The Transportation Element Examines the Future Transportation Needs for Both Vehicles and People of All Ages and Abilities Within the Fishers Planning Area

4 TRANSPORTATION

The transportation element examines the future transportation needs for both vehicles and people of all ages and abilities within the Fishers planning area. It anticipates and plans for transportation infrastructure that will sustain and enhance Fishers’ economic sustainability and resilience for the long-term. 44 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

INTRODUCTION

The transportation section examines the future transportation needs for both vehicles and people of all ages and abilities within the Fishers planning area. It anticipates and plans for transportation infrastructure that will sustain and enhance Fishers’ economic sustainability and resilience for the long-term.

Organization

The transportation section of the comprehensive plan The comprehensive plan focuses on six main includes the Thoroughfare Plan and the Bicycle and sections from the Transportation and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which are adopted with this Pedestrian Master plans. comprehensive plan by reference. The document is the > Goals, Objectives and Actions result of several months of public outreach, planning, research and analysis. This work was conducted by both > Thoroughfare Plan City staff and consultants to ensure accuracy and detail. > Bicycle and Pedestrian Network The Thoroughfare Plan establishes the right-of-way > Corridor Plans needs for each roadway based on its function in the > Design Standards overall transportation system. This Thoroughfare Plan is > Shared Transportation further enhanced by the bicycle and pedestrian network map, which identifies where bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure will be installed to create a truly multi- For the comprehensive plan, six sections of the two modal transportation system. To take the plan to documents have been included as a summary. Should additional detail, corridor plans were added to illustrate any conflict occur between the stand-alone plans and this the capacity needs of key roadways throughout the City. document, the stand-alone plans shall take precedence. The Thoroughfare Plan, corridor plans and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan may be altered on a case-by-case basis at the direction of the Board of Public Works.

Purpose

Population projections completed in 2014 show that The Plan anticipates, and plans for, transportation Fishers will grow to over 131,000 people by 2040 from just infrastructure that sustains and enhances Fishers’ over 87,000 at the time of the report. There will be a need economic sustainability and livability. for continued investment in the transportation network The standards and analysis presented in this plan in Fishers to maintain a high level of service for the City’s represent a comprehensive review of the previous residents. Transportation Plan as well as a detailed analysis of The Thoroughfare Plan examines the future transportation Fishers’ future population and transportation needs. needs of people of all ages and abilities within Fishers’ planning area. The Plan includes incorporated and unincorporated areas of Fall Creek Township and Delaware Township. Transportation 45

Key Findings and Initiatives The transportation section and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan both contain several goals, objectives and action steps that form the foundation of the community’s needs. Through these goals, community outreach and discussion by the Transportation Task Force, the following themes were identified to shape the overall form of transportation planning in Fishers.

Continued Maintenance. As Fishers Integration with Land Use. The needs of ages, the existing streets, trails, paths the transportation network are inherently and sidewalks will all incur increased linked with the development of the maintenance costs. surrounding land. Increased Capacity. The eastern portion Public Transportation. Establishing a public of the community will require capacity and transportation system is a priority of the safety improvements as development occurs. Indianapolis MPO and CIRTA. Establishing this service will require a public referendum. Pedestrian Primary Arterials. Just as Should a referendum pass, Fishers will arterial roadways provide the key east/west receive services as outlined by the MPO and and north/south connectivity for vehicles, CIRTA plan. establishing primary corridors for bicycles and pedestrians is also an important part of the road network. Balance Transportation Needs. A multi- modal approach must be used in developing roadways to include bike and pedestrian facilities alongside the vehicle corridors. To further balance the transportation network, the land uses should also be distributed to alleviate unnecessary cross-community travel. Reinvestment in Small Areas. Fishers should focus on key areas to create a sense of place, encourage reinvestment, redevelopment and foster pedestrian and vehicular safety. 46 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Plan Process Public Outreach

The foundation for this chapter of the plan The planning process included substantial public was developed in 2015 through a collaborative outreach efforts, which are further detailed in process involving input from a variety of the appendix. The plans both distributed surveys, perspectives. The project team included staff raised awareness of the effort by attending other from Fishers’ departments of community public meetings and City events and reached out development, engineering and public works. to stakeholder groups. Highlights of the outreach These groups regularly exchanged information efforts include: with the Steering Committee, which was > Public Survey (700 Responses) comprised of staff from Fishers’ departments of administration, community development, > Bicycle & Pedestrian Advocacy Committee engineering, fire, information technology, > Steering Committee parks and recreation, police, public relations > Hamilton Southeastern Schools and public works, as well as a representative of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning > Community Forums (March & May 2014) Organization (MPO). The project team > Wikimap Survey (113 Responses) updated the City Council and the Advisory Plan Commission at key junctures of the process. Development of the transportation section occured in three phases.

Phase I – Inventory During the inventory phase, staff surveyed and examined infrastructure to assess opportunities and challenges. Public participation provided insights into how residents viewed the existing transportation network and what they believe is important moving forward.

Phase II – Analysis The analysis phase identified key transportation issues to be addressed in the transportation section and recommended actions to tackle the challenges for the short-, mid- and long-term.

Phase III – Policies and Design Standards Design standards and policies were developed for the broad cross section of transportation needs within the community. This also connects Fishers’ plans to the greater region and ensures critical transportation links with other communities.

FIVE-YEAR UPDATE The Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan were updated in 2019. A Transportation Subcommittee was convened in 2021 as part of the five-year update process to provide direction for refinements to this chapter. Transportation 47

CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPORTATION Transportation initiatives and infrastructure play a vital role in local and regional mobility, the conveyance of goods and services, public safety and land use patterns within the City of Fishers and Central Indiana. The City of Fishers employs a multi-modal approach to transportation planning and project implementation.

Long-Range Plans

The City has adopted several plans Thoroughfare Plan. One of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master and is currently developing additional objectives of the Transportation Plan Plan. Fishers has developed a plans to guide the development of is to classify roads and streets into a bicycle and pedestrian master plan the overall transportation system. functional, hierarchical system based to increase safety and mobility of Each plan is updated periodically on the number of lanes, the amount of residents who bike and walk within to reflect evolving transportation traffic and highway function in terms the community. The City of Fishers needs, public input and national best of moving traffic or providing access. Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan practices. The City of Fishers Thoroughfare Plan connects key destinations with is presented in this comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, Transportation Plan. On Sept. plan. The Thoroughfare Plan includes identifies goals and objectives, 12, 2005, Fishers adopted its the classifications of interstate, prioritizes projects via capital Transportation Plan for the purpose primary arterials, secondary arterials, improvement plan and provides of implementing the transportation collectors and local streets. an overall implementation action network and guiding development. matrix. The plan is a section of the Key elements of the plan are Corridor Studies. Appendix C Transportation Plan but also acts as a incorporated into this document. contains Corridor Plans that were stand-alone document. The multi-modal plan will include developed to illustrate what key goals and objectives, design corridors could look like at build out. standards, a thoroughfare plan, These plans include right-of-way public transportation initiatives, widths, cross-section designs and implementation plan and bicycle and streetscape standards. The plans pedestrian infrastructure standards. are a synthesis of the Thoroughfare Plan and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Roadway Design Standards Right-of-Way and Corridor Preservation

To allow the transportation network to be built An integral part of the Transportation Plan is corridor according to the functional classification in an efficient preservation and right-of-way protection. Corridor and economical way, specific design standards are preservation lowers the cost of land acquisition by utilized. The design standards accommodate needed preventing the need to purchase developed land and infrastructure like sanitary sewer, water and other reduces the physical cost of development by preventing utilities that can be built without the need for acquiring structures from being built on land that could be needed for additional land. The standards also anticipate future transportation system improvements. Corridor preservation expansions needed to keep up with future demand. also reduces the social cost of development by reducing The design standards for road and street design are or preventing the need to relocate families or businesses. identified in the construction specifications and the Right-of-way is based on functional classification of the standard construction details documents found on the street. City’s website. 48 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Roundabout Initiative Roadway Maintenance

The City of Fishers has implemented The City of Fishers is responsible for roundabouts for various intersections where maintaining most of the roads and determined appropriate. Additional roundabouts streets within the City’s incorporated are planned in the coming years and other limits, however some roads are intersections are being analyzed for potential maintained by the Indiana Department reconstruction. Roundabouts eliminate the need of Transportation (INDOT), such for signalization while promoting a continual as Interstate 69 and State Road flow of traffic. Due to the relatively recent 37. When new commercial or roundabout initiative within Fishers, the City residential development occurs, it has developed an online brochure to provide is the developer’s responsibility to information and help the public safely maneuver build the streets needed to serve the the roundabout design. development per the City’s design standards.

Public Transportation

Currently, the City of Fishers is not served by public transportation. An Express Bus service between Fishers and downtown Indianapolis provided by the Central Indiana Regional The City of Fishers is currently working Transportation Authority (CIRTA) ceased operation in May 2015. independently and with surrounding A train station is located along Municipal Drive in Fishers’ Nickel communities and community partners Plate District and serves the seasonal Indiana Transportation to ensure residents have diverse Museum Fair Train that departs for a round-trip journey from transportation options. Fishers 2040 Fishers to the depot at the Indiana State Fairgrounds. The City identifies priority projects as we plan is an active member in the Hamilton County Transit Forum for the future infrastructure within our which is developing transit alignments, funding mechanisms community. and conducting outreach efforts to prepare for future transit discussions and elections. Transit facilities, including bus routes and rapid transit lines, are also identified within Fishers in the Indianapolis MPO Indy Connect Transit Plan. The City will remain an active participant in all public transit discussions.

Freight Movement Airports

Central Indiana is one of the premier freight and logistics The Indianapolis Metropolitan Airport is located within regions in the United States. The Indianapolis MPO Fishers, north of 96th Street between Allisonville Road region includes 231 miles of primary truck freight routes, and Interstate 69. The facility is considered a relief airport 240 miles of rail corridor and the sixth largest air freight for the Indianapolis International Airport. Operated by hub in the United States. Though Fishers is not a freight the Indianapolis Airport Authority, the airport has one center, the City must remain aware of the importance of runway approximately 3,800 feet long and 120 hangers freight movement due to its location on I-69 and State for 234,000 square feet of storage. The Indianapolis Road 37. International Airport is located approximately 35 miles southwest of Fishers along Interstate 70. Transportation 49

PLAN SUMMARY

Fishers’ transportation network was evaluated through the efforts of multiple task force groups, City staff and community outreach.

Purpose

The Thoroughfare Plan establishes design and engineering standards to create a safe, balanced and efficient travel system for the City of Fishers. This network balances the needs of all users of all abilities. The plan achieves this by establishing a series of goals to guide the plan. The final result of the plan is the thoroughfare plan map, which is supplemented by the bicycle and pedestrian master plan map.

Goals 1. ACCOUNTABLE - Monitor and evaluate 6. ECONOMICALLY VIABLE - Support the implementation of this plan by economic vitality though strategic providing regular progress reports transportation investments. to the City’s elected officials and by 7. FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE - Promote implementing an updated thoroughfare fiscally sound transportation investments plan every five years. and maximize financial resources. 2. CONNECTED - Improve connectivity 8. WELL-MAINTAINED - Maintain the quality between key destinations, such as parks, of the transportation infrastructure to neighborhoods, retail areas, civic centers, ensure safe operation and the long-term employment centers and neighboring viability of these assets. communities. 9. SUSTAINABLE - Promote the use of 3. SAFE - Achieve a safe, efficient and non-vehicular travel methods and new convenient transportation network in mobility technology. Fishers. 10. EFFICIENT - Continue to mitigate 4. ACCESSIBLE - Ensure the needs of all congestion throughout the City. users, including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and those with limited mobility are considered when improvements and additions are made to the transportation network. 5. INTEGRATED - Achieve a better relationship between land uses to reduce automobile dependency though coordination with planning and development activities. 50 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS

The transportation section organizes policies into a hierarchy of goals, objectives and action items, which all work together to support the vision. The plan will provide comprehensive, strategic priorities for Fishers’ transportation network, which include short-, mid- and long-term priorities and funding strategies.

FIVE-YEAR UPDATE All actions  Underway (started, but not yet complete)  Complete were assessed and updated in  Future (not started)  New (Actions added during the 2021 update) 2021. The status of each action   is noted with an icon. Future, then maintenance Maintenance (currently occurring on a repeating basis)

Goal 1: Accountable Monitor and evaluate the implementation of this plan by providing regular progress reports to the City’s elected officials and implement an updated thoroughfare plan every five years.

Objective 1.1 Monitor progress of the plan. Status (as of June 2021)

1.1.1. Provide periodic project status updates for the capital improvement  plan to the City Council Finance Committee and update the Thoroughfare Plan at least every five years.

1.1.2. Identify progress of the plan in the yearly statistical analysis of  development.

1.1.3. Create clear time frames for completion of all actions. 

1.1.4. Provide specific, measurable benchmarks for accomplishing tasks and  actions stated in this plan.

Objective 1.2 Regularly update the plan.

1.2.1. Community development and engineering departments to review and  document completed projects and review upcoming projects (for tracking of progress).

Objective 1.3 Update the public on current roadway projects.

1.3.1. Publicize the availability of Drive Fishers alerts. 

1.3.2. Discuss infrastructure projects in a monthly magazine.  Transportation 51

Goal 2: Connected Improve connectivity between key destinations, such as parks, neighborhoods, retail areas, civic centers, employment centers and neighboring communities.

Objective 2.1 Increase connectivity in residential neighborhoods and commercial developments through the use of a more grid-like street network. Status (as of June 2021)

2.1.1. Amend the UDO to limit the amount of cul-de-sacs in new  development and require road connections to surrounding parcels and neighborhoods wherever possible.

2.1.2. Amend the UDO to reduce allowable length of cul-de-sacs. 

2.1.3. Amend the UDO to require commercial developments to provide  connections to adjacent properties. This will result in better parcel cross- connectivity to reduce the number of trips on major arterial roads.

Objective 2.2 Increase pedestrian connections between neighborhoods and from neighborhoods to adjacent land uses.

2.2.1. Utilize greenways along creeks and other waterways to provide  pedestrian and bicycle connections.

2.2.2. Explore topic of Safe Routes with schools and viability of working  toward grant funding for infrastructure and non-infrastructure improvements to increase walkability within neighborhoods surrounding schools.

2.2.3. Amend UDO to require pedestrian connections between subdivisions  during planning process and to adjacent uses wherever appropriate.

2.2.4. Construct bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that connects to  surrounding communities and civic centers.

2.2.5. Design trails and sidewalks to allow space for pedestrians and cyclists  to pass one another.

2.2.6. Study the I-69 and E 116th Street INDOT interchange to see how robust  pedestrian amenities can be added or modified, connecting the Nickel Plate District on the west to Fishers District on the east.

2.2.7. Study and prioritize pedestrian connectivity on the east side of I-69  from 96th Street to E 121st and from I-69 to Cumberland.

Objective 2.3 Promote safety and awareness when creating connections.

2.3.1. Require roadway designs that reduce the speed of through traffic. 

2.3.2. Require new stub streets to have signage to notify adjacent  homeowners a future roadway will connect. 52 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 2.4 (new) Promote connections across the White River

2.4.1. Study an additional vehicular connection across the White River at key  locations with adjoining municipal and county stakeholders.

2.4.2. Study pedestrian connectivity across the White River at key locations  with adjoining municipal and county stakeholders.

Goal 3: Safe Achieve a safe, efficient and convenient transportation network.

Objective 3.1 Provide safe crossings for all pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles. Status (as of June 2021)

3.1.1. Replace stop sign controlled railroad crossings with gates and lights. 

3.1.2. Expand and implement the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)  Transition Plan.

3.1.3. Continue to study areas where the City’s roadway network could be  improved.

3.1.4. Address bike and pedestrian facilities when reviewing roadway  designs.

3.1.5. Secure funding for maintenance of existing bicycle and pedestrian  facilities and bring existing facilities up to the latest design standards where necessary.

3.1.6. Annually review police department crash data to determine areas  which may need additional safety improvements.

3.1.7. Regularly repaint pedestrian crossing markings. 

3.1.8. Investigate using raised crossings, pedestrian curb extensions and  other traffic calming and pedestrian safety devices where high pedestrian travel is expected.

3.1.9. Ensure that all intersections are properly lit. 

3.1.10. Study the I-69 corridor specifically from Exit 205 (E 116th Street) to  Exit 210 (Southeastern Parkway) as it relates to pedestrian connectivity over I-69.

Objective 3.2 Provide safe road network for automobile users.

3.2.1. When expansion projects are completed, widen lanes to modern  widths to improve safety.

3.2.2. Widen roadways with substandard lane widths. 

3.2.3. Inventory locations where sight distances may be impaired. 

3.2.4. Study the I-69 corridor specifically from Exit 205 (E 116th Street) to Exit  210 (Southeastern Parkway) as it related to vehicular connectivity both existing and proposed interchanges. Transportation 53

Objective 3.3 Educate citizens about proper use of sidewalks, shared-use paths and bike lanes.

3.3.1. Create materials and signage to alert drivers that they must share the  roadway with bicyclists.

3.3.2. Create materials to educate motorists on new intersection and  roadway designs, as needed.

3.3.3. Raise awareness to the bicycling community of the bicyclists’  responsibilities as a roadway user.

3.3.4. Create materials to alert residents how it is appropriate and lawful to  use shared-use paths, bike lanes and sidewalks.

3.3.5. Create route maps to show the overall transportation network for  bicycles, pedestrians and automobiles.

3.3.5A. Annually update the bicycle and pedestrian map and promote the   interactive map.

Objective 3.4 Improve safety through better education of all intersection types, including median U-turn, roundabout and conventional. Determined as not needed.

3.4.1. Post videos and brochures on the City website to show how to properly use all intersection types.

3.4.2. Develop charts to demonstrate the capacity and safety advantages of different intersection types to post to the City website.

3.4.3. Place links on the City website for the Indiana Driver’s Manual and all informational brochures produced by the City.

Goal 4: Accessible Ensure the needs of all users, including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and those with limited mobility are considered when improvements and additions are made to the transportation network.

Objective 4.1 Ensure continued compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accessibility standards. Status (as of June 2021)

4.1.1. Expand ADA Transition Plan. Duplicate of 3.1.2.

4.1.2. Assign a single point of contact for ADA and Title VI challenges in  Fishers.

Previously mentioned actions > 3.2.1 Expand and implement the ADA Transition Plan 54 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 4.2 Ensure all new development is being constructed to the latest design standards.

4.2.1. Continue to review all developments and infrastructure projects at the  Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to ensure compliance with accessibility standards.

4.2.2. Study the feasibility of requiring universal transportation design  standards or other emerging design standards within the City.

4.2.3. Train City employees on the use of modern design standards. 

4.2.4. Consider future transit facilities when upgrading infrastructure. 

Objective 4.3 Ensure development accommodates users of all ages and abilities.

4.2.1. Provide traffic calming where pedestrian travel is encouraged. 

4.2.2. Clearly mark crosswalk locations. 

Goal 5: Integrated Achieve a better relationship between land uses to reduce automobile dependency through coordination with planning and development activities.

Objective 5.1 Produce updated future land use map that provides mixed-use areas and nodes of walkability throughout the City. Status (as of June 2021)

5.1.1. Complete comprehensive plan. 

5.1.2. Update the UDO to encourage mixed-use designs and require  connected bicycle, pedestrian and automotive networks. These standards must also support future public transit systems.

Objective 5.2 Ensure all roadway projects provide connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as for vehicles.

5.2.1. Integrate planned paths, sidewalks and greenways into road projects. 

5.2.2. Promote roadway connectivity to reduce trips on arterial roadways. 

5.2.3. Continue to review all development and infrastructure projects at TAC  to allow all resource agencies and City departments an opportunity for input.

5.2.4. Provide parking areas for people to use trails. 

5.2.5. Provide parking identification signage for public parking in urban areas.  Transportation 55

Objective 5.3 Provide development nodes that create a well-connected pedestrian, bike and road network with mixed-use development.

5.3.1. Focus on creating key development nodes that provide a high standard  of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, such as in the Nickel Plate District, 106th Street corridor and Saxony District.

5.3.2. Require new development to provide bike and pedestrian facilities  during the TAC review.

Objective 5.4 Develop detailed visions for key nodes throughout the city that are prime development or redevelopment opportunities.

5.4.1. Prepare small area plans for the airport property, 116th Street at  Allisonville Road, State Road 37 Corridor and Fall Creek Road at Brooks School Road.

5.4.2. Update the master plan for the Nickel Plate District focusing on South  Street.

5.4.3. Study road connectivity and land use to create a safe, well-connected  road network for the eastern portion of Fishers.

Goal 6: Economically Viable Support economic vitality through strategic transportation investments.

Objective 6.1 Reinvest in infrastructure where economic development is sought. Status (as of June 2021)

6.1.1. Determine development nodes where reinvestment is needed and can  aid economic development initiatives.

6.1.2. Invest in pilot projects to create momentum for private investment, redevelopment and public-private partnerships. 

Objective 6.2 Reduce the City’s cost for transportation infrastructure improvements.

6.2.1. Pursue grants to leverage local dollars for larger improvement. 

6.2.2. Update design standards to require roadway and trail infrastructure  that is thicker and lasts longer.

6.2.3. Ensure that infrastructure is installed properly.  56 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Goal 7: Financially Responsible Promote fiscally sound transportation investments and maximize financial resources.

Objective 7.1 Prioritize installation of new road, bicycle and pedestrian facilities based on need for return on investment. Status (as of June 2021)

7.1.1. Prioritize filling gaps in the network before upgrading an existing  sidewalk or path, when possible.

7.1.1A. Complete trail gap analyst.  

7.1.1B. Prioritize trail gaps. 

7.1.1C. Identify funding opportunities to start closing trail gaps. 

7.1.2. Ensure that funding is secured for long-term maintenance of roads,  paths and sidewalks.

Objective 7.2 Coordinate shared-use path and sidewalk improvements with planned roadway improvements to reduce expenses.

7.2.1. During review of all projects at the TAC, ensure the project aligns with  the comprehensive plan and Thoroughfare Plan, including the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Goal 8: Well-Maintained Maintain the quality of the transportation infrastructure to ensure safe operation and the long-term viability of these assets.

Objective 8.1 Ensure the transportation network is well-maintained. Status (as of June 2021)

8.1.1. Continually update the list of capital improvements projects. 

8.1.2. Include path and sidewalk maintenance in the capital improvements  projects list.

8.1.3. Develop strategies and secure funding for transportation maintenance. 

8.1.4. Evaluate the City’s design standards to ensure infrastructure built by  new development will have a long life span.

Objective 8.2 Develop a plan for widening/improving transportation infrastructure in the eastern part of the community.

8.2.1. Ensure developments are dedicating adequate right-of-way through  TAC based on the Thoroughfare Plan.

8.2.2. Require larger development projects to help improve the roadways at  the time of construction. Transportation 57

Objective 8.3 Ensure snow removal is done in a manner that allows all users safe use of the comprehensive transportation network.

8.3.1. Update the UDO to discourage the future use of cul-de-sacs in  residential development to improve connectivity and reduce city expense when plowing roads.

8.3.2. Recognize which spaces will be lost in a parking lot due to piling snow in  the winter through the TAC process.

8.3.3. Design infrastructure to limit damage to snow plows when providing  pedestrian crossings and curbs.

Goal 9: Sustainable Promote the use of non-vehicular travel methods and new mobility technology.

Objective 9.1 Create a connected bicycle lane network. Status (as of June 2021)

9.1.1. Locate key street corridors to provide bike connectivity with particular  attention to creating continuous north-south and east-west routes with on- street and off-street options.

9.1.2. Identify roads that are to be improved/resurfaced for cost-effective  opportunities to add bicycle lanes where appropriate.

Objective 9.2 Provide bicycle facilities at destinations.

9.2.1. Continue to provide bicycle parking at City events, such as the concert  series and movie nights.

9.2.2. Update bicycle parking requirements in the UDO to encourage active  transportation options and better address anticipated demand.

Objective 9.3 Connect existing shared-use paths, greenways and sidewalks to expand usability of network.

9.3.1. Annually update the existing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure map  to accurately track remaining gaps in the existing path and sidewalk network Combined with 3.3.5A. and benchmark progress toward meeting plan goals.

9.3.2. Prioritize closing the gaps based on plan goals. Combined with 7.1.1.

9.3.3. Seek additional funding sources to fill in gaps. 

Previously mentioned actions Combined with 7.1.1C. > 7.1.1 Prioritize closing the gaps in the sidewalk network

Objective 9.4 Create uniform standards to include bike and pedestrian facilities on each roadway.

9.4.1. Update the Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan every  five years at a minimum to reflect the current design standards and the needs of the community. 58 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Objective 9.5 Promote the use of low-impact design standards and new technologies to be at the forefront of the construction industry.

9.5.1. Adopt low-impact (LID) development standards in the UDO. 

9.5.2. Amend the UDO to promote the use of low-impact standards. Combined with 9.5.1

9.5.3. Provide a cost-benefit analysis to present information to the Fishers  community and to the development community regarding cost comparisons of traditional design versus low-impact development alternatives.

9.5.4. Be a resource for the local development community to inform on new  standards and receive input.

Objective 9.6 (new) Support new mobility technologies.

9.6.1. Create best practices for EV Charging for multi-family and commercial  developments.

9.6.2. Update UDO to require EV Charging at commercial developments  over a certain threshold and define minimum requirements for a EV charging facility.

9.6.3. Be a resource for existing multi-family and destination commercial  developments (Fishers District, TopGolf, etc.) by facilitating and connecting national EV networkers to existing developments.

Goal 10: Efficient Continue to mitigate congestion throughout the City.

Objective 10.1 Optimize the capacity of existing roadways using the most recent technology. Status (as of June 2021)

10.1.1. Expand on the signal modernization system used on 116th Street and  other major corridors where congestion is a primary concern, if necessary.

Objective 10.2 Pursue further study to determine the need for roadway projects to increase capacity on corridors operating at a low level of service.

10.2.1. Identify regular bottle necks by gathering data at congested areas in  the existing system and prepare plans to mitigate the congestion.

Objective 10.3 Increase the connectivity of the roadway network to provide alternative routes for congested areas.

10.3.1. Require development to incorporate stub streets and pedestrian  connections.

10.3.2. Minimize disruptions to traffic during improvement projects.  Transportation 59

THOROUGHFARE PLAN

The Thoroughfare Plan establishes a hierarchy of the overall transportation network to ensure the efficient transport of people, goods and services to their destinations. The thoroughfare plan map identifies how each transportation corridor fits into the overall transportation network by the use of a functional classification.

The Thoroughfare Plan is the mechanism to prepare for roadway improvements and that establishes a roadway’s function in the pedestrian infrastructure is also installed at overall transportation network according that time. When additional right-of-way is to the type of travel it accommodates. This needed for a roadway improvement project classification establishes the amount of that has not already been set aside, the City right-of-way required along that corridor to must undergo a right-of-way acquisition preserve adequate space for future roadway process with the owner of the land. In these improvements. situations, the City may acquire less right- of-way than shown by the thoroughfare plan During development review for projects in map as to limit expenditures of public dollars. Fishers, necessary right-of-way is set aside

Corridor Plans

In addition to the standards set by the Thoroughfare Plan, individual corridor plans have been produced for more detailed analysis of select roadways. The corridor plans identify the types of bicycle and pedestrian facilities required on each roadway, lane configurations and select design details. Further information on these facilities is presented in the appendix. The Nickel Plate District Code supersedes the provisions of the Thoroughfare Plan and the corridor plans as it has been master planned under a form-based code. Some aspects of the corridor plans may be modified when construction plans are created. The corridor plans present a vision for how these corridors may ultimately develop. 60 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Functional Classifications - Roadway The following list of classifications includes definitions for the range of roadway types included in the Thoroughfare Plan.

Interstate/Expressway. Divided highways Collectors. Primary function is to collect with full control of access and grade- traffic from an area, residential or work-place separated interchanges. Primary function is and move it to an arterial while also providing movement of traffic, usually long trips from substantial service to abutting land uses. Built state to state, but can be used for short- with an urban design with curb and gutter trips within the study area. These roads are to provide better storm water management designed for high-speed operation consisting from impervious surface runoff. of several lanes. > Minimum right-of-way width: 90 feet > Right-of-way width: Varies - Consult with > Pedestrian facilities: 10-foot shared-use INDOT path on one side; Five-foot sidewalk on > Pedestrian facilities: No facilities are the other side required parallel to the INDOT right-of- way, but all crossing roadways are required Local Streets. Primary function is to provide to have pedestrian facilities. direct access to residential and commercial land uses and feed collectors. Any street not Primary Arterials . Similar in function shown highlighted on the thoroughfare plan to an interstate, but not grade separated, map is designated as a Local or private street. consisting of four or more travel lanes and > Minimum right-of-way width: 50 feet * usually divided. They have controlled access with major intersections typically one mile > Pedestrian facilities: Five-foot sidewalk on apart. Provides access to interstates or other both sides primary arterials. Designed to carry large > Eight-foot tree plot from curb to sidewalk traffic volumes either through communities or from area to area. > Minimum right-of-way width: 120 feet > Pedestrian facilities: 10-foot shared-use path on both sides

Secondary Arterials. These routes are typically main thoroughfares carrying higher percentages of short trips and local traffic than primary arterials. They carry significant volumes and usually provide access to major commercial districts. > Minimum right-of-way width: 100 feet > Pedestrian facilities: 10-foot shared-use path on both sides

See Appendix C for detailed corridor plans. If an existing facility is being upgraded (e.g. an existing sidewalk to a shared-use path) or maintained (e.g. an existing eight-foot shared-use path is being repaved) and current conditions restrict the width of a shared-use path, an alternate design may be approved by the board of public works.

* Updated August 2019 - Ordinance #081919F Transportation 61 THOROUGHFARE MAP 146TH ST 146TH ST

%, D

" D R

" D

R E R

S O I

N I

T L ¯37 A

C N E

A O M P

P H

U L B S T D T

P N

141ST ST K A R 141ST ST ! ! Y Ò Y R %, ! Ì ÌÒ C E D ÌÒ Û

E Û ! R L D Û

E Ò A Ì! L

T R KS ÛÒ

N Ì I T D E O Û %, V C LR %, O O §¨¦69 N R O

O B H T 138TH ST S S I C H " ! 136TH ST S T ! ÌÒ L 6 Ò" Û 1 3 Ì ! L ! 135T ! 136TH ST ! ! Û! ! ! ÌÒ ÌÒ H D ! Ò A Ì Ò ÌÒ ÌÒ Û

ÌÒ ! ÌÒ Ì D Û

Ò N Û Ì R Û Û N ÌÒ Û

E Û Û Û

R E

Û E " D ! P A " D

E D

W S

Ò A D

Ì L I

N I

D R Û O

O D N I

ST R D Y

R R

R M I

N D

L L R

K R T

E R O

M A

S B R

W T I R ST ST R

K 1

I A 1 3

T M T P

D D P

R !

M U h e R E ÌÒ

R D v A Û i A i C

t R B P R e r 131ST ST

B ! ! "" Ò! %, ÌÒ! ÌÒ! ÌÒ ÌÒ N ! Ì E

Û Û Û Û Û O ÌÒ S

T Û

C D

P 126TH ST S

R !

! !

126TH ST Ò ÌÒ

126TH ST Ò Ì Ì Û " ! %, ! Û Û 126TH ST

! S " ÌÒ ÌÒ

ÌÒ

R K D Û Û

Û !

O R C

ÌÒ I

O Û N

R R

B E

A T L

N ! T

S A A ÌÒ O

L Û

U D

Y D TH

R R

K E P 121ST ST A A S C E R P T

O D K E

E I M V Y R I I

R N M

F S

E O R

T O L

C I F

O IA X D L E H 116TH ST 116TH ST R 116TH ST

" %, E

" D

I R ! Ò! 11 ÌÛÒ ÌÛ

D 3 TH ST ÌÒ! R

Û O

I A

D S L

U Y O

D K 1 1 1 TH r

E i D R P o R

U D

R ST v Ò! G Ì

A R r E D

Û R

A e L

! T N I

L H ÌÒ

R S s

G R

Û I E E T E

E D e O N V

R L A G A

L R F N T 106TH S R U 106TH ST T O t C %, ! 106TH ST H I ! ! Ò! ÌÒ ! ! ! ! W T s CT ÌÒ ÌÛÒ ÌÛ Û ÌÒ ÌÒ ÌÒ ÌÒ H A i E Û Û Û Û Û N N Ò! e 104TH ST CO Ì R Û ! ! ! T ÌÒ ÌÒ ÌÒ N D G Û Û Û I ! A D Ò D O Ì

I D

Û R P D I A

S V R 101ST ST F

R C D S L ! W !

P N Ò D P R

E Ì E B Ò

I O Ì

Û N O

V Û

O R N K A

D !

D W A F

K I

R Ò C

Ì N

O R A R L L

N Û L G

A L L

T D R

E R

C E W

M Y N R

B E L R O

A H E H

L T B E

R E S T

O E K D O

T N V M N L G R E B T R

M U

D Y

D R NE N C S 6TH ST C A 9

L ! ! ! 96TH ST ! 96TH ST ÌÒÛ ÌÒÛ ÌÛÒ %, ÌÛÒ ÌÒÛ! ÌÒÛ! ÌÒÛ! ÌÛÒ! Legend "" Intersection Improvement %, Interchange Local Roads

"" Intersection Improvement - Future %, Interchange - Future Proposed Connections Arterial - Primary Interstate "" Intersection Improvement - County Arterial - Secondary ÌÛÒ! Roundabout Expressway Arterial - Noblesville/County Primary Fishers Incorporated Jurisdiction ÌÛÒ! Roundabout - Future Collector Noblesville/County ÌÛÒ! Roundabout - Noblesville/County 62 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Transportation 63

BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

The bicycle and pedestrian network will play an important role in Fishers’ future. These systems have the potential to offer viable alternative transportation options, as well as recreational opportunities within the community. As these networks mature, their roles are expected to evolve to make an even more meaningful contribution to the overall transportation system. The full plan is in Appendix C.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan The 142 mile network of shared-use developed a thorough network of paths, paths and side paths was developed to be sidewalks and bike lanes that connect along used primarily by recreational cyclists and all of the major thoroughfares in Fishers. pedestrians. These paths are generally well All major roadways, as shown on the map, used by a broad range of users including are to be multi-modal corridors that provide walkers, runners, skateboarders, roller facilities for vehicles and pedestrians alike. bladers and recreational cyclists. Commuter Connections along 106th Street, 126th cyclists and distance cyclists typically travel Street, Cumberland Road and Olio Road on the road and use dedicated bike lanes are considered primary thoroughfares for when they are available. Given the speed pedestrians, which is detailed in the parks of their travel, it is hazardous for these section of this plan. cyclists to share space with pedestrians and recreational cyclists on side paths or The existing bicycle and pedestrian network shared-use paths. In fact, it is preferable includes sidewalks, side paths, shared-use for commuter cyclists and distance (high- paths, greenways and natural trails. There speed) cyclists to be on the road. State law are currently 142 miles of paths and trails in considers a bicycle a vehicle that must adhere Fishers. The UDO requires the installation of to the same traffic laws as other motorized pedestrian paths when developments occur. vehicles. Particularly in more densely The specific type of path varies depending developed areas with higher amounts of on the context of the development. These traffic and intersections, it is safer for a cyclist upgraded standards have been in place to be on the road as opposed to a path. The since 2006. Prior to the 1990s, an ordinance infrastructure targeted to meet the needs of requirement did not exist for the installation these riders is currently limited. Presently, of paths with new development. This has there is just one road with a dedicated bike created some gaps that exist in the present lane, which makes up 4.7 miles along a system. portion of Olio Road. 64 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Key Findings Functional Classifications – Pedestrian > Fishers has 142 miles of pedestrian The following list of classifications includes paths and trails, compared to approximately 469 centerline definitions for the range of path types included in the miles of public roadways. Thoroughfare Plan. > The material, types and widths Shared Lane. A lane of a traveled way that is open to both within the pedestrian system vary. bicycle and motor vehicle travel. These types of facilities Pathways that narrow from eight- should be used by road and commuter bicyclists only; no foot paths to five-foot paths can pedestrians should travel in these lanes. It should be noted pose a challenge for pedestrians that under Indiana state law, all roadways except limited and cyclists sharing the path. access highways are permitted for shared use of bicycles > Narrower paths create conditions and motorized vehicles. The shared lane category in this where it is difficult for users to plan indicates that extra lane markings, such as sharrows, pass one another. are proposed to indicate to motorists that cyclists are > Obstructions within paths, such present and can merge with vehicular traffic. as signage, utilities, mailboxes, Sidewalk. The portion of a street or highway right-of- fire hydrants, benches and street way, beyond the curb or edge of roadway pavement, lights, can make it difficult for which is intended for use by pedestrians. Sidewalks are cyclists and pedestrians or persons to be use by pedestrians and small children on bicycles. with disabilities to use the shared Sidewalks may be separated from curb by planting strip. paths. Sidewalks are concrete and typically range from four to six > Road bike riders and commuter feet in width. cyclists prefer to travel in dedicated Greenway. A linear portion of land that is wooded or bike lanes when available, or on open space typically found along waterways, utility lines, the roadways. non-vehicular public right-of-ways and natural corridors. > Some roadways are very narrow, Sidewalks, side paths, shared-use paths and natural creating an uncomfortable shared trails can all be located within a greenway. Users of all travel environment both for drivers categories may make use of this type of path system. and cyclists. Shared-Use Path. A path or walkway physically > East-west connectivity is separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open space hampered by man-made and or barrier and either within the highway right-of-way or natural barriers. The White River, within an independent right-of-way. Shared-use paths Interstate 69 and State Road 37 may also be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair present significant constraints to users, joggers and other non-motorized users. Most pedestrians and cyclists. shared-use paths are designed for two-way travel. These > Signage and wayfinding for types of facilities are to be used by recreational bicyclists pedestrians and cyclists make the and pedestrians. While not recommended, road and networks more user-friendly and commuter bicyclists may use these facilities if no other alert motorists to the presence of option is available. These paths are typically asphalt and both pedestrians and cyclists. eight to 12 feet in width. > Pedestrians and cyclists feel Bike Lane. A portion of a roadway that has been more comfortable using the designated for preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists facilities when buffers of at least by pavement markings and, if used, signs. It is intended five feet separate them from the for one-way travel, usually in the same direction as the thoroughfare. Higher road speeds adjacent traffic lane, unless designed as a contra-flow should lead to wider buffers. lane. These types of facilities are to be used by road and commuter bicyclists and some recreational riders depending on their ability. No pedestrians and no cars should travel in these lanes. Transportation 65 BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN: OVERALL NETWORK # # # # # J J J J J J # # J #

J #

¾ ½ ¾ J ¦¨§69 # J ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ½ ¾

37 ¾ ½ (! ¾

¾½ J #

¾ ¾½

¾ ½

¾ #

¾ ½

¾ ¾ ½

¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ J ¾ ½

¾½

¾ ½ ¾½ ¾ ¾ ¾ ½

¾ ½ ¾

# ¾½ ¾½ ¾½ ¾½

¾½

¾½¾

¾½

¾ ½

69 ¾½ ¦¨§ ¾ J ¾½ ¾½ ¾½ ¾½ ¾½ ¾½ # # J

¾½

¾ ¾½

¾ ½ ¾½ ¾

¾ ¾ ½

¾ ½

¾½ ¾

¾½

J ¾

J ¾½

# # # # # #

Legend N 0 .5 1 mile Shared-Use Path Greenway Regional Connection Sharrow Bridge Sidewalk Bike Lane PRIMARY BIKE/PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARES (Major East/West and North/South Connections)

TO NOBLESVILLE

EAST 146TH STREET PRIMARY BIKE/PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARES EAST 141ST STREET (Major East/West and North/South Connections)

ER P . N RA D

N 3 7 IR R O I TO NOBLESVILLE E D

C D A NEW EAST 136TH STREET

O XON AN A Y EAST 146TH STREET R S

R T E .

D T A

M R S G S HI H U R E E SC L H C EAST 131ST STREET S H IL I EAST 141ST STREET F O V AY . IC PA O PRIMARYN BIKE/PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARESER R D O L K L . L S I R ER P I B L N RA D 66 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan L ANNE 3 7 (Major East/West and North/South Connections) E P N .

I R L R O H A O I T D R E A D N

C D K

R A EAST 136TH STREET EAST 126TH STREET Y

C O XON N AN A Y TO NOBLESVILLE . R

S R

L S C H O

E S D R 9 OU TE 6 S

T E A T R Primary Bike and Pedestrian Thoroughfares ERS D INT K

. NT T

BE R H

EAST 146TH STREET T A

O O EA

D A

R M S

L R HIG L ST

S H O

U R

I E E SC TRAIL NICKEL PLATE E O R L H S C N

EAST 131ST STREET S H B R IL I TO PENDLETON AT O P The primaryF north/southO and east/west bike and pedestrian routes through Fishers are presented PL E D MUD CREEK GREENWAY K V AY . L IS CHO W C O S O I PA E T O

N R D S

E R K R K L Y

H L

L L I P O L K C C R O A S in the followingI map. Though all roadways are to have these facilities, these roadways are the I EAST 141ST STREET

I L T B NN O R L EA E P N TON PRO K L . WHITE RIVER GREENWAY L R O TH A I P R B A D EAST 116TH STREET M E

N . ATKUR R R EAST 126primaryTH STREET thoroughfares to create a connected, non-vehicle transportation network.Y TheseN Epath R A E P I P E M R D G E N A H C N R A A N 3 7 N T I R A

N E I . R EK T A R D O E U . I S E D N R R E O T R H E D OR A D S C H O I C TH E .

E S D and greenway connections should be prioritized. H A 11 C R E 9 OU W R 3T EAST 136TL H STREET S H TE 6 P STR A

T R L D S V ER A

K T O L IN A S

NT T ON

D X

R H E A Y R N R K A S E A

O O EA E

A W T

I R U F E R T PA

R R

L S L R ST C I K A O

E AN E A T E

NICKEL PLATE TRAIL NICKEL PLATE E The routes shows are schematic. The board of public works or its authorized designee may Y L G O R .

S N E L BE

R B R R T A I A D TO PENDLETON N AT O P E M PL D MUD CREEK GREENWAY K R S HOIG I E R S V H L S HO W BE

C O U R S E O E E T E S

R approve alterations to the routes,S asL needed. TO CARMEL YAND E E S C

K A H K H L

M C I H P EAST 131ST STREET S E H

C C O A IL I R I C E U THE MONON TRAIL AG PA F T O T R T V . N N PR O I R ASY O TO O R K RD. C IC I P WHITE RIVER GREENWAY R K A

IL P E E EAST 106TH STREET N ER E R D B RLAN L EAST 116TH STREET M E H L Y WO BE O D LL K E O G R ATURE A R IL H M S P I N D I L I P GE M C A B NN R A E H V T S, U L EA E P N T A NA I L .

R O E I D . EK T N C H A A R E U R D T S N K R E O T R R O A D D O N H R I E RTH E A S K

H 11 C I R EAST 126TH STREET Y R E

W R 3 TH L P STR L

L E BEE CAMP CREEK TRAIL V V ORK C A L . F C

L N A

S T

D R E E A N R . K D

R A

EE A A E W W T L

S C H O E

GU E R U F E .

E PA R S

ST R 9 D F K

R OU A C I K A TE 6LIS SA S AN E A A A T R REE ERS O IL D KT K P

L Y G N C IN P I L NT R . N T H D R H E L A A

R R R L G

I O O EA A A A N

N I E R O F R

L TO FORTVILLE L

R R A E A IL ST C R K V O

BE I TA E I

E E E A

NICKEL PLATE TRAIL NICKEL PLATE E

E E E

S NT O

D GREENWAY DUKE TRAIL R

TO CARMEL AND S

A R H

H M E U N

B R

R A I C C TO PENDLETON U B GE P LATE O MUD CREEK GREENWAY P THE MONON TRAIL A A T L P D K IT R S EAST 96TH STREET L IS CHO W

RD. C S O R K I E T O S E E EAST 106TH STREET E K R K L Y RLA H P H L WO E N IC EY O B D G C O A IL H M P I D T R C A TO CASTLETON N N P O V T S, U TO RO I WHITE RIVER GREENWAY R K N C R IL P R D O K EAST 116TH STREET M E B S R TUR R I A E TO MUD CREEK A L I N P E M

E G BEE CAMP CREEK TRAIL ORK R A E H TO McCORDSVILLE L . F C N T ATO INDY GREENWAY, NA T R E GREENWAY/CONSERVATION I D . EK TU A A S R E D A E E O N T R R L E H E FALL CREEK TRAIL ANDD OR A GU I TH E R F CORRIDOR H 11 C R E

K W R 3 T L LIS S P H STR A A L

EE O I V R L FORT HARRISON A K P N P L A

C R . IN S

D H D A E L A A K N R R L

G EE A A

A N W T

E R R R U F E F PA

TO FORTVILLE R ST R

A IL A C I K A K C R K I TA EA A AN E

E Y L G

L NT

D GREENWAY DUKE TRAIL R E L

U U

R IR

A N N

I N B B O

EAST 96TH STREET E R V

BE E E

TO CARMEL AND E S

A H M E

Current Parks R Miles C U THE MONON TRAIL AGE PA T TO CASTLETON IT R S R K RD. C I E E EAST 106TH STREET 0 0.5 1 2 E 3 4 H L WO ERLAN 2015 Existing L EY O B D G TO MUD CREEK I H D M P C A V , U TO INDY GREENWAY, TO McCORDSVILLE IT S GREENWAY/CONSERVATION N C R 2040 Proposed R D O K FALL CREEK TRAIL AND S R CORRIDOR I L E BEE CAMP CREEK TRAIL ORK FORT HARRISON L . F C A T R

D A E L E

GU R F K LIS SA A REE O IL K P N C R . P IN H D

L A A

R L

A N G E F R

A IL A TO FORTVILLE I C A R K ET EA

L NT 146TH D GREENWAY DUKE TRAIL R

146TH U

Current Parks ST

Miles I I 146TH B 38474 EAST 96TH STREET L E 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 L

L C

I " O

L O

2015 Existing BAPT

T I

6228 O

VI TO CASTLETON L

4006 H

N O 14912 " AN

2040 Proposed " L

C S

T "SO AI

I TO MUD CREEK S

7771 D 141ST

S 3885 41ST L 1

7 TO McCORDSVILLE

K TO INDY GREENWAY,

3 " GREENWAY/CONSERVATION

N A "

AL O

E L

R 60240 FALL CREEK TRAIL AND

O N

Y CORRIDOR

S R

W I 69 S L 38 I 2 " FORT HARRISON

O 2322 R

B R E B S 791

H 6838 R A " M " " "

M " 1617 1713 U "10580 2371 1868 2340 857 7854 4931 1613 3938 242 136TH C 2117 136TH 19500 " " "

Traffic Counts 41861 " 8393 " " " T

" " " " S 4893 I

15162 " 4822 E

S 7

" I "

N N 3

Current Parks 93

M 17602 Miles

T P A B

O R

2303 O

T " S "

" 12116 E

N A Traffic counts are conducted throughout the community to determine which roadways are the E

1984 G " 980 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 R P H

R 146T H 7205 N 295 146TH 11165 99820150 Existing I ST

7212 T I

5662 7746 5629 7605 131ST C I

" 146TH A " I 131ST 60720 N "

most heavily used. This determines which roadways need upgraded and can also help"" identify " " " 38474 T N "" " E Y

688 L R " P

2040 Proposed L C C

43996 I

O N " A

L O

N E P

" 3198 BAPT

I L

8761 11312 6228 O

" VI L T

6220 4006 H

good locations for commercial development. The most recent traffic 17counts869 are presented in the " I A N O " 6404 14912 " " 7530 AN

" " L C " 6072 S 243 111 T " "SO 19983 " 1806 AI

I 7401 S

11830 7771 D 126TH 141ST

S 15206 10281 3885 41ST 5859 6275 5280 " 12311 L 1 following figure. 126TH 7 " " " " K

PR O

" " 3 "

N A

" " " I "" AL O

" " E L

11115 L

R 1372 60240

O N

757 Y

R O W I 69 S 10916 4201 L 38 I 2 "

O " 2322 R

" B R E " B S 791

H " 6838 R 16859 A " 15628 M " " "

M " 1617 1713 U " 2340 857 13140 " 3938 10580 242 2371 1868

7854 A 4931 1613 136TH

47889 4635 " C " R 19975 E 2117 136TH 19500 " " " " 2905 41861 D 223 " " "

121ST I 8393 T " " " " S

11811 4893 I I ² S 15162 " " " " R 4822 9799 E "

" "N 3071

O " E

" S 761 7

" I O

U " L 179 " N N

3 "

F 93

9 M

H 17602

T P A " B

6 O R " 482 2303 I O

T "

S " " " E

7 12116

N A E 3 G "

1984 980

R P

R H R 7205 N 295 21777 16088 11165 9980 I 7212 T

S 5662 7746 5629 7605 131ST C I 27772 " A " 20409 26087 40219 116TH I

31ST 60720 N 25859 114741 "

" T

" " "" " ER " N

25478 " "" " 688 Y R 2876"5" " " " " P

21657 G

4"3996 C N

3417 3883 A

N E P " N " 3198

" L

8761 " 1651 1426 707 11312 T 17869 R " 6220 " 3317 " A 4425 " " 113TH 6404 "" 7530 " " 6072 2160 3777 " 243 111 13110 " " 7401 19983 " 1806 11360 " 15206 10281 11830 126TH 5859 6275 5280 " 12311 126TH "3352 " " ER 28146 " " "

6030 " O

A L " " " " I 10397 2912 " " ""

11115 L " D 1401 " I 1372

EL 757 10916 O " R " 19843 " 4201 " 108330 458 11260 15243 " O

L 1150 " 2911 " 16859 " " 697 " " F 15628 4538 " 13140 " 3456 6503 " " 562 389 A

7732 N 47889 4635 " " R " 19975 E R " 2905 D 223 121ST I

" 3625 11904 9229 7862 10444 10678 O " 11811 I " 12750 ²9832 S 13400 9173 8842 " " H " " R

106TH T 9799 " 3071 " O

" O

" "" " 81"47 10151 " ""12651 " """8756 W " 761 O U L 179 A " 1235 "

H 9 F 2530 H 6 "

ST " 482

I I TH 104 " " " 7 E 1079 3 N 8823 G R

R 21739 PF " 21777 16088 26087 S 27772 H E 8985 20409 40219 116T E 101ST

25859 A

" I 14741

" T

" ER

U 2KO 5478 " " " 2876"5" " " " G 6438 5172 21657 F " G

5396 R 820 AN 13723 AL 3417 3883

N 1290 EN " 231 " I

L 882 1426 707 O "L L H " 1651 " " C R " L " 16355 " E R 12565 " 3317 " 822 11 "" O EEK 3 G 4425 " TH 6773 " 2160 M 13110 " " " 3777 26154 18520 " 11360 " 3258 4359 4813 4278 3462 "3352 ER " " 6030 28146 9565 96TH A 25594 20914 37008 " 54829 30693 19628 L " "" 20255 16364 15546 10397" " " 2912 96TH " D 1401 " " I " EL """ 22970 " " " ""23287 "" " 16506 " " 19843 "R

108330 458 11260 15243 O

L 1150 2911 " " " " F " 4538 " 697 " 3456 6503 " 7732 N 562 389 " " R " 3625 11904 9229 7862 10444 10678 O " Total Traffic Volume in a 24-Hour Period " " 12750 13400 9173 8842 9832 H 106TH T " "" " 81"47 10151 " " " W ""12651 " ""8756 A H 2530 1235

" " ST 2008 2011 Incorporated Town of Fishers I 104TH " "

E 1079

N 8823 G

R 21739 PF "

E 8985

E 101ST A

" " " I

" T

U 2010 2013 KO

" G 6438 5172 F

5396 R 820 AN 13723 AL

AG 1290 EN 231

L 882 O "L L " H " C L " 16355 " R 12565 "E " 822

O EEK 6773 " G M " 26154 18520 " 4359 4813 4278 3462 3258 " 9565 96TH 25594 20914 37008 " 54829 30693 19628 20255 16364 15546 " " "" 96TH " " " """ 22970 " " " ""23287 ""16506 " Total Traffic Volume in a 24-Hour Period " 2008 " 2011 Incorporated Town of Fishers " 2010 " 2013 Transportation 67

Safety RANKING OF TRAFFIC CRASH LOCATIONS

Traffic safety is a key component to any Property Personal successful transportation strategy. Assisted 2012 Number of Damage Injury by the Police Department, an examination Ranking Location Crashes Crashes Crashes of crash history and traffic patterns can 1 Southeastern Parkway & Olio Road 54 51 3 predict key locations where improvements 2 126th Street & Cumberland Road 14 11 3 in traffic safety will be beneficial to both 3 96th Street & Allisonville Road 12 12 0 motorists and the community. According 4 (tie) 106th Street & Allisonville Road 11 7 4 to data published by the USDOT, the cost 4 (tie) 131st Street & Cumberland Road 11 10 1 to the community of an average crash is 5 131st Street & Promise Road 10 8 2 typically $42,000. This cost includes medical 6 (tie) 126th Street & Hoosier Road 9 9 0 care, emergency services, victim work loss, employer cost, traffic delay, property 6 (tie) 126th Street & Lantern Road 8 8 1 damage and overall reduction in quality 7 116th Street & Commercial Drive 8 6 2 of life. This section of the report presents 8 (tie) 96th Street & Lantern Road 7 6 1 the analysis of crashes on segments of 8 (tie) 116th Street & Allisonville Road 7 5 2 roadway and at intersections along major 8 (tie) 141st Street & Mundy Drive 7 6 1 roadways. Crash data for Fishers for the 9 (tie) 116th Street & Olio Road 6 4 2 calendar year ending 2012 was analyzed to 9 (tie) 131st Street & Allisonville Road 6 5 1 determine high-crash locations throughout 9 (tie) 126th Street & Olio Road 6 6 0 the community. Contributing factors to any location’s high crash occurrence can include: 9 (tie) 126th Street & PromiseRoad 6 6 0 driver error, intersection configuration, 10 (tie) Allisonville Road & River Glen Drive 5 5 0 access considerations and overall traffic 10 (tie) 126th Street & Allisonville Road 5 4 1 congestion. Many of the locations experience recurring congestion and a direct relationship exists between traffic congestion and crash frequency, which justifies the ongoing IMPO 2016 SAFETY STUDY: TOP 50 MOST DANGEROUS efforts to provide adequate funding for INTERSECTIONS IN THE INDIANAPOLIS REGION transportation projects that minimize In 2016 the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization traffic congestion. Driveway access within (IMPO) conducted a study of the top fifty (50) high-crash close proximity to intersections also can locations within the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Area contribute to crash frequency by increasing (MPA). For each location, the team reviewed crash data and the unexpected conflict points near the existing conditions, created a collision diagram, conducted intersections. The table above shows the a field check. The team also met with local engineering, 10 highest crash occurrence locations within police representatives, and city staff, and identified specific Fishers. improvements the remedy existing safety issues. These recommendations range from lower cost maintenance items to higher cost capital improvements.

Intersections Identified within the City of Fishers: 1. 96th Street & Hauge Road 10. Allisonville Road and E 96th Street 20. E 116th Street and Olio Road 30. Allisonville Road and E 116th Street 36. Allisonville Road and 146th Street The Study can be found here 50. Olio Road and Southeastern Parkway and the Map can be found here. 68 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

DESIGN STANDARDS

The design standards section organizes policies which are the adopted standards of the City of Fishers. All transportation projects shall be reviewed at the Technical Advisory Committee to ensure compliance with these policies as well as the other design standards of this plan.

Policies

Priorities. Maintenance, capacity intersection form, including forms common For more detailed improvement, new road construction, trail and uncommon to Fishers. The latter types information, see connections and transit are all important are typically referenced as alternative or Appendix A. components of the Fishers’ transportation innovative intersections and, for instance, network. Given the fiscal constraints of include median U-turn, roundabout, implementing all of these elements at the displaced left-turn and other designs. same time, the following priorities have been Curb Placement. It is Fishers’ policy to established: consider the use of both shoulders and curbs adjacent to the traveled way on public > Maintain current roads roadways. > Increase capacity for vehicles Pedestrian Crossings. Pedestrian crossings > Complete pedestrian trails and sidewalk on and adjacent to arterial and collector network streets shall require a distinct, visible design > Implement bike lanes that clearly identifies the areas where > Mass transit pedestrians are intended to cross. An important distinction must be made Bike Parking. Bike parking is required for all between the eastern and western portions of developments in Fishers. These standards are the community with these priorities. While available in the UDO, as amended. this list is correct for the established portion Street Lights. Lighting installed by Fishers of Fishers, the need for maintenance and the is generally limited to intersections and need for increased capacity are reversed in major thoroughfares. The decision to provide the undeveloped, eastern portion of the City. lighting is made on a case-by-case basis. In this area, it is necessary to increase vehicle Lighting provided within neighborhoods is capacity as a top priority. installed and maintained by homeowners ADA compliance is a key component of every associations. priority listed above and, thus, is not identified Alleys. Alleys shall be reviewed on a case- individually. by-case basis by the engineering department. Intersection Type. The intersection type Lanes shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide and decision policy aids in choosing among pedestrians shall have safe means of refuge design alternatives. Specifically, this (e.g. sidewalk or connection to a nearby policy prescribes a model to be used in sidewalk). decision-making relative to choice of basic Transportation 69

Design Standards. To allow the transportation Land Dedication. An integral part of the network to be built according to the functional transportation section is corridor preservation classification in an efficient and economic way, and right-of-way protection. By preserving specific design standards are needed. future corridors and right-of-way, it accomplishes three important aspects of Intersection Study. The road and street planning: lowers the cost of land acquisition network cannot be upgraded without by preventing the need to purchase developed improving intersections. To move existing and land; reduces the physical cost of development future traffic in a safe and efficient manner, by preventing structures from being built on intersections must be upgraded to reduce land that could be needed for transportation conflicts and move converging traffic through system improvements; and reduces the social the intersections. cost of development by reducing or preventing Traffic Access Management.For the the need to relocate families or businesses. transportation network to function at a high Maintenance and Funding. The City of Fishers level of service, it is necessary to control is responsible for maintaining all of the public access along the major thoroughfares. Access roads, streets and paths within the City’s right- management is described as the process of-way, unless otherwise noted in this plan or in of controlling the number of access points other City documents, contracts or agreements. or driveways as land along thoroughfares INDOT is responsible for maintenance on develops. Limiting the spacing and number Interstate 69, the interstate interchanges and of access points reduces conflicts caused by State Road 37. traffic maneuvers such as stopping, turning, ingress and egress. Limiting access points also Level of Service. The level of service is a preserves and helps maintain a tolerable level rating system that ranks the function of a of service and flow of traffic, while providing road on a scale from A to F. Roads rated A appropriate access to the land uses along the experience free-flow of traffic at the peak hour. major arterials. Roads rated F experience complete gridlock at the peak hour. Generally, level C is the ideal Green Infrastructure. The City of Fishers has condition where a roadway is not overbuilt but established storm water design standards congestion is not overwhelming. that allow for green infrastructure and low- impact development to be implemented on ADA Compliance. The City has adopted a all construction projects. To facilitate these transition plan to identify how City-owned designs, the director of engineering may allow facilities will be updated to meet current for deviation from the standards of this plan standards. All development projects in the City and from the standard construction details. of Fishers must meet the most recent ADA Deviations may include, but are not limited to, requirements. alternative curb designs, porous pavements, rain gardens and swales. Connectivity. The City of Fishers seeks to provide connectivity between neighborhoods and developments. This connectivity extends to both commercial and residential construction. All development in the City planning jurisdiction shall be required to provide connectivity for vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists into and through the development. 70 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Design Standards

The Thoroughfare Plan includes many design Pedestrian Network. Similar to the details for the construction of infrastructure. road network, the pedestrian network The full details of these design standards identifies the standards for sidewalks can be found in the appendix. The design based on the classification of the facility. standards presented in the appendix are a These classifications include residential, supplement to the latest design standards urban residential, commercial and urban from the Institute of Transportation Engineers commercial sidewalks. (ITE), the Federal Highway Administration Bicycle Network. The bicycle network (FHWA), INDOT, the City of Fishers and establishes standards for the placement professional engineers. and general construction of paths and trails. Similar to the road and pedestrian networks, THE DESIGN STANDARDS ADDRESS: these are based on the type of facility and Roundabouts. The roundabout standards include: greenway trail, shared-use path, bike address proper approach methods for cars, lane, shared lane and bike boxes. bikes and pedestrians. Creating Place. Infrastructure improvements Road Network. The road standards address can be used to create place and enhance the needs of each classification of roadway: pedestrian safety. The methods identified primary arterial, secondary arterial, collector include: speed tables, raised intersections, and local. This classification denotes how partial road closures, traffic circles, road adjacent properties interact with the roadway narrowing, curb extensions, improved and how the roadway will be designed to fit pavement markings, gridded street network, into the overall transportation system. shared parking, frontage roads, pedestrian crossing signals and medians or center islands. Transportation 71

CORRIDOR PLANS

Corridor plans have been prepared for select roadways throughout the City of Fishers.

The plans are schematic and will be refined during engineering for each project. These plans anticipate long-range transportation challenges, provide for improved livability and economic vitality and plan for balanced travel options between roads, bicycles and pedestrians. Fishers’ staff members understand that in order to maintain mobility and economic vitality concurrently, vehicular demand management strategies must be paired with improvements in safety, capacity and performance of all transportation modes including walking, cycling, carpooling and mass transit. The goal for the Fishers transportation network is to ensure that congestion during peak commute periods does not interfere with Fishers’ economic sustainability and resilience over the coming decades. See appendix C for details on these corridor plans listed and mapped below:

1. Allisonville Road 10. Hoosier Road 19. 104th Street 2. Atlantic Road 11. Lantern Road (two-lane) 20. 106th Street 3. Brooks School Road 12. Lantern Road (four-lane) 21. 106th Street (Interstate 69) 4. Cumberland Road 13. Olio Road 22. 116th Street 5. Cyntheanne Road 14. Southeastern Parkway 23. 126th Street 6. Fall Creek Road 15. State Road 37 24. 136th Street (two-lane) 7. Florida Road 16. USA Parkway 25. 136th Street (four-lane) 8. Georgia Road 17. 96th Street 9. Hague Road 18. 96th Street (Interstate 69)

24 25 15 14

23 5

11 3 13 10 22 7

1 16 4 9

21 20 12 19 8

17 18 72 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

SHARED TRANSPORTATION

Indy Connect

Indy Connect was an initiative to construct rapid transit in 2021 TRANSIT NETWORK central Indiana. From 2010-

96TH

W T P U OW DE AP 2018, transit planning was U R

D NSH U

FFA E I

86TH P 86TH 465 69

LINE

NO R

MERIDIAN

C F O 82ND

coordinated by the Central O LLE

L L A LI T

465 K

Z H S

E R

N V

N C

SVI R

79TH O CLEA

KE 65 U

D L

RT LE N Future Red Line

A T

Indiana Regional Transportation L O

D service to be N

O E

O TLANE 73RD

WES determined.

W H

OOVE 71ST E K 71ST L E H L E I CR C L V L G E A GUION F

T N

R R

AN O SHADELAND Authority (CIRTA), IndyGo, and IN M PR S I I L

C D ORD I L F H N V 64TH A N I G I G IE B A M A W BRO D G R N IPPLE 62ND

E 62ND IL D O L EL R I F G T the Indianapolis Metropolitan E S 59TH T E KESSLER O W R WN

KESSLER R

AL 56TH 56TH

IL H KE

L I PI G

N N H TO Planning Organization (MPO) and O E 52ND L

KESS I

S C END H P

O D KNOLLTON

O R

L M 46TH 46TH 46TH L CENTRAL E E K HAMPTON L A B L ING SUNSET I was referred to as Indy Connect. A G O V S LE U ER S 42ND 42ND JR LEV L IL W T C M O R D E A A E RD E K M 38TH 38TH 38TH

KE 74 L A A MERIDIAN CAPITOL

A RLI Y FA K YS

formal plan was adopted in 2016. H

C E

Y N

E E

ET L

R O 34TH G

I 465 C A R 34TH F C

T N

A T D MOLLER W E 65 T L 33RD

L O F

FO O A R

R F N D N SV A

I N

LLE 30TH 30TH K

30TH S M

TT L I

E I N

T GE S COLLEGE U H T

RGE 2 LYNHURST 5TH ASSAC E D M

G W A R R 70

U E

The 2016 Central Indiana Transit O T HARDING

O R R

L A 70 J L C

W 22N

O L

S S D

B 21ST 21ST R

N EL

C O SHADELAND

COUNTR O AW

H W

H ST

O 18T

N A O

R 16TH

L 16TH E

Plan recommends improving Y

SK IN U 0TH D 10TH 10TH B 1 E IA N N

A R

B I RACEWAY Z

I T CHIGAN TE A MI MICHIGAN WASHINGTON C

R VERMO H H N

M T

existing transit systems and O ORK

W EW Y G

L N

IC T

A K N Y INGTO SHORTRIDGE L ASH

W M EY

ROCKVILLE M AN CHU BE I

S D

O RAWLES EL

U ENGLISH A

IVER R OL E

W V

creating new ones. NT I HOYT

MCCARTY IRG C A

465 R I

NI R E

PE 70 RRIS A PROSPECT SO MO NN

KY E C N W A SANT RU U S A T ST EST Y E N L TON E LVANIA P B NG K MINNESOTA ROO SHI ESOTA PERKINS SO KVILL WA MINN U E MAD T HEA ST RAYMOND RAYMOND E With the implementation of the I R S N

O STATE KEYSTONE

Blue Line branches SAM JONES H SOUTHERN

O L

arrive every 20 T Marion County Transit Plan and the minutes. ALBANY

TROY HA MAIN

SH MERIDI S

R H

R L

Y AN opening of the Red Line in 2019, AN HANNA 10 min frequency ZĂƉŝĚdƌĂŶƐŝƚ͕ŽŶůǇŝŶϮϬϮϭƉůĂŶ Y REDFERN K 74 C U T the MPO assumed more direct N 465 E THOMPSON 15 min frequency GA K TW IC M

E ADIS 70 K A 65 S 30 min frequency

leadership of transit planning in R A M TU EDGEWOOD 60 min frequency E CA MANN RIPLEX DE MILHOUSE

3 Longer than 60 min frequency

7 Central Indiana. 'ŽŶĞŝŶϮϬϮϭƉůĂŶ HPORT CAMBY SOUT U Route operates limited times only S

31 'ŽŶĞŝŶϮϬϮϭƉůĂŶ

M E

Fishers continues to have open MERIDIAN SCHOOL RSO 2 2 Route Frequency Change

N H

E 65 L

B 2 Route Branch Y 2 2 tŚĞŶŽŶĞůŝŶĞĚŝǀŝĚĞƐŝŶƚŽƚǁŽ dialogue with the MPO. COUNTY LINE 2 5 Schedules offset for higher frequency tŚĞƌĞƚǁŽƌŽƵƚĞƐŽǀĞƌůĂƉĨŽƌ ĂĚŝƐƚĂŶĐĞ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐŚŝŐŚĞƌ If residents would like to learn more ĨƌĞƋƵĞŶĐǇĂůŽŶŐƚŚĂƚƐĞŐŵĞŶƚ End of the line about IndyGo’s efforts surrounding 2 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) including the Red Line, Blue Line, and Purple, please visit: indygo.net/bus-rapid- CENTRAL INDIANA TRANSIT PLAN 35 transit/ The Central Indiana Transit Plan, is adopted as a component of the Indy Connect Map (June 2016) Fishers’ Comprehensive Plan by reference. Transportation 73

Hamilton County Transit Forum Hamilton County Transit 2018 - 2027 Vision The Hamilton County Transit Forum Operating Budget: $25.5 - $41.7 Million 46 Vehicles at peak in 2018 Capital Budget: $24.5M Local Vehicles & $279M RAPID 68 Vehicles at peak in 2027 first met in 2014 to bring together Route Name Symbol Operating Operating Peak Route Name Symbol Operating Peak local government officials, business Cost 2018 Cost 2027 Frequency Cost 2027 Frequency leaders and regional planners from 01 96th St $5.3M $6.5M 15 min 08 Fishers Connector $2.3M 15 min 02 116th St $3.0M $3.7M 15 min Red Line RAPID $6.0M 10 min Indy Connect to discuss the local 03 Carmel Main St $3.0M $3.7M 15 min Orange Line RAPID $3.2M 10 min 04 146th St $3.4M $4.2M 30 min Green Line RAPID $3.5M 10 min transit needs of Hamilton County. 05 SR 32 $3.4M $4.3M 15 min This group held regular meetings to 06 Allisonville Rd $2.3M $2.9M 15 min 07 NE Express $4.1M N/A 15 min discuss where the transit stations Janus / HCE Service* $1.0M $1.4M along the bus rapid transit lines *Funding for Janus/HCE increased to expand services in all townships were planned and what local infrastructure would be needed to support these lines. The plan that Hamilton County the forum produced is included below. 193rd St Grand Park The City of Fishers was represented US 31 Noblesville at the forum through its community Downtown Noblesville SR 32 Downtown Westfield 5 development department. The Riverview Pleasant West eld Hospital plan that was developed accounts for providing service to the 161st St 7 Gray Rd Gray most densely populated areas Dell PkwyHazel

of businesses and residents in Spring Mill Rd 146th St 4 Hamilton County. The plan also Clay Terrace Hamilton Town Center takes into account the fiscal realities St. Vincent Carmel Hospital SR 37 IU Health 131st St 3 Saxony of the new transit system and Carmel Hospital City 69 is designed to be funded by the Center Carmel IU Health DRAFTNickle Plate North Hospital District 116th St funding mechanisms approved by 116th St 2 Fishers the State Legislature.

106th St Illinois St 8 St. Vincent Ave College Keystone PkwyKeystone Pennsylvania Pkwy Pennsylvania Health

West eld Blvd/Rangeline Rd West eld HHPA Allisonville Rd 96th St HAMILTON COUNTY 1 MARION COUNTY 012 6 Miles [ 465 US 31

Transit Forum Map (September 2015) 74 FISHERS 2040 Comprehensive Plan

Existing Services

TRANSPORTATION VOUCHERS The Central Indiana Council on Aging (CICOA) is a nonprofit agency based in Indianapolis and one of 700 area agencies on aging in the United States established by an amendment HAMILTON COUNTY EXPRESS to the Federal Older Americans Act. The Operated by Janus Developmental Services, agency oversees state and federal funds, a nonprofit agency, the Hamilton County as well as private donations, to provide Express is a dial-a-ride service operating support services for senior citizens, people on a specific origin to destination basis. The with disabilities and caregivers. Residents service is provided throughout Hamilton of Fishers may use transportation vouchers County but does cross into northern Marion provided by the agency. The individual may County, such as the Keystone Crossings area, then use this voucher for transportation where passengers can transfer to IndyGo needs including taxi fares. Funding for local bus routes. The Hamilton County this program is provided by a federal New Express also provides for transfers to the Freedom grant. Boone County and Madison County public transportation systems. PRIMELIFE In 2012, the Hamilton County Express served PrimeLife Enrichment, a nonprofit, provides 45,876 trips and has increased steady to transportation to senior citizens of Fishers for 65,029 in 2019. There are 20 buses and medical appointments, personal business, riders are to make reservations for service employment or social activities. To schedule a 24 hours in advance. Same day service can ride, individuals are asked to call 48 hours in be provided, however, this service is limited advance. The service is funded by individual to no more than 50 percent of the riders in donations and charitable contributions. the system. The 14-passenger buses have wheelchair accesibility and are funded by a CARPOOL/VANPOOL mix of Hamilton County, state and federal dollars. The service has been in operation CIRTA operates a carpool service known since 2002 and has served all of Hamilton as Commuter Connect. After signing up for County since 2007. Ridership has been on the the program, individuals are able to find upswing since inception, as the first year only fellow commuters based on their origin, served some 4,000 trips. Passengers of any destination points or travel periods. Riders age may use the service. Janus also operates are responsible for coordinating their Riverview Health Rides, a service providing arrangements after initial contact has been door-to-door shared-ride, non-emergency established. The program is supported by transportation to medical appointments to 29 the Emergency Ride Home Benefit which is Riverview Health locations with four vehicles. a safety net for commuters who experience In 2018, Riverview Health Rides provided unforeseen circumstances. 11,070 rides. CIRTA also operates a vanpool service. The program is designed for seven to 15 people commuting from similar origins to similar destinations each workday. The van is provided by Commuter Connect. Passengers pay a monthly fare to secure a seat in the van.