan.org/wtpp/ ‘GRAPHICS-FREE’ VERSION The complete version, with photographs, correct page numbering, etc., is available for free download at our website. This graphics-free version is available for those with slow internet connections.
    [Show full text]
  • Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects in Wisconsin
    Bicycle-Pedestrian Projects Funded by WisDOT (1993-2014) PROJ. YR PROJECT TITLE PROJECT LOCATION PROGRAM FEDERAL COST LOCAL COST TOTAL COST 1993 Bike Route Signage Madison TE $16,000 $4,000 $20,000 1993 Yahara Rive Bridge Rehabilitation w/bike-ped facilities Madison TE $100,050 $49,950 $150,000 1993 Bicycle Master Plan Holiday Bluff Madison TE $8,800 $2,200 $11,000 1993 Bicycle Master Plan Stricker's Pond Madison TE $15,200 $3,800 $19,000 1993 Historic Horseshoe Bend Road Bridge Platteville TE $161,200 $39,800 $201,000 1993 Webster Street Bike/Ped Bridge Berlin TE $112,000 $28,000 $140,000 1993 Hwy 44 Bike and Walking Path Markesan TE $44,800 $11,200 $56,000 1993 Algoma Lakeshore Walkway Algoma TE $65,000 $35,000 $100,000 1993 Bangor Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Bangor TE $52,000 $13,000 $65,000 1993 Memorial Drive Bike/Walkway Manitowoc TE $11,840 $2,960 $14,800 1993 Bay Shore Walkway Marinette TE $51,240 $12,810 $64,050 1993 Bayside Pedestrian/Bike Path Bayside TE $16,800 $4,200 $21,000 1993 South Pennsylvania Avenue Cudahy TE $61,360 $15,340 $76,700 1993 NW Bikeway-Parkway Drive Milwaukee TE $102,400 $25,600 $128,000 1993 Oak Creek Bikeway-Rawson Avenue Milwaukee TE $110,400 $27,600 $138,000 1993 Riverwalk: E. Wells to E. Mason Milwaukee TE $336,000 $84,000 $420,000 1993 Highland Road Bike Path Mequon TE $76,000 $19,000 $95,000 1993 Coulee Road Pathway System Hudson TE $100,800 $25,200 $126,000 1993 Baraboo Devil's Lake Bike Trail Sauk County TE $48,000 $12,000 $60,000 1993 Old Plank Road Trail Plymouth TE $239,328 $59,832 $299,160 1993 Broughton Drive Multipurpose Trail Sheboygan TE $18,400 $4,600 $23,000 1993 South 8th Street Bridge Sheboygan TE $27,600 $6,900 $34,500 1993 Parkway Walking and Bike Trail Viroqua TE $21,600 $5,400 $27,000 1993 Boulder Junction Memorial Walkway Boulder Junction TE $18,992 $4,748 $23,740 1993 Highway L Extension Trail Muskego TE $7,800 $7,800 $15,600 1993 Eagle's Ridge-Maple Avenue Path Sussex TE $10,608 $2,652 $13,260 1993 Farm Progress Days Park ADA Facilities Town of Lincoln TE $12,128 $3,032 $15,160 PROJ.
    [Show full text]