Guide to Bicycle Project and Program Funding in California

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Guide to Bicycle Project and Program Funding in California Guide to Bicycle Project and Program Funding in California Second Edition by Gail Payne February 2002 This document is a combined effort of the California Bicycle Coalition, Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit and the Planning and Conservation League Foundation. Guide to Bicycle Project and Program Funding in California Second Edition by Gail Payne February 2002 This document is a combined effort of the California Bicycle Coalition, Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit and the Planning and Conservation League Foundation. For additional copies of this report, refer to: § California Bicycle Coalition’s web site at www.calbike.org or phone at (916) 446-7558. § Planning and Conservation League Foundation’s web site at www.pcl.org or phone at (916) 444-8726. Guide to Bicycle Project and Program Funding in California Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Background................................................................................................................................................. 2 Federal Transportation Funding Summary ................................................................................................. 3 State Transportation Funding Summary..................................................................................................... 6 Local/Regional Transportation Funding Summary..................................................................................... 9 Bicycle Project Funding Example ............................................................................................................ 10 Primary Funding Sources - Federal .............................................................................................................. 11 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program................................................ 11 Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Program............................................................................ 14 Recreational Trails Program (RTP) .......................................................................................................... 16 Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) .................................................................................. 19 Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program................................................................. 22 Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Program.......................................................................... 23 Primary Funding Sources - State .................................................................................................................. 28 Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA).................................................................................................... 28 California Conservation Corps (CCC)...................................................................................................... 31 Community Based Transportation Planning Demonstration Grant Program............................................ 32 Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP)............................................................... 33 Habitat Conservation Fund (HCF) Grant Program................................................................................... 34 Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Program................................................................................................... 36 Petroleum Violation Escrow Account (PVEA) ........................................................................................ 38 Safe Routes to School Program (SR2S).................................................................................................... 39 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)................................................................................. 41 Primary Funding Sources – Local and Regional .......................................................................................... 43 Developer Impact Fees ............................................................................................................................. 43 Local Air District Projects Funded by Vehicle Registration Fee.............................................................. 44 Local Sales Tax for Transportation .......................................................................................................... 46 Registration and Licensing of Bicycles .................................................................................................... 48 Transportation Development Act (TDA) – Article 3................................................................................ 49 Foundation and Corporate Funding Sources ................................................................................................ 51 Bikes Belong Coalition, Ltd. .................................................................................................................... 51 Recreational Equipment, Inc. (REI) Corporate Contribution Program..................................................... 53 The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) ...................................................................................... 54 Secondary Funding Sources - Federal .......................................................................................................... 55 Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) Program.............................................................................................. 55 Secondary Sources – State............................................................................................................................ 57 Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 (Proposition 12) ........................................................................................................................................ 57 Appendix A: Local Bicycle Advocacy Groups .......................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B: State and National Bicycle-Related Organizations and Services .......................................... B-1 State Bicycle Organizations.................................................................................................................... B-1 National Bicycle-Related Organizations................................................................................................. B-1 Appendix C: State Legislative Contacts for Transportation ....................................................................... C-1 General Information ............................................................................................................................... C-1 Transportation Committee of the Senate ................................................................................................ C-1 Transportation Committee of the Assembly........................................................................................... C-1 Appendix D: Caltrans Contacts .................................................................................................................. D-1 Local Programs Bicycle Facilities Unit .................................................................................................. D-1 Local Streets and Roads.......................................................................................................................... D-1 Appendix E: Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs).......................................................................E-1 Appendix F: Regional Transportation Planning Agencies ..........................................................................F-1 Appendix G: City and County Transportation Contact Information .......................................................... G-1 Appendix H: Local Air Pollution Control Districts.................................................................................... H-1 Appendix I: Congestion Management Agencies ..........................................................................................I-1 Appendix J: Transportation Glossary .......................................................................................................... J-1 List of Figures Figure 1: Federal Transportation Funding ...................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2: STIP Transportation Funding Process........................................................................................... 41 List of Tables Table 1: Primary Federal Bicycle Program and Project Funding Sources...................................................... 4 Table 2: Primary State Bicycle Program and Project Funding Sources.......................................................... 8 Table 3: Primary Local/Regional Bicycle Program and Project Funding Sources ......................................... 9 Table 4: Example Bicycle Project Funding Sources..................................................................................... 10 Table 5: CMAQ Statewide Distributions...................................................................................................... 11 Table 6: 1999/2000 CMAQ Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects......................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Alameda, a Geographical History, by Imelda Merlin
    Alameda A Geographical History by Imelda Merlin Friends of the Alameda Free Library Alameda Museum Alameda, California 1 Copyright, 1977 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 77-73071 Cover picture: Fernside Oaks, Cohen Estate, ca. 1900. 2 FOREWORD My initial purpose in writing this book was to satisfy a partial requirement for a Master’s Degree in Geography from the University of California in Berkeley. But, fortunate is the student who enjoys the subject of his research. This slim volume is essentially the original manuscript, except for minor changes in the interest of greater accuracy, which was approved in 1964 by Drs. James Parsons, Gunther Barth and the late Carl Sauer. That it is being published now, perhaps as a response to a new awareness of and interest in our past, is due to the efforts of the “Friends of the Alameda Free Library” who have made a project of getting my thesis into print. I wish to thank the members of this organization and all others, whose continued interest and perseverance have made this publication possible. Imelda Merlin April, 1977 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge her indebtedness to the many individuals and institutions who gave substantial assistance in assembling much of the material treated in this thesis. Particular thanks are due to Dr. Clarence J. Glacken for suggesting the topic. The writer also greatly appreciates the interest and support rendered by the staff of the Alameda Free Library, especially Mrs. Hendrine Kleinjan, reference librarian, and Mrs. Myrtle Richards, curator of the Alameda Historical Society. The Engineers’ and other departments at the Alameda City Hall supplied valuable maps an information on the historical development of the city.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Trail at Point Molate
    San Francisco Bay Trail at Point Molate Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared For: Prepared By: East Bay Regional Park District NCE 2950 Peralta Oaks Court 501 Canal Blvd. Suite I Oakland, CA 94605 Richmond, CA 94804 Date: March 2018 NCE Project Number: 567.04.55 SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL AT POINT MOLATE Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...................................................................... iii 1.0 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ................................................ 2 3.0 LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION .............................................................................. 2 4.0 PROJECT SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 3 4.1 Project Location ............................................................................................. 3 4.2 Project Background ........................................................................................ 3 4.3 Project Description ......................................................................................... 3 4.4 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting .................................................................. 5 5.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ............................................................ 9 I. Aesthetics ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California Highways & Public Works, May-June 1962
    P ~Jmited States of America PgtOCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 07th CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 108 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, 1dIAY 21, 1962 1Vo, g0 A~~' en~Zx tragic to our economy and to our etFOrts to Fourth, ovr State highway commission is The California Highway Program remain apace with our population increases composed of dedicated and intelligent men if this. total highway construction program who are appointed for overlapping terms, in were seriouslq curtailed for any reason. order to provide continuity, and they are EXTENSION OF REMARKS Second. I want to say thaw I am convinced required by law to take a statewide and not os California's Department of Public Works and a sectional viewpoint. State law spells out Division of Highways cooperate fully, com- in detail the procedure to be fflllowed by HON. GEORGE P. MILLER pleCely, and in honesty with the T7.S. Bureau the State highway commission, including OF CALIf'ORNIA of Public Roads. The regional office of the the requirement that public hearings be held Bureau of Public Roads Yor certain Western IN THE HOIISE OF REPRESENTATIVES on a rather heavy schedule. I have insisted, States is In Ban FYancisco anfl the State office as Governor Snight and Governor Warren Tuesday, M¢y 8, 1962 of the Bureau o1 Public Roads is right here insisted, that members of the highway com- in Sacramento where there is daily contact Mr. GEORGE P. MILLER. Mr. mission be nonpartisan in their conduct o1 between the California highway people and highway policy matters. Our commission is Speaker,from time to time, from various the Federal highway people.
    [Show full text]
  • State of California, County of Siskiyou Board of Supervisors Minutes
    State of California, County of Siskiyou Board of Supervisors Minutes, November 12, 2019 The Honorable Board of Supervisors of Siskiyou County, California, met in regular session this 12th day of November 2019; there being present Supervisors Lisa L. Nixon, Brandon Criss, Michael N. Kobseff, Ray A. Haupt and Ed Valenzuela, County Administrator Terry Barber, County Counsel Edward J. Kiernan, and County Clerk and ex-Officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Laura Bynum by Deputy County Clerk Wendy Winningham. The meeting was called to order by Chair Criss. Pursuant to AB23, the Clerk announced that the Board members receive no additional compensation for sitting as members of the Siskiyou County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Supervisor Nixon led in the salute to the flag of the United States of America. Closed Session - Personnel pursuant to Government Code §54957, conference with legal counsel, existing litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(1), four cases, conference with labor negotiators pursuant to Government Code §54957.6, commenced at 8:33a.m., concluded at 9:59a.m., with no action taken. Report On Closed Session County Counsel Edward J. Kiernan announced that closed session concluded at 9:59a.m., with no reportable action taken. Invocation - Siskiyou County Sheriff Chaplain Keith Bradley provided the invocation. Consent Agenda – Approved. At Supervisor Haupt’s request, items 5C, County Administration’s letter to Union Pacific Railroad supporting the Siskiyou Trail Association designed Mossbrae Falls Access project, and item 5D, County Administration’s Rule 20A Credit Purchase agreement with the City of Weed for the transfer of $1,200,000 of 20A credits (County Allocation) from the County to the City, were pulled from the consent agenda for discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
    San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Final Adopted September 8, 2011 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design in association with Fehr & Peers and Eisen | Letunic San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Acknowledgements C/CAG Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Matt Grocott, Chair Judi Mosqueda, Vice Chair Naomi Patridge Karyl Matsumoto Cory Roay Ken Ibarra Marge Colapietro Ian Bain Paul Grantham Steve Schmidt Frank Markowitz David Alfano Cathleen Baker Cathy Baylock Former Members Joel Slavit Julie Lancelle Lucy Wicks We wish to thank staff from the following agencies who contributed to this plan: Town of Atherton, City of Belmont, City of Brisbane, City of Burlingame, Town of Colma, City of Daly City, City of East Palo Alto, City of Foster City, City of Half Moon Bay, Town of Hillsborough, City of Menlo Park, City of Millbrae, City of Pacifica, Town of Portola Valley, City of Redwood City, City of San Bruno, City of San Carlos, City of San Mateo, City of South San Francisco, Town of Woodside, County of San Mateo, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Caltrans District 4, SamTrans, San Francisco International Airport, San Mateo County Transportation Authority, and City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. This page intentionally left blank. San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Table of Contents GLOSSARY AND LIST OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SISKIYOU COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 17, 2019
    SISKIYOU COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 17, 2019 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: ALTES USE PERMIT (UP1802) APPLICANT: Matt & Ruth Altes P.O. Box 1048 Mt Shasta, CA 96067 PROPERTY OWNER: Matt & Ruth Altes P.O. Box 1048 Mt Shasta, CA 96067 PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project consists of a use permit to establish an equestrian and event center. LOCATION: The parcel is approximately 9 acres, located at 138 Big Canyon Drive, Mt Shasta, CA 96067, Siskiyou County, California on APN 037-260-510 (Latitude 41°17'05.12"N, Longitude 122°17'52.50"W). GENERAL PLAN: Woodland Productivity ZONING: Highway Commercial (CH) EXHIBITS: A. Proposed Use Permit Findings B. Resolution PC-2019-024 B-1. Proposed Notations and Recommended Conditions of Approval C. Recirculated Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration D. Public Comments Altes Use Permit (UP1802) Page 1 SITE DESCRIPTION The 9-acre project site is located at 138 Big Canyon Drive. The project site is accessed via Big Canyon Drive. The project site is located in an open woodland area. Adjacent parcels are largely developed with residential and commercial uses and the property is near the intersection of Interstate 5 and Highway 89. Figure 1, Project Location PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is a proposed use permit to bring an existing nine-acre equestrian and special event facility into compliance with County Code as well as to facilitate future development of the site. The facility is currently used for horse boarding/training, riding lessons, trail riding, and outdoor events, such as weddings, parties, and retreats. The use permit would allow these unpermitted uses to continue, as well as allow for training clinics and development of a septic system and two additional structures: 1) a multi- use building containing offices, restrooms, storage, and a caretaker’s residence and 2) a barn for storing hay, tack, and other horse-related materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Development in Western Oregon, 1825-1861
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1-1-2011 The Pursuit of Commerce: Agricultural Development in Western Oregon, 1825-1861 Cessna R. Smith Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Smith, Cessna R., "The Pursuit of Commerce: Agricultural Development in Western Oregon, 1825-1861" (2011). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 258. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.258 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: pdxscholar@pdx.edu. The Pursuit of Commerce: Agricultural Development in Western Oregon, 1825-1861 by Cessna R. Smith A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History Thesis Committee: William L. Lang, Chair David A. Horowitz David A. Johnson Barbara A. Brower Portland State University ©2011 ABSTRACT This thesis examines how the pursuit of commercial gain affected the development of agriculture in western Oregon’s Willamette, Umpqua, and Rogue River Valleys. The period of study begins when the British owned Hudson’s Bay Company began to farm land in and around Fort Vancouver in 1825, and ends in 1861—during the time when agrarian settlement was beginning to expand east of the Cascade Mountains. Given that agriculture
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Sign-On Letter Cardin-Cochran Amendment 1549-AARP
    2/13/2012 «F1» Dear Senator «Last_Name», We are writing to request your support for the Cardin/Cochran amendment #1549 to MAP- 21, to ensure local access to Transportation Enhancement (TE) and Safe Routes to School (SRTS) funds. This amendment will ensure the effective implementation of TE and SRTS eligibilities by empowering local governments through suballocation of funds to Tier I metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). In addition, for localities outside of Tier I MPOs, the amendment provides a streamlined administrative structure for a statewide pool set aside for these activities. At the same time, the amendment improves capacity for state departments of transportation (DOTs) to partner with locals. Since 1992, the Transportation Enhancements program has brought tremendous benefits to local communities through improved transportation choice, economic development, historic revitalization, and environmental restoration of the surface transportation system. This program enjoys broad local support in every state. For example, just in one area in Florida, 13 counties, cities and transportation agencies in and around Daytona Beach have passed resolutions supporting federal investment in TE. Local communities also support TE because of the job-creation benefits these projects provide; a recent American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials/Transportation Research Board study found that TE projects create more jobs per dollar than any other type of Federal-aid highway spending. However, a major challenge for state DOTs in implementing this program has been the local-scale orientation of the eligible activities, a non-traditional area for state DOTs. There is limited capacity at the state level for addressing these myriad, sometimes competing, priorities.
    [Show full text]
  • East Bay Regional Park District
    East Bay~ Regional Park District TO: PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: GLENN KIRBY, CHAIR SUBJECT: PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE March 24, 2014 Location: Peralta Oaks Court 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 6:45 pm Social and Refreshments REGULAR MEETING 7:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Minutes - February 24, 2014 2. Introductions 3. Public Comments 7:15 p.m. 4. Presentations: (I) a. Introduction of Cultural Services Coordinator - Jim O'Connor, AGM Operations (I) b. Statewide Drought Effects - Jim O'Connor, AGM Operations & Anne Scheer, Chief of Parks (I) c. Regional Parks Foundation Updates - Carol Johnson, AGM Public Affairs 8:00 p.m. 5. PAC Member Comments· 6. Report from the Vice Chair - John Mercurio 7. Board Committee Reports 8. Status of Recommendations 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Adjournment - Next Meeting April 28, 2014 (A) Action (I) Information (R) Recommendation ATTACHMENTS 1. CSC Memo 2. Drought Press Release 3. Regional Parks Foundation Memo 4. Work Plan 2014 5. Status of Recommendations 6. Articles & Correspondence Unapproved Meeting Minutes PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE February 24, 2014 ATTENDING: Kirby, Madsen, Madison, Godfrey, Kern, Coffey, Vann, Mercurio, Bank, Palacios, Simmons, Beyaert, Volin, Coomber, Shalaby, Gregory NOTATTENDING: Best, Pellegrini, DeMarcus, Yee STAFF ATTENDING: Barial, Pfuehler, Scheer, Johnson GUESTS: Director John Sutter PUBLIC: None. The meeting began at 7:05 p.m. I. Approval of Minutes: PAC member Beyaert moved and PAC member Coomber seconded approval of the January 27, 2014 minutes with one correction. The motion passed unanimously. PAC members Madison and Madsen abstained due to absence from the meeting. 2. Introductions: PAC Chair Kirby asked PAC members, staff and the public to introduce themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Guard Island Southshore Center
    JACK LONDON SQUARE Oakland Ferry Terminal EMBARCADERO 80 OAKLAN Al DeWitt 2014 Metropolitan O’Club Yacht Club D Bicycle Shop Bike/Walk Path California Gompers Arkansas Enterprise Caution: Noisy, Narrow and Dangerous Bike Locker Bridge with Steps Trail through Posey Tube Alameda Road Stairs Fire Station Bike Path-Caution Mulvaney 9 Pyro Bus Stop Protected Bike Lane Mars Texas Shasta Õ Flint Cimarron Ct Gas Station & Air Bike Lane Narrow Boardwalk WILLIE STARGELL Public Restroom Bike Route 6 EMBARCADERO Public Phone Park Glenview Gate Shopping Center Coast RUBY BRIDGES Guard 80 SCHOOL Island North Star Rd Oakland Yacht Club Eagle Rd Encinal Yacht Club Pickering Dr Campbell Blvd McCulloch Wakefield Dr Icarus Dr Spencer Rd Dr Brush St Dr BASE ro SCHOOL1900 Mun Bear Rd Hudson 1800 1800 1700 ACADEMY OF 1800 Dennison St 1700 ALAMEDA China Clipper EMBARCADERO 100 200 1800 ALAMEDA 400 Alameda Yacht Club 100 500 300 ANIMAL 1700 FortmanThoroughfare Way Cruiser 1600 Hibbard 100 NEACLC SHELTE Red Sails R Bohemia 1500 Alaska Packer 1600 200 200 2000 600 Island Yacht Club 100 1500 900 1000 200 1000 1599 29th Ave 1600 1500 1400 1800 800 23rd Ave 1400 1400 Esterbrook Kennedy Bikers: Take underpass on 29th Avenue ALAMEDA PARK 900 1600 to stay on East 7th Street 1300 Chapman Street East 7th St FRUITVALE Queen’s 1500 1000 1300 1400 BART 1100 1200 1500 Ford St Glascock Street 1300 400 King’s 1300 1400 Derby St 1300 1600 1200 1200 1300 8 900 1700 2000 1300 1100 Stairs East 8th St 1200 1800 1900 1200 Ballena Bay 1900 1200 2400 Yacht Club 1900 Lancaster
    [Show full text]
  • March 2021 | City of Alameda, California
    March 2021 | City of Alameda, California DRAFT ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 CONTENTS 04 MARCH 2021 City of Alameda, California MOBILITY ELEMENT 78 01 05 GENERAL PLAN ORGANIZATION + THEMES 6 HOUSING ELEMENT FROM 2014 02 06 LAND USE + CITY DESIGN ELEMENT 22 PARKS + OPEN SPACE ELEMENT 100 03 07 CONSERVATION + CLIMATE ACTION 54 HEALTH + SAFETY ELEMENT 116 ELEMENT MARCH 2021 DRAFT 1 ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD: PRESIDENT Alan H. Teague VICE PRESIDENT Asheshh Saheba BOARD MEMBERS Xiomara Cisneros Ronald Curtis Hanson Hom Rona Rothenberg Teresa Ruiz POLICY, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS: Amie MacPhee, AICP, Cultivate, Consulting Planner Sheffield Hale, Cultivate, Consulting Planner Candice Miller, Cultivate, Lead Graphic Designer PHOTOGRAPHY: Amie MacPhee Maurice Ramirez Alain McLaughlin MARCH 2021 DRAFT 3 ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 FORWARD Preparation of the Alameda General Plan 2040 began in 2018 and took shape over a three-year period during which time residents, businesses, community groups, and decision-makers reviewed, revised and refined plan goals, policy statements and priorities, and associated recommended actions. In 2020, the Alameda Planning Board held four public forums to review and discuss the draft General Plan. Over 1,500 individuals provided written comments and suggestions for improvements to the draft Plan through the General Plan update website. General Plan 2040 also benefited from recommendations and suggestions from: ≠ Commission on People with Disabilities ≠ Golden
    [Show full text]
  • California Trail Corridor System Update
    California Trail Corridor System • Existing or planned long distance trail routes • Identified in the California Recreational Trails Act, 1978 • Must meet 3 of 10 established criteria in California Recreational Trails Plan California Trail Corridors • Currently the 26 Trail Corridors in California are in various levels of development, planning, completion and public use. • Trail Corridors are in the backcountry, on the coast, in cities, suburbs, along rivers, through historic routes and on abandoned rail grades. Corridors with Substantial Progress or Completed • American Discovery Trail • Bay Area Ridge Trail • California Coastal Trail • Lake Tahoe Bikeway • Los Angeles River Trail • San Gabriel River Trail • Mokelumne Coast to Crest Trail • Pacific Crest Trail • San Francisco Bay Trail • San Joaquin River Trail • Santa Ana River Trail • Tahoe Rim Trail • Trans County Trail Corridors With Minimal Progress Characteristics: major gaps and minimal management These trails include: • Cuesta to Sespe Trail • Condor Trail • Merced River Trail • Whittier to Ortega Trail • Tuolumne Complex Trails Corridors With Little or no Progress • Redwood Coast to Crest Trail • Cross California Ecological Trail Heritage Corridors and Historic Routes: • Pony Express National Historic Trail 140 miles long in CA, along the Highway 50 Corridor, about 25 miles is in the El Dorado National Forest. • Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail Through 14 counties and 2 states, traces the 1,210 mile route of explorer Juan Bautista de Anza over dirt trails and roads close to the historic route. Next Steps • Maintain up-to-date database, contact information, mapping and planning progress of Trail Corridors from managing entities. • Compile information on new Trail Corridors currently not included in the system.
    [Show full text]