DOCSLIB.ORG

Menlo Park COMPREHENSIVE BICYCLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Menlo Park COMPREHENSIVE BICYCLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Menlo Park COMPREHENSIVE BICYCLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN January 2005 Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design Menlo Park Comprehensive Bicycle Development Plan January 2005 Prepared for: City of Menlo Park Transportation Program 701 Laurel Street Menlo Park, CA 94025 (650) 330-6775 Contact: Rene C. Baile, P.E., Transportation Engineer Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design 806 Hearst Avenue Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 540-5008 Contact: Brett Hondorp, Project Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS MENLO PARK COMPREHENSIVE BICYCLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1-1 1.1. Purpose of the Plan..................................................................................................................................1-1 1.2. Goals and Policies of the Plan ...............................................................................................................1-3 1.3. Major Recommendations........................................................................................................................1-5 1.4. Plan Contents............................................................................................................................................1-6 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS.......................................................................... 2-1 2.1. Setting ........................................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2. Existing Bicycle Facilities........................................................................................................................2-4 2.3. Bicycle Facility Maintenance.................................................................................................................2-13 2.4. Past Bicycle Program Expenditures ....................................................................................................2-14 2.5. Encouragement and Education Programs .........................................................................................2-14 2.6. Multi-Modal Connections.....................................................................................................................2-15 2.7. Menlo Park Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.............................................................2-16 3. PLANNING AND POLICY CONTEXT ............................................................ 3-1 3.1. City of Menlo Park...................................................................................................................................3-1 3.2. San Mateo County....................................................................................................................................3-6 3.3. Santa Clara County...................................................................................................................................3-7 3.4. City of Palo Alto.......................................................................................................................................3-7 3.5. Stanford University..................................................................................................................................3-8 3.6. Town of Atherton....................................................................................................................................3-8 3.7. City of East Palo Alto..............................................................................................................................3-8 4. NEEDS ANALYSIS................................................................................. 4-1 4.1. Land Use and Demand ...........................................................................................................................4-1 4.2. Commute Patterns ...................................................................................................................................4-2 4.3. Trip Reduction and Potential Air Quality Benefits.............................................................................4-4 4.4. Bicycle Safety and Accident Analysis....................................................................................................4-5 4.5. Bicyclist Needs........................................................................................................................................4-10 4.6. Public Outreach......................................................................................................................................4-15 Menlo Park Comprehensive Bicycle Development Plan i 5. RECOMMENDED BIKEWAY SYSTEM AND IMPROVEMENTS ................................. 5-1 5.1. Recommended Bikeway Network .........................................................................................................5-2 5.2. Recommended Support Facilities and Programs ................................................................................5-5 5.2.1. Bicycle Parking and End-of-Trip Facilities ..........................................................................................5-5 5.2.2. Safe Routes to School Program .............................................................................................................5-6 5.2.3. Traffic Calming.........................................................................................................................................5-8 5.2.4. Maintenance..............................................................................................................................................5-9 5.2.5. Intersection and Bikeway Spot Improvement Program...................................................................5-10 5.2.6. Bicycle Signal Detection........................................................................................................................5-11 5.2.7. Construction Activities..........................................................................................................................5-12 5.2.8. Bicycle and Bikeway Security................................................................................................................5-12 5.2.9. Signing and Striping...............................................................................................................................5-13 5.2.10. Protect Bicycle Facilities From Removal............................................................................................5-13 5.2.11. Multi-Modal Connections.....................................................................................................................5-14 5.2.12. Education Programs ..............................................................................................................................5-14 5.2.13. Encouragement Programs ....................................................................................................................5-16 5.3. Overview of Recommended Network Projects ................................................................................5-19 5.4. Bikeway Network Project List..............................................................................................................5-20 5.4.1. Short-Term Projects ..............................................................................................................................5-23 5.4.2. Mid-Term Projects.................................................................................................................................5-39 5.4.3. Long-Term Projects...............................................................................................................................5-59 6. IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................................. 6-1 6.1. Implementation Process..........................................................................................................................6-1 6.2. High Priority Projects..............................................................................................................................6-1 6.3. Cost Breakdown.......................................................................................................................................6-2 6.4. Funding......................................................................................................................................................6-7 APPENDIX A: BIKEWAY PLANNING AND DESIGN APPENDIX B: STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS APPENDIX C: BIKE PLAN SURVEY FORM AND RESULTS APPENDIX D: BIKE PLAN PUBLIC MEETING NOTICES AND SUMMARIES APPENDIX E: SAMPLE BICYCLE PARKING CODE LANGUAGE APPENDIX F: CONSTRUCTION ZONE TREATMENTS APPENDIX G: BICYCLE COMMUTE AND AIR QUALITY CALCULATIONS Menlo Park Comprehensive Bicycle Development Plan ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1, Existing Bicycle Facilities..................................................................................................................2-7 Figure 3-1, Menlo Park General Plan Land Use Map.......................................................................................3-2 Figure 5-1, Existing and Recommended Bicycle Facilities ..............................................................................5-3 Figure A-1, Bicycle Facility Types....................................................................................................................... A-2 Figure A-2, Class I Facility Cross Section.........................................................................................................
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]
  • Travel Behavior and Mobility of Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Evidence from the National Household Travel Survey
    Travel Behavior and Mobility of Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Evidence from the National Household Travel Survey Jeremy Mattson Small Urban & Rural Transit Center Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute North Dakota State University, Fargo December 2012 Acknowledgements This research was sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, United States Department of Transportation, and conducted by the Small Urban & Rural Transit Center within the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute at North Dakota State University. The author thanks Jana Lynott from the AARP Public Policy Institute and Steve Polzin from the Center for Urban Transportation Research for their comments on a previous version of the paper. Responsibility for any remaining errors belongs to the author. The guidance of Jill Hough, Director of the Small Urban & Rural Transit Center, and Jarrett Stoltzfus, FTA Project Manager for the project, is also acknowledged. Disclaimer The contents presented in this report are the sole responsibility of the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute and the authors. North Dakota State University does not discriminate on the basis of age, color, disability, gender expression/identity, genetic information, marital status, national origin, public assistance status, sex, sexual orientation, status as a U.S. veteran, race or religion. Direct inquiries to the Vice President for Equity, Diversity and Global Outreach, 205 Old Main, (701) 231-7708. ABSTRACT Older adults, people with disabilities, individuals in low-income households, and those living in rural areas can face significant mobility challenges. This study examines travel behavior and mobility of these transportation-disadvantaged groups by analyzing data from the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). NHTS data on driving, trip frequency, staying in the same place all day or week, miles driven per year, mode choice, use of public transportation, trip purpose, trip distance, and issues and concerns regarding transportation are highlighted.
    [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]
  • Socio-Cultural Impacts of Backpacking in Rural Destinations with an Emphasize on Local Residents’ Attitudes (Case Study: Darak Village)*
    Persian translation of this paper entitled: Tourism of Culture, 2(5), 61-76 / Summer 2021 DOI: 10.22034/toc.2021.285720.1048 اثرات اجتماعی-فرهنگی کوله گردی در مناطق روستایی با تأکید بر نگرش جامعۀ محلی )مطالعۀ موردی: روستای َد َرک( is also published in this issue of journal Original Research Article Socio-Cultural Impacts of Backpacking in Rural Destinations with an Emphasize on Local Residents’ Attitudes (Case Study: Darak Village)* Motahareh Abbasi1, Zahra Nadalipour2** 1. M. A. Student in Tourism Development Planning, Faculty of Tourism, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran. 2. Assistant Professor, Faculty of Tourism, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran. Received: 10/05/2021 Accepted: 01/07/2021 Available online: 23/07/2021 Abstract| Backpacking tourism is a type of adventure tourism that has increased significantly in recent years. Backpackers are tourists who travel with only one backpack and the lowest possible budget. Their target destinations are lesser-known areas and nature. Backpackers travel to discover new destinations and communicate with locals to better understand them. They play an effective role in identifying and introducing lesser-known tourist destinations. Although choosing a backpacking travel style by young people in Iran is increasing, less research still exists in this field and its effects on the tourism industry of Iran and the local community has not been investigated. This study aims to recognize the attitudes of rural residents towards the phenomenon of backpacking and identify its socio-cultural effects on rural host communities. For this purpose, Darak village located in Chabahar city of Sistan and Baluchistan province was selected as a case study.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Plug-In Electric Vehicle Travel and Charging Behavior Final Report (CARB Contract 12-319 – Funding from CARB and CEC)
    Advanced Plug-in Electric Vehicle Travel and Charging Behavior Final Report (CARB Contract 12-319 – Funding from CARB and CEC) April 10, 2020 Prepared By: Gil Tal, Ph.D. Seshadri Srinivasa Raghavan Vaishnavi Chaitanya Karanam Matthew P. Favetti Katrina May Sutton Jade Motayo Ogunmayin Jae Hyun Lee, Ph.D. Christopher Nitta, Ph.D. Kenneth Kurani, Ph.D. Debapriya Chakraborty, Ph.D. Michael Nicholas, Ph.D. Tom Turrentine, Ph.D. Prepared For: 1 Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Figures .............................................................................................................................. 5 List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 9 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Preface........................................................................................................................................... 13 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 14 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 15 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Proposal Cover Sheet
    REGION II UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH CENTER REGION II Marshak Hall, Room 910 Tel: 212-650-8050 New York, New Jersey, The City College of NY Fax: 212-650-8374 Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands New York, NY 10031 Website: www.utrc2.org TECHNICAL PROPOSAL COVER SHEET PROPOSAL TITLE: Innovative Travel Data Collection PURSUANT TO: Z-14-04 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Name: Mitchell L. Moss Title: Director, Rudin Center; Henry Hart Rice Professor of Urban Policy and Planning Address: 295 Lafayette Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10012 Tel: 212-992-9865; Fax: 212-995-4166; Email: [email protected] CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Name: Sarah Kaufman Title: Digital Manager Address: 295 Lafayette Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10012 Tel: 212-992-9865; Fax: 212-995-4166; Email: [email protected] Name: Anthony Townsend Title: Senior Research Fellow Address: 295 Lafayette Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10012 Tel: 212-992-9865; Fax: 212-995-4166; Email: [email protected] SPONSOR: NYMTC RESEARCH PROJECT MANAGER: Name: Marilyn Lopez Title: Program Administrator Address: 295 Lafayette Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10012 Tel: 212-992-9865; Fax: 212-995-4166; Email: [email protected] PROJECT DURATION: 8 months DATE SUBMITTED: September 24, 2014 CONSORTIUM MEMBERS City University of New York, Clarkson University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Hofstra University, Manhattan College, New Jersey Institute of Technology, New York Institute of Technology, New York University, Polytechnic Institute of NYU, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rowan University, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Rutgers University*, State University of New York, Stevens Institute of Technology, Syracuse University, The College of New Jersey, University of Puerto Rico *Member under SAFETEA-LU Legislation Table of Contents Part I: Technical and Management Submittal .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development Julius Arnegger Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development
    Würzburger Geographische Arbeiten WGA GGW 110 Würzburger Geographische Gesellschaft Würzburg Based on demand-side surveys and income multipli- ers, this study analyzes the structure and economic Geographische importance of tourism in two highly frequented protected areas, the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve in Arbeiten Mexico (SKBR) and the Souss-Massa National Park (SMNP) in Morocco. With regional income effects of approximately 1 million USD (SKBR) and approximately 1.9 million USD (SMNP), both the SKBR and the SMNP play important roles for the regional economies in underdeveloped rural regions. Visitor structures are heterogeneous: with regard to planning and marketing of nature-based tourism, protected area managers and political decision-takers are advised put a stronger focus on ecologically and economically attractive visitor groups. Julius Arnegger Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development Julius Arnegger Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development ISBN 978-3-95826-000-9 Würzburg University Press Band 110 Julius Arnegger Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development WÜRZBURGER GEOGRAPHISCHE ARBEITEN Mitteilungen der Geographischen Gesellschaft Würzburg Herausgeber R. Baumhauer, B. Hahn, H. Job, H. Paeth, J. Rauh, B. Terhorst Band 110 Die Schriftenreihe Würzburger Geographische Arbeiten wird vom Institut für Geographie und Geologie zusammen mit der Geographischen Gesell- schaft herausgegeben. Die Beiträge umfassen mit wirtschafts-, sozial- und naturwissenschaftlichen Forschungsperspektiven die gesamte thematische Bandbreite der Geographie. Der erste Band der Reihe wurde bereits 1953 herausgegeben. Julius Arnegger Protected Areas, the Tourist Bubble and Regional Economic Development Two Case Studies from Mexico and Morocco Würzburger Geographische Arbeiten Herausgegeben vom Institut für Geographie und Geologie der Universität Würzburg in Verbindung mit der Geographischen Gesellschaft Würzburg Herausgeber R.
    [Show full text]
  • Travel Behavior Over Time
    Travel Behavior Over Time David Levinson, Principal Investigator Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering University of Minnesota June 2015 Research Project Final Report 2015-23 To request this document in an alternative format call 651-366-4718 or 1-800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota) or email your request to [email protected]. Please request at least one week in advance. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC 2015-23 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date June 2015 Travel Behavior Over Time 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. David Levinson, Greg Lindsey, Yingling Fan, Jason Cao, Michael Iacono, Martin Brosnan, Andrew Guthrie, and Jessica Schoner 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering CTS # 2013078 University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 500 Pillsbury Drive S.E. (c) 99008 (wo) 95 Minneapolis, MN 55455-0116 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report Research Services & Library 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 Metropolitan Council 390 Robert St. N. St. Paul, MN 55101 15. Supplementary Notes http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/201523.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 250 words) Using detailed travel surveys (the Travel Behavior Inventory) conducted by the Metropolitan Council of the Minneapolis/Saint Paul (Twin Cities) Region in Minnesota for 1990, 2000-2001, and 2010-2011, this report conducts an analysis of changes in travel behavior over time.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Staff Report #18-225-CC
    AGENDA ITEM I-4 Public Works STAFF REPORT City Council Meeting Date: 12/4/2018 Staff Report Number: 18-225-CC Informational Item: Update on the citywide Safe Routes to School program Recommendation This is an informational item and does not require City Council action. Policy Issues The development of a Citywide Safe Routes to School program (Program) is included as one of the top-six priority projects in the City Council’s adopted 2018 work plan. The program is also an implementation program included in the 2016 general plan circulation element. Background On February 6, 2018, the City Council adopted its 2018 work plan, including the Citywide Safe Routes to school program and further prioritized it as one of the city’s top-six priority projects. Accordingly, staff reprioritized work efforts and prepared a draft request for proposals for the program. The Safe Routes to School subcommittee of the Complete Streets Commission and advocates from Parents for Safe Routes reviewed the draft request for proposals. Staff incorporated this feedback and released the request for proposals May 2, 2018. Six proposals were received by the May 23, 2018, due date. A team of seven people comprised of City staff and Complete Streets Commission subcommittee members reviewed proposals and recommended Alta Planning + Design to initiate the program. Authorization for entering into an agreement with Alta Planning + Design was approved at the City Council meeting June 19, 2018. A notice to proceed was given in July 2018, and this report serves as an update to the work that has been performed over the last five months.
    [Show full text]