City. the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan Steering Committee Was Comprised of Stakeholder Representatives and Key Staff, Who Will Implement the Plan

BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN JULY 2012

City of Bellingham WASHINGTON

The City of Bellingham appreciates the efforts of the numerous residents and other walking enthusiasts who participated in the development of this Plan. Their creativity, energy, and commitment were critical to the success of this planning effort.

Brent Baldwin Chris Behee Kim Brown, Project Manager Chris Comeau Heather Higgins Nicole Oliver

Carol Berry, Western Washington University, Sustainable Pam Holladay, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Transportation Therese Kelliher, Transportation Commission Alex Brede, Bellingham School District Louis Leake, Bellingham Police Department Ayesha Brookshier, Opportunity Council Jim McCabe, Transportation Commission Dave Engebretson, Western Washington University Mike Olinger, Public Works Engineering Darby Galligan, Planning & Community Development Rick Nicholson, Whatcom Transportation Authority Steve Haugen, Public Works Operations Lesley Rigg, Aging & Disability Resources, NWRC Susan Holden–Walsh, Downtown Bellingham Partnership Nicole Willis, Whatcom County Health Department

Alta Planning + Design Mia Birk Dana Dickman, Project Manager Nick Falbo Drusilla van Hengel Kim Voros

Walkable and Livable Communities Institute Dan Burden Sara Bowman Kelly Morphy

Walking is the oldest form of human transportation. Almost everyone walks at some point during their day. Walking is so common and simple that we tend to forget that after years of planning around auto mobility, walking needs to be nurtured, protected, and encouraged.

“The Pedestrian Master Plan is Bellingham's action agenda to create a safer, more walkable and healthy city. Implementing this plan is key to enhancing our quality of life, fostering economic vitality, and protecting our environment. Most importantly, this plan builds a sense of community. When we walk, we connect more with others and with our environment. Let's work together to make the vision in this plan a reality!”

- Kelli Linville, Mayor of the City of Bellingham

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan is ambitious in its recommendations for infrastructure and programs to achieve the vision for walking in the City of Bellingham. The Plan calls for development of nearly 77 miles of sidewalks, 58 improved crossings, and a robust set of studies and programs to support and encourage walking over the next 20 years.

i  Safety: Improve pedestrian safety through well-designed facilities along and across roadways, and by promoting safe driving, walking, and bicycling behaviors.

 Equity: Provide accessible pedestrian facilities for all through equity in public engagement, service delivery, and capital investment.

 Health: Develop a pedestrian network that promotes active, healthy lifestyles and sustains a healthy environment.

 Economic Sustainability: Enhance economic vibrancy by creating a safe and aesthetically pleasing walking environment with easy connections to commercial centers and inviting public places for people to socialize.

 Connectivity: Provide a citywide network of accessible, efficient, and convenient pedestrian infrastructure that connects homes, jobs, shopping, schools, services, and recreation areas using sidewalks, crosswalks, shared-use paths, bridges, tunnels, and signage.

 Multi-Modal Transportation: Develop high-quality pedestrian facilities that provide access to all other modes of transportation.

 Land Use and Site Design: Employ land use planning and site design requirements that are conducive to pedestrian travel and result in a mode shift away from automobile trips to walking trips.

ii | The project management team consisted of representatives from the City of Bellingham’s Public Works and Planning and Community Development Departments, as well as the consulting team. The project management team worked together throughout the 14-month project to guide the technical work and review project deliverables. The process was driven by the desire to build the framework for a truly connected pedestrian network that serves all residents of Bellingham. Residents and key stakeholders were engaged throughout the process and provided invaluable information about both challenges and opportunities for pedestrians in the city. The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan Steering Committee was comprised of stakeholder representatives and key staff, who will implement the Plan. This group formally advised the project team. In addition, residents throughout the city gave input and received information through two public workshops, an online survey, and information posted to the City website.

Existing federal, state, regional, and city policy, the vision and goals for the Plan, and best practices were all considered in developing policy to guide pedestrian facility and program implementation in Bellingham. The goals help to articulate broad concepts that the City and residents hope to achieve for pedestrians, while the policies are statements that translate the intention of the goals into the language of local government. The recommended policies are intended to guide the way the public improvements are made, where resources are allocated, how programs are operated, how City priorities are determined, and how private development is designed. The policies recommended in the Plan are tied directly to the goals and are intended to guide implementation of the Plan.

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan recommends a robust network of on-street routes to connect people with the places they live, work, play, and learn within the city. In order to understand which routes would provide the greatest connectivity, safety, and pedestrian comfort, a GIS-based approach was undertaken to evaluate current and future potential for walking. The analysis performed the following tasks:

 Quantified factors that impact pedestrian activity

 Located pedestrian network gaps as potential projects

 Identified key pedestrian corridors The key pedestrian corridors and access points to destinations in the city were compiled into a Primary Pedestrian Network. This network provides pedestrian connectivity to recreation and services throughout the community and to every neighborhood. The connected Primary Pedestrian Network is shown on the following page.

iii Executive Summary

1 o' " ""'<> City of h

~":.r-s,.,,N~~ B e 11·ng1 WASHamINGTON ! i ' ... Primary L..l Pedestrian L. .- t')-- --··-··-:. Network ' ! r·--1;;- · .

...__I ___. .!: ~c( ! E KELLOGG RO Cl • ~ ... .!~ _....::.:::&--~ .. -~ ,, ~ ~.J :I: L---; ··,• •.._ W BAKERVIEW RO ti E BAKERVIEW RO / /',.-•• ..... z • / - ~-.I ( . ,.. i I • • r-··_:-:J 15 DIVISIONS~ L._...... J .> , ~.o ffi • '(~ ::E I l "-o~ :-flOOO AVE : Q I "'"e -c.,.~c:ii -t-"'EY 11( If. L .. - .....A'..z "'"'~ '/)"-.;/ ,,.,1 ! ! ~ ,(> : v oL.·-··-··i • ~OS, • 3 ~ NoR> i L .._ . ~~ \ w I LLINOIS ST w 113 __ ...! ;:s ~ s . ; .s' v. ~ i i-./ ! .,o.o\)"'" ! ?. ~ i 1 Lok .,; ~ '?¢£ ~ ,<,. hat . ""£ Roe0 () ,.,., ! / ~.1?4 ?,'°o I" ~ • '-t°' 'f- ~HIO ST ...... '-...... _ '~. I., "- Q-.r J.o ·...... +o >- '!'.,_, <;:. , ...... ,·~ ...... '((" ...,. z , •• J ' ··\ "> 4."- 8 ,. ... r- i ·, "'" ..,<,. "' z ·. ~... ~ "' .t l a llfngham \ ~~ .:-" ,:. 3 LAKEWAY OR I <.P+~+ w i ay tii i .I + (>~ ~ . >- ' ! / ___ ,1 · ·~· -·-··-·-··i / ,--~ ./ i / ! Key: / i Primary Pedestrian I ti Ill i Q ~ 1 /.< i Network / ~ ~ '>..(,: ., I ~ ~ .... Primary Trail ~ _,I ! ~-- Secondary Trail (/ w Ill i ,-.. Trails Recommended in \ ; i \ ' ~+ : 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open \. Space Plan ·1 "''f>- !i I \ WILKIN ST :... ·-··-··-··... .. ! Schools \ Parks i •. r·1 \, City Limits \ r"'s" \ =-....'- ...... Urban Growth Area Author: kimvoros \ ~ : \ ' 2,100 4,200 6,300 8,400 Date: July 2012 \ •• J -. ! AA Name: PrimaryPedestrianNetwork '-' Feet NORTH

iv | City of Bellingham

The recommended network builds upon previous and on-going local and regional planning efforts and reflects input offered by City staff, the project steering committee, the transportation commission, and Bellingham residents. Goals that framed the development of the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan project list include the following:

 Provide a consistent and connected network for walking for transportation and recreation in the City of Bellingham.  Provide a list of projects that will result in contiguous routes with dedicated pedestrian facilities.  Identify opportunities to overcome barriers to walking.  Identify needs for future study needed to improve safety and design. The recommended projects include the following:

 Sidewalk infill (approximately 77 linear miles – 343 projects)  New off-street connections (.2 linear miles – 3 projects)  Intersections and crossings (50 arterial roadway, 1 local roadway, 3 trail/shared use path, and 3 grade- separated crossings)  Intersection and feasibility studies (4 total)  Citywide projects (4 total)

v The City has design standards for pedestrian facilities in various documents. Minimum standards meet or exceed federal and state requirements. However, there is a desire to elevate the quality and consistency of pedestrian facilities throughout the city. The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan design guidance provides a summary of best practices in pedestrian facility design. The practices will help coordinate with existing standards to support consistent development of projects over time. The graphic below depicts a sample of the best practices guidance.

vi | While improving infrastructure is critical, the importance of encouragement, education, enforcement, and evaluation programmatic improvements should not be underestimated. These efforts can ensure that more local residents know about new and improved facilities, learn the skills they need to integrate walking into their activities, and receive positive reinforcement about integrating walking into their daily lives. In essence, the new and enhanced programs market the idea of walking to local residents and encourage a shift to walking as a transportation option. Ten recommended programs for the city and partners are as follows:

 Safe Routes to School  Neighborhood Walking Maps  Traffic Safety Campaign  Themed Walks  Open Streets Event  Professional Development Courses  Marketing Campaigns  Speed Reader Board Loaner Program  Pedestrian Crossing Enforcement Actions  Walk Friendly Community Designation

vii The final chapter of the Plan provides a framework for implementation that includes identification of priority projects, potential funding sources, and measures to track performance over time. Priority projects were identified through a set of criteria developed with the project team and steering committee. All projects were evaluated and the resulting priorities were identified in two tiers. The Tier 1 projects are the highest priority and the City will actively seek funding and opportunities to complete those projects in the short term. The table below summarizes extent of priority and total plan projects.

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan provides the long-term vision for the development of a community- wide pedestrian network. Implementation of the Plan will take place over many years. The Plan identifies strategies that can be acted on in the short term through specific actions to develop the network and strive towards the vision of a walkable Bellingham. The five key strategies are as follows:

 Strategically pursue infrastructure projects  Support network improvements through education, encouragement, and enforcement programs  Establish and encourage multi-modal corridor design  Integrate pedestrian needs into all Bellingham planning and design processes  Integrate equity concerns into ongoing facility and program development

Evaluation is a critical part of planning for pedestrians and for all planning processes. The recommended performance measures are a means of gauging both progress on implementation of the Plan and the effectiveness of the facilities and programs on behavior change and mode shift. The performance measures are based on the following principles:

 The measure is policy driven and can be supported by data.  Data can be collected with available resources.  Data are consistently available over time.  Data allow year to year comparisons.  The results are understandable to the general public.

viii | CHAPTER 1 introduction

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

Bellingham envisions itself as a city of urban villages and well-established residential neighborhoods, where connected walkable neighborhoods shape everyday life and people on foot are afforded as much respect as people driving. Within these pockets of active life are streets and sidewalks that compare with those of the greatest walking cities in the world. Parents will go out for a walk with their children for pleasure, grandparents will stroll to a park for exercise, and teenagers will walk to the bus stop on their way to school. People of all ages and abilities will enjoy the ease and pleasure of accessible and inviting pedestrian facilities. The recommendations, tools, and policies presented in the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan form the building blocks of great streets in Bellingham. Building great streets will connect neighborhoods and communities, linking the region’s history, culture, economy, and natural environments. Implementing the Plan will give residents and visitors the option to replace motor vehicle trips with walking and transit trips, thus reducing auto travel on area roads, leading to improvements in air quality, health, and livability.

“ [Livability is] being able to take your kids to school, go to work, see a doctor, drop by the grocery or Post Office, go out to dinner and a movie, and play with your kids at the park —all without having to get in your car.” – Ray LaHood, United States Secretary of Transportation

Bellingham is a community where residents already walk frequently. Prior investments in walking infrastructure have supported many residents’ desires to walk for both transportation and recreation. In order to enhance the experience and continue to increase walking, a strong commitment to invest in pedestrian infrastructure will be needed to improve safety and provide facilities to more areas of Bellingham. This Plan provides the basis for a connected network of facilities and programs for walking that, when developed and implemented, will further support and encourage walking for transportation, recreation, and health throughout the community. The projects recommended in this Plan supplement our existing pedestrian network and strong trail system by identifying needed improvements within the public street infrastructure. Recommendations for off-street trail improvements are included in the Park, Recreation and Open Space Chapter of the Bellingham Comprehensive Plan. The infrastructure and programs recommendations, design tools, and policies presented in this Plan will help the City of Bellingham realize the vision for a more walkable community. This Plan is ambitious in its recommendations for infrastructure and programs to achieve the vision for walking in the City of Bellingham. The Plan calls for development of nearly 80 miles of sidewalks, 58 improved crossings, and a robust set of studies and programs to support and encourage walking over the next 20 years.

1-1 |

The Pedestrian Master Plan identifies strategies, projects, and programs to achieve the following goals:

 Safety: Improve pedestrian safety through well-designed facilities along and across roadways, and by promoting safe driving, walking, and bicycling behaviors.  Equity: Provide accessible pedestrian facilities for all through equity in public engagement, service delivery, and capital investment.  Health: Develop a pedestrian network that promotes active, healthy lifestyles and sustains a healthy environment.  Economic Sustainability: Enhance economic vibrancy by creating a safe and aesthetically pleasing walking environment with easy connections to commercial centers and inviting public places for people to socialize.  Connectivity: Provide a citywide network of accessible, efficient, and convenient pedestrian infrastructure that connects homes, jobs, shopping, schools, services, and recreation areas using sidewalks, crosswalks, shared-use paths, bridges, tunnels, and signage.  Multi-Modal Transportation: Develop high-quality pedestrian facilities that provide access to all other modes of transportation.  Land Use and Site Design: Employ land use planning and site design requirements that are conducive to pedestrian travel and result in a mode shift away from automobile trips to walking trips.

1-2 |

This Plan document includes the following components: Chapter 1 Introduction: Presents the vision for the Plan and the benefits of a walkable community. In addition, it summarizes the planning process including the steps taken to develop the Plan through public input, policy review, and existing conditions review. Chapter 2 Policy Recommendations: Provides policy guidance for pedestrian facilities and priorities. Chapter 3 Pedestrian Network Recommendations: Identifies methods for analysis and sets forth a framework of recommended facilities (sidewalk, intersection improvement projects, facility studies, neighborhood off road connections) for a complete pedestrian network to serve residents throughout the city. Chapter 4 Design Guidance: Provides a summary of best practices for pedestrian facility design and resources to support the building of the network identified in the Plan. Chapter 5 Recommended Programs: Outlines education, encouragement, and enforcement programs to support walking. Chapter 6 Implementation: Includes funding options, maintenance recommendations, and performance measures, defined to support long term accomplishment and realization of the vision for walking in Bellingham.

1-3 |

A pedestrian-friendly environment directly contributes to health, economic, environmental, and cultural benefits that impact all residents. When more people walk as part of their daily activities, communities reap the following benefits:

 Higher levels of individual health and wellness  Better air quality and lower levels of carbon and noxious emissions  Higher quality of life  Reduced traffic congestion and exposure to crashes  Healthy business districts with increased dollars staying in the local economy  Lower costs for roadway maintenance  More equitable access to community resources for all The following section summarizes the benefits of creating a walkable Bellingham for all residents.

A growing number of studies show that the design of our communities—including neighborhoods, towns, transportation systems, parks, trails, and other public recreational facilities—affects people’s ability to reach the recommended daily 30 minutes of moderately intense physical activity (60 minutes for youth). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “physical inactivity causes numerous physical and mental health problems, is responsible for an estimated 200,000 deaths per year, and contributes to the obesity epidemic.” The increased rate of disease associated with inactivity reduces quality of life for individuals and increases medical costs for families, companies, and local governments. Walking offers a way to integrate physical activity into busy schedules, and has been demonstrated to improve chronic health conditions as well as to contribute to emotional well-being.

“Individuals must choose to exercise, but communities can make that choice easier.” – Rails-to-Trails Conservancy

The prevalence of walking in a community has been described as a barometer of how well that community is advancing its citizens’ quality of life. Areas that are busy with people walking are considered to be environments that work at a human scale and foster a heightened sense of community. These benefits are difficult to quantify, but when community residents are asked to identify civic places that they are most proud of, they tend to name places where walking is safe, easy, and common such as a popular greenway, a riverfront project, a neighborhood market, Main Street, or downtown. Walking is a good choice for families. A safe walking environment enables a young person to explore her neighborhood, visit places without being driven by parents, and experience the freedom of personal decision- making. More trips on foot mean fewer trips by car. In turn, this means less traffic congestion in the community. There are also more opportunities to speak to neighbors and more “eyes on the street” to

1-4 | discourage crime and violence. It is no accident that communities with low crime rates and high levels of walking and bicycling are generally attractive and friendly places to live.

Cities are increasingly recognizing that that the pedestrian environment is a key element of economic vitality and vibrancy. Walkable neighborhoods typically have active streets that promote commercial exchange, while providing safe and efficient ways for residents to travel on foot. While improving the walking conditions in a neighborhood or urban village can positively impact the vibrancy of the area, it is generally the case that economically vibrant areas are more pleasant and more popular places to walk. From a real estate standpoint, consider the positive impact of sidewalks and greenways, which are essential components of a complete pedestrian network. According to the recent CEOs for Cities report, 2009 Walk the Walk, “houses [in neighborhoods] with above-average levels of walkability command a premium of about $4,000 to $34,000 over houses with just average levels of walkability in the typical metropolitan areas studied.” The walking environment’s contribution to quality of life or livability has a profound impact on attracting businesses and workers as well as tourism. In addition to increased property values, improved walking environments have been correlated to increased retail sales and economic development opportunities. In addition, school districts can realize financial benefits by working to make walking safe and attractive. A combination of improved infrastructure and programs can greatly improve the walking environment. Schools with increased numbers of students walking can reduce their overall transportation budget for buses. The transportation funds saved can then be reinvested to support walking or other needed programs.

“Much of what we do in Community Development is focused around creating places for people. When we feel comfortable walking downtown or in our neighborhood, not only do we get the benefits of reducing traffic, limiting our environmental impact, or simply getting our heart pumping - businesses also thrive from the increase in pedestrian shoppers, and the social fabric of the community is strengthened from the hundreds of spontaneous interactions that simply can't occur when we're sitting in our cars.”

- Darby Galligan, Steering Committee Member, City of Bellingham, Planning and Community Development

1-5 |

When people choose to get out of their cars and walk, bike, or take transit, they make a positive environmental impact and improve air quality. People choosing to walk rather than drive are typically replacing short automobile trips, which contribute disproportionately high amounts of pollutant emissions. These emission reductions benefit all residents, whether they choose a walking trip or not. They reduce their vehicle miles traveled, reducing traffic, congestion, and the volume of pollutants in the air. Other environmental impacts can be a reduction in overall neighborhood noise levels and improvements in local water quality as fewer automobile-related discharges wind up in local wetlands, streams, rivers, and lakes. In 2009, the National Household Travel Survey found that roughly 40% of all trips taken by car are less than two miles. By taking short trips on foot, rather than in a car, citizens can have a substantial impact on local traffic and congestion. A complete pedestrian network that connects homes, schools, parks, downtown, and recreation and cultural destinations can encourage walking.

Accessibility and economics are inherently tied to equitable transportation solutions. While some residents choose not to own a motor vehicle, others cannot afford one. For those who cannot use other modes of transportation, the ability to walk safely is essential. For young people, walking affords a sense of independence, and for seniors, walking is an effective means to stay active both physically and socially. In addition, people living with disabilities are more likely to be pedestrians, as some physical limitations make driving difficult. Equitable services and investments provide the same opportunities for all people.

1-6 |

This section summarizes the planning process used to develop the recommendations of the Pedestrian Master Plan.

The project management team consisted of representatives from the City of Bellingham’s Public Works and Planning and Community Development Departments, as well as the consulting team. The project management team worked together throughout the 14-month project to guide the technical work and review project deliverables.

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan Steering Committee was created to advise the project team on context and content of the Plan throughout the planning process. Steering committee representatives were chosen to represent stakeholders in pedestrian needs and desires for the city, but also included members of agencies that will be integrally involved in implementation of the Plan’s recommended facilities and programs. Steering Committee members participated in three formal meetings to review project deliverables.

“I became involved in pedestrian advocacy, not because I want to be a planner or an activist, but because I want to walk to the store, the park, downtown, my friends' houses, and the bus stop for as long as I am physically able. I expect to live longer and be healthier because of it."

- Carol Berry, Steering Committee Member, Western Washington University, Sustainable Transportation

1-7 |

The overall goal of the civic engagement process for the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan was to engage citizens in defining the issues most relevant to walking in Bellingham. The project team worked to create a variety of platforms where residents could get information about the Plan and give input to help guide recommendations. The involvement consisted of public workshops, an online survey, and information posted to the City website.

There were two formal public workshops held during the planning process. The workshops were intended to provide information about the Plan to a broad audience. The first workshop took place in May 2011. Approximately 60 people attended the workshop at City Hall. The goal was to introduce the planning process to residents and gather baseline data to inform the development of recommendations. Elements of the workshop included the following:

 An advanced presentation on walkable communities and implementation issues from Dan Burden, a national advocate and expert in walkable communities  A visioning exercise to help frame direction of the Plan  A mapping exercise that provided an opportunity to review existing conditions and gather input on the gaps in the existing system An open house to review the draft plan was held in May 2012. Elements of the open house included the following:

 A brief presentation on the vision for the Plan and its role in transportation planning for the city  An open house meeting format with poster boards to illustrate key elements of the Plan  City staff and project consultants available to answer questions about the Plan and implementation

1-8 |

An online survey was administered between May 11 and June 15, 2011. Over 800 individuals took the Bellingham Pedestrian Plan Community Survey. The survey gathered information on preferred pedestrian facility types, existing walking behavior, the strengths and weaknesses of the existing pedestrian environment, and neighborhood attitudes toward walking as a transportation and/or recreation mode. Participants in this survey were not chosen at random and are not a statistically valid sample. However, the opinions expressed by survey participants provided a greater understanding of the perceptions regarding walking in Bellingham. Participants in the survey were predominantly female (74 percent) and between the ages 31 and 64 (82 percent).

The majority of respondents felt that the existing pedestrian environment is doing a “good” or “fair” job of meeting their needs as individuals who choose to walk for transportation/recreation, but that there was significant room for improvement. Bellingham residents are interested in improving the pedestrian network because of the following:

 They recognize the health benefits of daily exercise.  They would like to walk more.  They enjoy walking in their community. Key issues facing pedestrians included the following:

 Difficult crossings  Areas of sidewalk gaps  Streets with high traffic volumes without adequate facilities to safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian travel A copy of the Community Survey Summary in included as Appendix A.

1-9 |

Walking is an enjoyable, energizing, environmentally friendly, and low-cost form of transportation. The pedestrian infrastructure, consisting largely of sidewalks, crossing treatments, and shared-use paths, is a fundamental part of any transportation system, connecting people not only to destinations, but also to other transportation modes such as transit and driving. The following section describes the current state of various community elements that impact and support walking in Bellingham.

Data from the three year estimates of the 2010 American Community Survey show that 7.3 percent of commute trips in Bellingham are made by walking. This is significantly higher than the national average of 2.8 percent. Table 1-1 compares Bellingham’s commute trip walking rates with Whatcom County, Washington State, and national rates.

Source: American Community Survey 2010 *’Drive’ includes carpool.

Additional data on walking rates in Bellingham were collected in a 2009 Socialdata USA survey. The survey was conducted for Whatcom Council of Governments to gather information on resident travel patterns using household trip diaries, telephone interviews, and in-person interviews. Information gathered include mode choice (walking, bicycling, transit, driving), trip purposes, and distances travelled. Transportation behaviors of Bellingham area residents were analyzed to look at the potential for shifting some automobile trips to non- motorized modes of travel. This travel survey measured all trips rather than just commute trips. Table 1-2 shows walking rates and other modes for all trips.

1-10 | The City of Bellingham conducts bicycle and pedestrian counts annually at various locations. These short- term counts provide a useful snapshot of the relative levels of pedestrian activity. The locations summarized in Table 1-3 were counted in both the morning and afternoon in 2011. They are sorted in decreasing order of activity during that period. Local bicycle and pedestrian counts are completed annually each fall.

1-11 | Like many northwest municipalities, Bellingham was consolidated from multiple original communities, which has resulted in transportation network irregularities throughout the city, as it was originally platted by several different entities. The Central Business District and primary downtown area have a well-connected grid street pattern that allows for good pedestrian connections. The commercial core of the Fairhaven neighborhood south of downtown also has a relatively consistent grid road network that provides connectivity for all modes. Outside the city core, particularly east of I-5, the road network has a more irregular pattern with small residential streets feeding into larger arterials, which are typically high speed and high traffic volume corridors. Many existing sidewalks are directly adjacent to roadways and lack separation for pedestrians. Controlled crossings are infrequent, causing significant out of direction travel for pedestrians who are uncomfortable crossing without a traffic signal or flashing crosswalk. In addition, there are many areas with curvilinear and cul de sac style development that do not provide connections to neighboring streets. The lack of consistent connectivity and long block sizes present a constraint to comfortable walking. A number of Bellingham’s older neighborhoods further from the city center lack sidewalks, as they were built to reflect a more rural feel. In some areas, where traffic volumes and speeds are low, the lack of formal pedestrian facilities does not significantly diminish the walking environment. In fact, some neighborhood residents prefer having streets without sidewalk facilities. The I-5 corridor is a significant barrier to cross-town mobility for pedestrians between east and west Bellingham. Areas adjacent to I-5 are characterized by high-speed motorized travel at access points to the freeway with limited crossing opportunities.

1-12 | Bellingham’s pedestrian network consists of a system of sidewalks, off-street pathways, and trails. Sidewalks are included on both sides of streets throughout most the downtown core of the city. Sidewalk coverage and connectivity are generally good west of I-5, including amenities such as wayfinding signage, interpretive signs, and waste receptacles. Sidewalk coverage on the east and north side of I-5 is less consistent. A number of the main commercial areas in the city are located along arterials with high traffic volumes and speeds. Sidewalks are not always complete and in most cases there is limited separation from motorized traffic. This makes for an uncomfortable experience for pedestrians trying to access services by foot. The same challenge is apparent along some of the primary high frequency transit routes. High speeds and limited buffers discourage pedestrian travel on these important corridors. Some of these corridors also lack adequate crossing opportunities. In some cases, there are significant gaps of over 1,500 feet between controlled crossings. In Washington, it is legal for pedestrians to cross at all intersections whether marked or unmarked except where crossing is expressly prohibited. Marked crossings reinforce the location and legitimacy of a crossing, and are essential links in a pedestrian network. There are a variety of other amenities used to provide pedestrians with adequate crossings at intersections and key mid-block locations, such as parallel striped crosswalks at signals, countdown signals, pedestrian-actuated beacons with audio/visual warnings, bulb-outs, and median refuge islands that reduce crossing distances. Figure 1-1 depicts the locations of supplemental crossing treatments in place, such as flashing beacons. The City is investing in improving crossings near schools through the use of school zone flashing beacons and high visibility crosswalks as shown in Figure 1-1. In addition, improved crossings on arterials improve the ease of pedestrian movement on along important corridors. The downtown has curb extensions, high visibility crosswalks, pedestrian scale lighting, and others features that support walking. The neighborhood of Fairhaven has a pedestrian-oriented commercial center and a connection to the City’s trail network.

1-13 | The City has a robust system of shared-use trails that provide walking opportunities for recreation and transportation. The City’s Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan recommends an interconnected system of high-quality, accessible shared-use trails and greenway corridors. Major trail corridors that serve a transportation, as well as recreation, function include the Railroad, Whatcom Creek, South Bay/Boulevard Park, and Interurban Trails. Throughout the city there are also short trail connections that provide key pedestrian routes at the neighborhood scale. These off-street pathways and trails provide additional connections throughout the city, including short-cuts within large blocks and accessible routes across barriers.

Connections to transit are an important aspect of the pedestrian network, which allow those on foot to access needed or desired services that are not within walking distance. Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA) provides transit services to Bellingham and greater Whatcom County. WTA’s GO Lines provide high-frequency service every 15 minutes on weekdays. These routes serve primary destinations as summarized below:  The BLUE Line provides direct connections between downtown’s Bellingham Station and Sehome Village via Western Washington University and Bill McDonald Parkway.  The RED Line travels between downtown’s Bellingham Station and Fairhaven along State Street. This route connects to Amtrak and ferries in Fairhaven.  The GREEN Line travels between downtown’s Bellingham Station and Whatcom Community College (at Cordata Station) via Northwest Avenue.  The GOLD Line travels between downtown’s Bellingham Station and Whatcom Community College (at Cordata Station) with service to Sunnyland Square, Barkley Village, Sunset Square, and Bellis Fair Mall along the way.

While improvements to pedestrian access and mobility are key ingredients to supporting and increasing WTA transit ridership, the City of Bellingham has committed to protecting and maintaining average transit speed on arterial corridors. Therefore, it is critical to examine the positive benefits that pedestrian improvement projects may provide and to weigh them against the potential negative costs that they may have on the WTA transit system and service that the City has made a commitment to protect, maintain, and enhance.

1-14 | Schools generate large numbers of trips, particularly during commute hours. Many school trips could be taken by foot or on bike, if connections around schools were designed for pedestrians. The Bellingham School District is the largest school district in Whatcom County, serving over 10,000 students. There are 13 elementary schools, four middle schools, and four high schools throughout the city. Improving pedestrian connections to these schools and providing education and encouragement programs will likely result in increased walking among younger and less experienced pedestrians in Bellingham. Increased walking rates can improve safety for all by decreasing motor vehicle congestion around schools. There are three post-secondary institutions in Bellingham. Western Washington University is located south of downtown. It is the largest post-secondary institution with over 14,000 students. Whatcom Community College, with 7,000 two-year program students and upwards of 12,000 students throughout the year is located in the northern portion of the city in the Cordata neighborhood. Bellingham Technical College, located in the Birchwood neighborhood, currently has over 8,000 students attending classes. These institutions are also major employment centers and generate significant pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and automobile trips.

Bellingham’s downtown, Fairhaven, and other planned urban villages illustrate the direct relationship between land use and urban design and the walking environment. In these areas, the physical character of the community supports walking and all modes of transportation. However, other areas of Bellingham have physical characteristics that are more automobile oriented, resulting in difficult conditions for pedestrians, poor access to transit, and a lack of destinations and services within walking distance to residences. In the commercial areas along Meridian, Lincoln/Lakeway, and the Sunset Square area, the services and commercial businesses are predominantly automobile oriented, making it difficult for pedestrian travel. Single and multi-family residential zones are spread throughout the city. Large tracts of single-family residential homes exist on the outer southern and eastern edges of Bellingham. These areas have generally good access to open spaces and natural areas, but limited nearby access to commercial services. Western Washington University and Whatcom Community College cover significant land area and are major pedestrian trip generators for students and faculty as well as residents using the facilities for recreation.

1-15 |

1-16 |

The City of Bellingham through past planning efforts has defined a clear goal to increase walking by residents and visitors. This Plan is intended to address remaining obstacles to increased walking, such as deficient facilities, concerns about safety, attractiveness and appeal, and a lack of connectivity. The Pedestrian Master Plan, as guided by existing and proposed goals and policies, sets forth specific obtainable strategies that will result in tangible improvements over the next 20 years. The following section summarizes the policy guidance and past planning efforts that informed the goals and strategies in this Plan.

The Federal Highway Administration has given clear direction to local jurisdictions to include pedestrian transportation as part of all transportation planning, design and construction. Due consideration of the needs should include, at a minimum, the presumption that pedestrians will be accommodated in the design of new and improved transportation facilities. U. S. Department of Transportation guidance to local jurisdictions states that, “Congress clearly intends for pedestrians to have safe, convenient access to the transportation system and sees every transportation improvement as an opportunity to enhance the safety and convenience of walking.”

Washington State Transportation Planning Documents, including the Washington Transportation Plan and the 2008 Washington State Bicycle Facilities and Pedestrians Walkways Plan, provide guidance for developing pedestrian networks. These documents guide planning for pedestrian facilities throughout the state, and they are generally supportive of the development of pedestrian networks. In July 2011, the Washington State Legislature passed the Complete Streets Bill (ESHB1071). The Complete Streets Bill recognizes the importance of planning for main streets that provide safe access for all users and also protect and preserve a community’s character. The bill specifies that a grant program be established to fund complete streets projects. Specific goals of the bill include improving health by increasing walking and biking; improving safety with wider sidewalks, and street trees; protecting the environment and reducing congestion by providing alternatives to single-occupant vehicle driving; and preserving community character by involving citizens in the transportation improvement process. At the time of this Plan, a grant program had not been established to provide funding for complete streets implementation.

The Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG) was organized and established by its member agencies, including the City of Bellingham, in 1977. It serves to facilitate and encourage cooperation among counties, cities, and other entities such as ports and non-governmental organizations. An Executive Board comprised of local elected officials controls the activities of WCOG. The mission of the WCOG is to provide general and special governments with an organized means of providing a more unified response to significant issues in Whatcom County. WCOG is the region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization and Regional Transportation Planning Organization under the

1-17 | Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). WCOG is charged with meeting transportation planning requirements specified in the GMA and by the U.S Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. WCOG also administers the regional Commute Trip Reduction, Whatcom Smart Trips, and Everybody Bike programs, and oversees related projects including trail development and scenic byway designations.

The City of Bellingham has a rich history of community development, which includes planning from the neighborhood to the citywide level. As such, numerous documents were reviewed for relevant policy direction. The large number of pedestrian related goal and policy statements reflects the City’s dedication to pedestrian-scale development and planning. For the purposes of understanding the community’s commitment to pedestrian access, the Comprehensive Plan is the key document. Bellingham Comprehensive Plan policy is to include sidewalks and on all new and, where possible, on reconstructed arterial roads.

“One of the City’s primary goals is to enhance the public environment at the street level, which is everyone's community space, and design the urban streetscape primarily for people rather than strictly for automobiles.”

– Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan

The list of local documents reviewed includes the following:  Council legacies and strategic commitments  Transportation Commission pedestrian plan vision & values statement  Comprehensive Plan, Framework Goals and Policies  Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, Part 7, Transportation Goals  Relevant sections of all neighborhood level planning documents  Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan

A matrix of existing pedestrian policies in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and other relevant federal, state and local plans is included in Appendix D.

1-18 | CHAPTER 2 Policy Recommendations

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

This mode-specific Pedestrian Master Plan provides the primary basis for citywide pedestrian planning, pedestrian projects prioritization, and pedestrian policy in addition to the transportation element of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. When the 2006 Bellingham Comprehensive Plan is updated, this Plan will be fully incorporated and will replace all of the existing pedestrian projects and policies in the Transportation Element.

Existing federal, state, regional, and city policies, the vision for a walkable Bellingham, and best practices were considered in developing goals and policies for the Plan.

 Goals are broad visions of what the City and its residents hope to achieve over time.  Policies are statements that translate into the language of local government and guide the way the public improvements are made, where resources are allocated, how programs are operated, how City priorities are determined, and how private development is designed. The goals and policies were defined early in the planning process. The vision for a walkable Bellingham and the goals of the Pedestrian Master Plan were the basis for the robust package of pedestrian infrastructure and programs recommendations. The goals identified in Chapter 1 are restated below with corresponding policies. Implementation strategies for executing these policies are described in Chapter 6.

Improve pedestrian safety through well-designed facilities along and across roadways, and by promoting safe driving, walking, and bicycling behaviors.

Policy 1.1 Reduce the number and severity of vehicle-pedestrian collisions through education to promote safe driving, bicycling, and pedestrian behaviors.

Policy 1.2 Enforce traffic laws that affect pedestrian safety and personal security.

Policy 1.3 Improve the walking environment through enhanced design, engineering, and maintenance of pedestrian facilities.

Policy 1.4 Raise awareness on the part of all road users about pedestrian rights and laws.

Policy 1.5 Increase the number of Bellingham residents who walk, in order to realize the benefits of "safety in numbers."

Policy 1.6 Incorporate design best practices to improve pedestrian crossings.

| 2-1

Provide accessible pedestrian facilities for all through equity in public engagement, service delivery and capital investment. Policy 2.1 Provide diverse opportunities for all residents to participate in making Bellingham a walkable community. Policy 2.2 Ensure that walking facilities are provided for all residents of Bellingham, including people of different ages, races, ethnicities, incomes and those with variable or restricted mobility. Policy 2.3 Ensure that the transportation system is accessible to people with disabilities, and that an ADA Transition Plan is completed to identify obstacles to access, develop a work plan to remove those obstacles, and identify responsible parties. Policy 2.4 Increase community engagement opportunities among residents that rely on walking for daily needs.

Develop a pedestrian network that promotes active, healthy lifestyles and sustains a healthy environment.

Policy 3.1 Improve pedestrian access to transit, schools, healthy food choices, healthcare facilities, support services, and employment destinations throughout the city.

Policy 3.2 Improve air and water quality and reduce energy consumption by encouraging walking and other non-motorized trips.

Policy 3.3 Ensure that pedestrian facility design supports environmental objectives within the city.

Policy 3.4 Increase the availability and use of pedestrian infrastructure to improve the health of Bellingham residents.

“For most of us, a more walkable Bellingham would be “nice.” For those who don’t drive – primarily the poorer people, the elders, and people with disabilities, a walkable city means the difference between a full life and a restricted life. Citizens who rely on public transportation, or who get there on foot or in a wheelchair, really know what a difference this Pedestrian Plan will make in their lives.”

- Lesley Rigg, Steering Committee Member, Aging & Disability Resources, Northwest Regional Council

2-2 |

Enhance economic vibrancy by creating a safe and aesthetically pleasing walking environment with easy connections to commercial centers and inviting public places for people to socialize. Policy 4.1 Support walking access to community destinations for residents and visitors. Policy 4.2 Increase pedestrian connectivity between existing residential neighborhoods and nearby commercial areas, parks, and schools. Policy 4.3 Increase the provision of pedestrian amenities, including street trees, furniture, and pedestrian-scale lighting within the sidewalk where appropriate. Policy 4.4 Promote the economic benefits of pedestrian-oriented development. Policy 4.5 Incorporate design practices that achieve an aesthetically pleasing pedestrian environment whenever possible.

Provide a citywide network of accessible, efficient, and convenient pedestrian infrastructure that connects homes, jobs, shopping, schools, services, and recreation areas using sidewalks, crosswalks, shared-use paths, bridges, tunnels, and signage. Policy 5.1 Provide a continuous sidewalk network along all city streets in the primary pedestrian network identified in the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan. Policy 5.2 Design high-quality and context-appropriate pedestrian facilities on all new roadways, and retrofit older roadways to complete the pedestrian network, using routes and facility design guidance identified in this Plan. Policy 5.3 Ensure that all schools within the city have complete infrastructure for safe walking routes.

"Implementing Bellingham's Pedestrian Plan will strengthen the interface between our Greenway trail system, on-street bike routes, and sidewalk network, further enhancing opportunities for recreation and transportation for our citizens."

- Leslie Bryson, Design Development Manager, Bellingham Parks and Recreation

| 2-3

Develop high-quality pedestrian facilities that provide access to all other modes of transportation.

Policy 6.1 Promote a diverse transportation system that provides equitable mobility and complete connectivity for all modes.

Policy 6.2 Improve connections to transit for pedestrians.

Policy 6.3 Foster a community culture supportive of walking as an important mode of transportation and recreation.

Employ land use planning and site design requirements that are conducive to pedestrian travel and promote a mode shift away from automobile trips to walking trips. Policy 7.1 Address safety issues associated with vehicle speeds and volumes; provide appropriate separation from motor vehicle traffic and design elements that reduce the speed differential between modes. Policy 7.2 Ensure connection and completion of pedestrian facilities as part of SEPA review for new and redevelopment. Require the construction of sidewalks or walkways with multiple residential, commercial or industrial development, where pedestrian facilities are appropriate Policy 7.3 Encourage walking for short trips. Policy 7.4 Design Urban Village settings so that walking is the most attractive mode of transportation. Policy 7.5 Pedestrian circulation plans shall be required for commercial and large multi-family projects. Pedestrian facilities shall connect commercial and multi-family buildings with the abutting street(s) to encourage pedestrian/transit use.

"A pedestrian friendly community is one that embraces multi-modal methods of transportation for all residents equitably, providing its residents access to vital resources, recreational activities, and community services in a safe, healthy, and pleasant manner. Ensuring a pedestrian-friendly environment serves as a catalyst for positive change toward both individual self-reliance and a sense of community among all the diverse residents."

- Ayesha Brookshier, Steering Committee Member, Opportunity Council

2-4 | CHAPTER 3 Network Recommendations

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

This chapter first describes the process and methodology used to assess the pedestrian infrastructure needs and demand. The methodology is followed by recommendations for the overall pedestrian network and specific projects that are needed to complete and improve the network.

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan recommends a robust network of on-street routes to connect people with the places they live, work, play, and learn. In order to understand which routes would provide the greatest connectivity, safety, and pedestrian comfort, a GIS-based approach was undertaken to evaluate current and future potential for walking. The analysis performed the following tasks:  Quantified factors that impact pedestrian activity  Located pedestrian network gaps as potential projects  Identified key pedestrian corridors The measures quantified in the analysis were organized into four descriptive categories: live, work, play, and transit/roadway quality. Table 3-1 describes the measures used in this analysis, and Appendix B provides a more detailed description of the methodology. The results of the analysis provide a mechanism for selecting priority project corridors for developing a well-connected primary pedestrian network, as described in the next section.

| 3-1

While all roadways and paths/trails are part of the pedestrian network, there are corridors that serve as critical connections between destinations. These critical corridors act as pedestrian ‘highways’ within the system. These corridors were selected as the Primary Pedestrian Network, shown in Figure 3-1 through 3-4. The Primary Pedestrian Network for Bellingham is based on the potential to serve greater numbers of recreational and essential pedestrian trips (e.g., trips to schools, work, and grocery stores) while providing connectivity to all parts of the city. While shared-use trails are managed by the Parks and Recreation Department, rather than as a part of the street network, major trail corridors were considered as critical points of connection to the network. The Primary Pedestrian Network provides the framework for a truly connected system of infrastructure that will serve to provide access to services and recreation for all residents in the city.

"A truly walkable community has far-reaching health benefits for all residents. Safe, well-connected pedestrian facilities that encourage and support walking make the healthy choice the easy choice. This plan will get us there, and most importantly, it prioritizes equity in our pedestrian infrastructure to better serve all members of our community who rely on safe streets, especially children."

Nicole Willis, Steering Committee Member, Whatcom County Health Department

3-2 | Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

• Cityof 5 -· \ B 11 · gham WASH INGTON ·,,,'fs,,,N .,G\"',; e in , Figure 3-1: Primary L..l ', Pedestrian L------··-··-: Network J ____ \ .----0- .L-----""":"':::'------'I a: ...... I ___. .l : z 7 EKEllOGG RD i3 .. ~ ....! _--!.:::/,.-...... , ,, -- ~ , .J XL-·-; ··, .. W BAKERVIEW RO Iii E BAKERVIEW RD / /',.- •• ...... z ...... "' ( (i i!... ..I I o w r-· - ~- ~ "':E DIVISION ST L._...... J ,J ..., '1• "'"°<'(ll :Ew "' i ~O~ ~OODAVE , I "'"E ~._~c:-1' , : ! ~ Iii !• ~ ~ •:r "'"1 L .. __ ~ \ w ILLINOIS ST iiJ -··-' ;!' ~ Jl .$ v"' ' - .,o.\l't- l <" ~ /<;E "' ~ / 4 "E" RoEo~ "&..... '<., l • ;4?_. ,_ )Cl_ ,.. IOWA ST ' '<" "+ iiOHIO ST 1...... ts. r.,r ...... +o >o.f'.,. <;...... '((; .r.,. z " " .s>- ,...,., 8 ~ ,... I "., ~.,.. "'... z "'3 : i B tlmgham ·.\ ~.~" ~$" ., ~ LAKEWAY OR I "o +" ~ w i a ...~ i I ~""' : + ' i. I __... ··-·-·-··-·-·.i ./ ,- ...... : / i / I Key: i i i Iii; i Primary Pedestrian / ~"E. ( i Network /I ~ 1 ' i ~ Primary Trail ~ ! ~ ! Trails Recommended in / ~ ; \ ~+ i 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open \. ~ ii.... ,.. : Space Plan \ WILKIN ST ! -··-··-··-..., Schools \ Parks i __ ,., :,, ,' _,_~:b" r,.r· City Limits \ _rr_·- ·· -- · ~-- - ·· -··- ·· - ·· -··-··- ·· ...... 1-· ·1 \ ;,-.. - :_...... Urban Growth Area Author: kimvoros '\ \ ~ \ : - 2,100 4,200 6,300 8,400 Date:July2012 \ ... .I•, ! AA Name: PrimaryPedestrianNetwork '-' feel NORTH

City of Bellingham | 3-3 Chapter 3 I Network Recommendations

[______, ) · -~ ------··1 \ .to• •IJ.l.J,,, City of ! \ r·------, ~.,I) Bellingh~m i ~ i i I ~ I : S ' , ~------J - ! Figure 3-2: Primary ~ l Pedestrian EKELLOGG RD ~ i ~ :---J--4-.:1---~1 Network - North r··j L------; E AKERV EW RD / / .I·"· l-r-··-: ~ ( ( r·-··J

~ 1' i ! ! z~ .i______, . ____ J: \.

6IRCHWOOD AV~ r·~~~ i .. ' '-··----··-··•a::, - ti z , ~ ~L-----·-··-1 Q i2 f:l t;; al :E l "'z WILUNOIS ST ~a: 0 ALABAMA ST t;; .... z "'a: La $ -{ => al What om 0 : 3: Iii IOWA ST zCl HIOST !i? MEADOR

Primary Pedestrian Network Primary Trail Secondary Trail r··-·J___ J______.. Trai ls Recommended in r- ··-·-.J " 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Plan ElWooo AVE • \ i \ i \ Schools i ' I Parks ' ' ' 'I •. r·1 City Limits ti ' \ I r,r· Q \ I \I ,. ~ ~ \ Urban Growth Area • <'I 1- I \ I Author: kimvoros ~ I , 1,300 2,600 l,900 5,200 . Date: July 2012 i. I AA Name: PrimaryPedestrianNet.:rork Feet NORTH \ '•·

3-4 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

L ... - .... - -...-··- --··-.,-··-··1 f l UU-v. • l ~\ ~~\ C1tyof i r ·-··-··-··-··---, ~"'..,,,•,NG"':- Bellino-ham0WASHINGTON i i i l______j ~ i Figure 3-3: Primary ~ i Pedestrian EKELLOGG RD , ~ i ~ :-··· _ _...1.1.-:..>l:---i Network - Central :-·_j L------, E BAKERVIEW RD I / / ' .._ ___ ... .., .i / . {.r___ __J '

w ( . ·' ~ t i Cl ii.______... •• _ j z 0 DIVISION ST ~

BIRCHWOOD AV£ , i I , , t;; "-··----··- ··•a: · , z zl I :5 "' ~ L · -·--· ·-··1 w~ L "' IO fVo J: ~ ~ WIWNOISST \ ALABAMA ST ~ Iii t;; z l:l... « ~ u IO < 0 Ii; ... ~ IOWA ST Cl OHIOST ~ MEADOR 1'L ft' Iii 3 0 I u "' z "' Key: 3 LAKEWA~ Y" DR w Primary Pedestrian Network Primary Trail i Secondary Trail r·--J- ··-··-··-··-··-··-··-: .. Trails Recommended in r-··-·.J " 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open i Space Plan i L Schools i Parks ' \ ' .:·'"l City Limits t;; \ ~ .... 1~ Q ,. ~ ~ t 'i Urban Growth Area .., ~ . \ I Author: kimvoros ~ \ I ~ 0 1,300 2,600 3,900 S,200 Date: July 2012 ~ AR ~ Name: PrimaryPedestrianNet.:rork I Ifft NORTH '

City of Bellingham | 3-5

3-6 | The recommended network builds upon previous and on-going local and regional planning efforts and reflects input offered by City staff, the project steering committee, the Transportation Commission, and Bellingham residents. Goals that framed the development of the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan project list include the following:  Provide a consistent and connected network for walking for transportation and recreation in the City of Bellingham.  Provide a list of projects that will result in contiguous routes with dedicated pedestrian facilities.  Identify opportunities to overcome barriers to walking.  Identify needs for future study needed to improve safety and design.

With these goals in mind, conditions along the Primary Pedestrian Network identified in the needs analysis were reviewed to develop a list of proposed projects. The primary network was evaluated through both a quantitative and qualitative process that considered the needs on these corridors based on the following information:  Streets where the sidewalk width is less than the ADA minimum requirement of five feet.  Streets where sidewalk is missing on one or both sides.  Signalized intersections of the primary pedestrian network where pedestrian crossing issues have been identified  Intersections of arterial and residential roadways included in the primary network that have no current crossing improvements. Each intersection should be evaluated using the City’s crosswalk installation guidelines.  Areas along the corridors where pedestrian involved crashes are located and safety improvements and further study may be necessary  Specific pedestrian-supportive capital improvement projects identified in Urban Village Plans

Any location along the Primary Pedestrian Network that included one or more of the preceding conditions was identified as a future project for the proposed network. In addition, projects identified in the Comprehensive Plan and Urban Village, Neighborhood, and Institutional Master Plans; by the Transportation Commission, neighborhood associations, and former Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee; and through the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan community survey were considered in the development of the project list. Pedestrian projects that were identified through this process, but were already funded for the 2012 fiscal year were removed from the project list. All locations identified as future projects require evaluation to determine project feasibility and appropriate treatment.

| 3-7

Recommended projects to complete the primary pedestrian network include location specific infrastructure projects as well as citywide studies and projects to support and improve usability and safety for pedestrians. Recommended programs to support walking in Bellingham are detailed in Chapter 5. The recommended projects include the following:  Sidewalk infill and widening (approximately 77 linear miles – 343 projects) *Note that some segments of sidewalk are existing but below the standard 5 foot minimum. These projects are combined in the project list due to similar implementation costs.  New off-street connections (.2 linear miles – 3 projects)  Intersections and crossings (50 arterial roadway, 1 local roadway, 3 trail/shared use path, and 3 grade- separated crossings)  Intersection and feasibility studies (4 total)  Citywide projects (4 total) Figures 3.5 through 3.8 show the locations of recommended projects throughout the city. Note again, the city was divided into three sections for readability of maps. There is significant overlap in each map and the geographic area does not represent any separation in network characteristics. Full tables providing detail about individual project locations are included in Appendix C.

3-8 | Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

0' •uu,.,~ City of

~"-.,,,,,-~· Bellingh~m

··1 .... Figure 3-5: Proposed ' L-·-·------··t Improvements !. r------...__1 _____J: ~ i

··-··-··1 RTHsH~o .i .I . t ,.J__ _.., .-*"""···-- ··""" i i Bay i i

, ~--~-----·· ~Z ~se d Improvement I • Grade Separated Crossing • Crossing Improvement ~ Off Street ~ Sidewalk Infill ~ Sidewalk Widening ""'\. Primary Trai l ~ Secondary Trail ,-.. Trails Recommended in ' 2008 Parks, Trails, & ·-----·- ··- ...., Open Space Plan Schools ··,·...... , Parks •• r·1 r',J"' City Limits Urban Growth Area

O 1.300 2,600 3,90-0 S,200 HAI feel NORTH

City of Bellingham | 3-9 Chapter 3 I Network Recommendations

J---··--··-·· c-

' ::-··-··-··-·· '·' ·· '·. ,.,. · ., ··, .. .., -.I;"··...; v ~, 1.0~ \ '... -~~":><.:- ~ ~ BARKLE'( BLVD /T : •\ W INDWii :;;r J / ~ W I LLl~N -:; ~ E lbb!NOIS ST Trail ~ ! ~ ,t Trail rail ~~ ~ ~ \\' ~ !t ~ !l;'"f" I ~ 0 ~v ~ -d ~ ~ t;; ~ Key: ~~ t- ~ IJ)CJ ~ MO~OE ST ,j.'t LL1 imttPHA5 S" Proposed Improvement '-'1 0.P ~ • Grade Separated Crossing >- R • ' -~~~~i ~ ~ST~ ~ Sidewalk lnfill ~ FLORAS"'f "' ~ Sidewalk Widening ~ ,,..,,,,"' Primary Trail ,/ ,<.,'t ~"'-< ~ Secondary Trail , A ~4'4;"' f.. ~ ..... Trails Recommended in 2008 Parks, Trails, & / ft~ ~ l g LAI.. Open Space Plan Bell ham f~UJ .t Schools ay ('~ IS',>- Parks ~ .. r·1 ~~ r..,,r City Limits • Urban Growth Area Author: kimvoros 890 1,780 2,670 3.560 Date: July 2012 AA ~ Name: Proposedlmprovements fttl NORTH

3-10 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

' ~o•'"""'~ City of ~- Bellingh~m Figure 3-7: Proposed Improvements - Central

E B~KERVIEW RO

/ ·"·L ...,, .. .,. (. r.r -· ·.J: i ! . EM EODRO_\,

WINDllW~ J;

...... ,;· ____..,...... ·· FRASER ST i Key: Proposed Improvement • Grade Separated Crossing • Crossing Improvement ~ Off Street ~ Sidewalk Infill ~ Sidewalk Widening

.i Primary Trail Secondary Trail ~ .. Trails Recommended in """"'\ 2008 Parks, Trai ls, & Open Space Plan ! Schools Parks ' .•r·1 City Limits \ I r,r - GLAS1 ' 0 ,., .r ~ Urban Growth Area Author: kimvoros 890 1,780 2,670 J,560 Date: July 2012 , ~ AA I ~ CNa'rife:' P.roifose dl mprove~n ts Feel NORTH

City of Bellingham | 3-11 Chapter 3 I Network Recommendations

Bellingham f- Bay (/) t1i f- ~ (/) ::::> !: "a. w )~ >

\ ~ \ -· · - · ·-· · - ·· E . f'~ i i i ·! t i Key: Proposed Improvement • Grade Separated Crossing 0 Crossing Improvement ~ OffStreet ~ Sidewalk Infill ~ Sidewalk Widening Primary Trail Secondary Trail Trails Recommended in 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Plan Schools Parks .. r·1 r-··-··--·· -··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-·· r.,_r· City Limits \ Urban Growth Area \ \ 890 1,780 2,670 3,560 f NORTH

3-12 | City of Bellingham

There are a number of high-crash locations in the city that warrant further study to determine the best methods to improve pedestrian safety. Funding for the following intersection studies should be identified within two years:  Lincoln Street at Lakeway Drive  Meridian Street at Westerly Road  Samish Way at Bill McDonald Parkway (Note: This intersection was previously the subject of analysis by TranspoGroup. Inc. in 2008-2009 for the Samish Way Urban Village Sub-area Plan.)  James Street/Ohio Street at N State Street

The downtown is a multi-modal destination with residents and visitors traveling in and through by various methods. Eight downtown intersections had more than two pedestrian involved collisions from 2006 to 2010. Many more intersections had at least one. In order to determine the best methods for improving safety and reducing collisions in downtown Bellingham, which is one of the primary pedestrian districts in the community, a study that reviews the crash data and traveler behavior at key intersections should be conducted within two years. Information contained in the City Center Master Plan can help inform the analysis. Key intersections that should be included in the downtown Bellingham study are as follows:  E Chestnut Street at N Forest Street  E Holly Street at N State Street  E Holly Street at Railroad Avenue  Chestnut Street at Cornwall Avenue  E Magnolia Street at N State Street

| 3-13

The Alabama Street corridor is a heavily traveled four-lane east-west secondary arterial that bisects the Lettered Streets, Sunnyland, Roosevelt, and Alabama Hill neighborhoods. Current traffic volumes exceed 20,000 vehicles per day in places with recorded speeds averaging 33.3 mph; 85th percentile speeds are 38.5 mph. According to WSDOT collision data for years 2004 to 2010, there have been 93 collisions with known or possible injuries along the Alabama Street corridor. Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA) provides high-frequency (15-minute) transit bus service on Alabama between Cornwall and Woburn on the Gold GO Line. The Gold GO Line is the most productive WTA transit route in Bellingham and connects downtown Bellingham to important retail shopping centers and the northern WTA transit hub at Cordata Station. Neighborhood residents served by the Alabama Street corridor have overwhelmingly identified traffic volumes, vehicles speeds, and lack of dedicated pedestrian crosswalks as a barrier to north-south mobility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders needing to access transit stops and cross between neighborhood destinations. Sidewalks along the corridor are a width of five feet with no buffer in most areas. Current travel lane widths will not allow significant modifications to increase separation along the corridor or provide for improvements at intersections to reduce crossing distance across four lanes. A “road diet,” or the removal of one travel lane in each direction, with the addition of a two-way center left- turn lane, has the potential to provide the space necessary to improve the pedestrian, bicycle, and multi-modal environment and to improve safety along the Alabama corridor. Prior to any proposal for a “road diet” on the Alabama corridor, however, an in-depth feasibility study must be completed to fully understand the potential impacts on all travel modes. Critical elements include possible impacts to transit service and traffic function on connecting corridors and at intersections. The study should include an evaluation of multiple alternative pedestrian safety improvements that could be implemented if the feasibility study concludes that a road diet is not the best solution to solve pedestrian safety issues on the Alabama corridor.

3-14 |

As noted earlier in the Plan, Interstate 5 bisects the city and is a significant physical barrier to pedestrian travel. The existing I-5 interchanges in Bellingham are designed primarily for motorized travel, present safety and crosswalk challenges, and are uncomfortable for pedestrians. The interstate and the interchanges are federal highway facilities, but are managed and operated by WSDOT. In addition to design challenges, the spacing of crossings and access points are designed to primarily facilitate auto travel. The existing design of crossing opportunities often presents a psychological barrier in addition to the physical challenges. While some of the I-5 interchanges in Bellingham do not meet the federal minimum spacing requirements for automobiles, several of the current crossings are too far apart to adequately accommodate pedestrian travel and connectivity through the city. WSDOT published the “Fairhaven to Slater Interstate 5 Master Plan” in November 2008 (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/i5/fairhaventoslater/), which acknowledges some of the challenges for non-motorized users trying to cross I-5, but this issue merits further study. In coordination with WSDOT, the City should develop a comprehensive study that documents the existing conditions for pedestrians and provides specific recommendations to address I-5 as a barrier to walking and bicycling.

| 3-15

The City should continue upgrading pedestrian facilities to ADA standards and complete its ADA Transition Plan to better identify existing transportation facility deficiencies and develop a phased plan to eliminate these deficiencies.

The City currently installs wayfinding signs on trails and in the downtown core. The City should continue and enhance this effort. Wayfinding signs can be placed along a route to guide people to destinations, reinforce to users that they are heading in the right direction, and can provide directions at decision points. A comprehensive plan for wayfinding to commercial and recreation destinations should be developed and should be coordinated with existing wayfinding for trails, managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department.

Lighting is a primary concern of many residents on shared-use paths, trails, and other routes throughout the city. In order to improve both real safety and the perception of safety, lighting should be improved on key routes. A citywide study utilizing the framework of the primary pedestrian network and other measures should be completed in the future to develop a strategy for improving lighting on key pedestrian routes over time.

Many residents noted concerns about personal safety on greenways and trails due to perceived risk of crime. Key concerns noted by residents include a lack of lighting, maintenance issues, and loitering. An extensive trail network is a great asset to the community, but can also be a financial burden for a community trying to maintain it over the long term. The City along with community volunteers should explore additional opportunities to expand programs to involve residents in trail patrols and maintenance.

Residents, as well as, City of Bellingham Staff from Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments noted that there are opportunities throughout the city to improve pedestrian connectivity by creating short off road connections where the street does not connect. As a joint effort Public Works and Parks and Recreation should develop a joint inventory of opportunities to increase connectivity in the primary pedestrian network through off street connections and establish a protocol for management of these facilities.

3-16 | CHAPTER 4 Design Guidance

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

The recommended pedestrian network in this Plan is bold, but the direction for implementation is clear and the tools are relatively simple. Bellingham can combine standard street elements and best practices in pedestrian facility design to create a safe and enjoyable experience for all. This chapter summarizes the City’s existing standards for sidewalks and intersections. The summary is followed by a discussion of guiding principles for pedestrian design and the needs of various pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Finally, the chapter provides recommendations for best practices to serve as guidance for implementation of the infrastructure projects recommended in this Plan.

The City of Bellingham’s road designs are based upon state and national guidelines. There is some variation as described in the municipal code, the Development Guidelines and Improvement Standards, and urban village or neighborhood planning documents, such as the City Center and the Waterfront District plans. Careful attention is paid to street design, sidewalk design, and street crossings. While robust guidance for pedestrians exists within current planning documents and city code there is a need to enhance standards and coordinate the existing standards for clarity and consistency. The following is a brief summary of existing design guidance as it relates to sidewalks, intersections, and crossings.

The City of Bellingham’s sidewalk standards meet or exceed minimum federal and State of Washington standards. According to the municipal code, minimum width for sidewalks in Bellingham is five feet, wide enough for two people to walk side by side. However, sidewalks of this width assume minimal pedestrian traffic and no amenities, such as benches and other appurtenances, encroaching from the curb zone or storefront/activity zone into the movement zone. Sidewalk width should be designed to meet the anticipated walking demand and provide buffer space between motor vehicle lanes and spaces for walking, sitting, and lingering. The best practices included in this Plan are intended to guide the City through the implementation of projects and provide a consistent set of pedestrian design tools, which can be applied to sidewalk development throughout the city. The Municipal Code and Development Guidelines and Improvement Standards provide direction on the provision of sidewalk by functional classification as follows:

 Parkways – Not required  Primary (Major Arterials) – Required on both sides with 5’ walkway minimum in residential areas and wider in commercial areas  Secondary Arterials – 5’ minimum width on both sides  Collector Arterials – 5’ minimum width on both sides  Residential Access Streets – 5’ minimum width on both sides

| 4-1  Residential Access Streets, Lake Whatcom Watershed - The city standard under this section shall be a 5' sidewalk on one side of the street; the city minimum standard under this section does not require a sidewalk but does require a 4' minimum grass bench on one side of the street.  Commercial and Business Streets - Both sides with 8' minimum width on 60' right-of-way and 10' minimum on 80' right-of-way; pedestrian traffic should be encouraged  Industrial Streets – one side with 5’ width as minimum Sidewalks should be wide enough to support the expected pedestrian volumes in the movement zone. The commercial and business street standard in the municipal code is augmented by policies and regulations related to sidewalk cafés. Annual permits must be obtained to use sidewalk space and operate a café with outdoor seating. To ensure that sidewalk café’s do not impede pedestrian movement, the City has established the guidelines for permit approval. The café permitting guidelines are summarized below. A sidewalk café will only be allowed where the following is true:

 The sidewalk, as measured from the property line to the curb, is at least 8 feet wide.  The area is adjacent to the business. The area for roadway side features (trees, bike racks, lights, parking meters) shall be three feet and the pedestrian passage area shall be five feet. Parking strips with pavers may not be used for pedestrian passage or the sidewalk café. The area reserved for pedestrian travel is called the Clear Pedestrian Zone. This area must be free of all roadway side features as noted above.

The intersection of two streets provides a legal and expected place for pedestrians to cross the street. Although all intersections are legal crossings, the provision of special crossing treatments can increase driver awareness of pedestrians and create a more comfortable pedestrian experience. The City Center Design Guidelines recommend a graduated approach to the provision of curb extensions, specialty pavement markings for crosswalks, and intersection markings dependent upon pedestrian use and possible conflicts at intersections. Intersection designs could include a tiered level of crosswalk and intersection designs in response to varying levels of use of intersections. As a general rule, intersections most critical to the pedestrian circulation system are recommended to receive the highest levels of improvement. This intersection typology is the most detailed design guidance for the City but has not yet been incorporated in the street standards. During the development of this Plan, the City concurrently worked on development of detailed crosswalk installation guidelines that provide guidance for the provision of marked crosswalks at controlled and uncontrolled intersections. The guidelines also apply to mid-block crossings where evidence of high pedestrian use and safety concerns exist. In general, marked crosswalks are not considered on streets with 1,500 or fewer cars per day. The guidelines set minimum pedestrian volume thresholds in order to recommend a marked crosswalk. In addition, the installation guidelines provide information to help engineers determine appropriate crossing types. These guidelines should be used in combination with the best practices discussed later in this chapter to guide implementation of the projects defined in this Plan.

4-2 | Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

4.2 Design Needs of Pedestrians Types of Pedestrians

Pedestrians are not all alike and the transportation network should accommodate a variety of needs, abilities, and possible impairments. Age is one major factor that affects pedestrians’ physical characteristics, walking speed, and environmental perception. Children have low eye height and walk at slower speeds than adults walk. They also perceive the environment differently at various stages of their cognitive development. Older adults walk more slowly and may require assistive devices for walking stability, sight, and hearing. Table 4-2 summarizes common pedestrian characteristics for various age groups.

Table 4-2 Pedestrian Characteristics by Age

Age Characteristics 0-4 Learning to walk Requires constant adult supervision Developing peripheral vision and depth perception 5-8 Increasing independence, but still requires supervision Poor depth perception 9-13 Susceptible to “dart out” intersection dash Poor judgment Sense of invulnerability 14-18 Improved awareness of traffic environment Poor judgment 19-40 Active, fully aware of traffic environment 41-65 Slowing of reflexes 65+ Difficulty crossing street Vision loss Difficulty hearing vehicles approaching from behind

Source: AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (July 2004), Exhibit 2-1.

The MUTCD recommends a normal walking speed of three and a half feet per second when calculating the pedestrian clearance interval at traffic signals. The walking speed can drop to three feet per second for areas with older populations and persons with mobility impairments. While the type and degree of mobility impairment varies greatly across the population, the transportation system should accommodate these users to the greatest reasonable extent. Table 4-3 summarizes common physical and cognitive impairments, how they affect personal mobility, and recommendations for improved pedestrian-friendly design.

City of Bellingham | 4-3 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance

Table 4-3 Disabled Pedestrian Design Considerations

Impairment Effect on Mobility Design Solution Wheelchair Difficulty propelling over uneven or soft surfaces Firm, stable surfaces and structures, including ramps and Scooter or beveled edges Users Cross-slopes cause wheelchairs to veer downhill Cross-slopes to less than two percent Require wider path of travel Sufficient width and maneuvering space Walking Aid Difficulty negotiating steep grades and cross slopes; Smooth, non-slipperly travel surface Users decreased stability Slower walking speed and reduced endurance; re- Longer pedestrian signal cycles, shorter crossing duced ability to react distances, median refuges, and street furniture

Hearing Less able to detect oncoming hazards at locations Longer pedestrian signal cycles, clear sight distances, Impairment with limited sight lines (e.g. driveways, angled inter- highly visible pedestrian signals and markings sections, right-turn slip lanes) and complex intersections

Vision Limited perception of path ahead and obstacles Accessible text (larger print and raised text), ac- Impairment cessible pedestrian signals (APS), guide strips and detectable warning surfaces, safety barriers, and lighting Reliance on memory Reliance on non-visual indicators (e.g. sound and texture)

Cognitive Varies greatly. Can affect ability to perceive, recog- Signs with pictures, universal symbols, and colors, Impairment nize, understand, interpret, and respond to informa- rather than text tion

4-4 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

4.3 Pedestrian Design Best Practices

The following sections provide best practices by facility type from public agencies and municipalities nationwide. Treatments are covered within a single sheet tabular format relaying important design information and discussion, example photos, schematics (if applicable), and existing summary guidance from current or upcoming draft standards. Existing City of Bellingham standards were integrated and should be the first source of information when seeking to implement any of the treatments featured here. Design guidelines are flexible and should be applied using professional judgment. This document references specific national guidelines for pedestrian facility design. Statutory and regulatory guidance may change. For this reason, the guidance and recommendations in this document function to complement other resources considered during a design process, and in all cases sound engineering judgment should be used.

The following are guiding principles for these pedestrian design guidelines: • The walking environment should be safe. Sidewalks, crossings, and shared-use paths should be free of hazards and minimize conflicts with external factors, such as noise, vehicular traffic, and protruding architectural elements. • The pedestrian network should be accessible. Sidewalks, shared-use paths, and crosswalks should ensure the mobility of all users by accommodating the needs of people regardless of age or ability. In areas with specific needs (e.g. schools), improvements should accommodate the needs of the target population. • The pedestrian network should connect to places people want to go. The pedestrian network should provide continuous direct routes and convenient connections between destinations such as homes, schools, shopping areas, public services, recreational opportunities, and transit. • The walking environment should be clear and easy to use. Sidewalks, shared-use paths, and crossings should allow all people to easily find a direct route to a destination with minimal delays, regardless of whether these persons have mobility, sensory, or cognitive disability impairments. • The walking environment should include inviting public spaces. Good design should integrate with and support the development of complementary uses and should encourage preservation and construction of art, landscaping, and other items that add value to public ways. These components might include open spaces such as plazas, courtyards and squares, and amenities like street furniture, banners, art, plantings, and special paving. These along with historical elements and cultural references, should promote a sense of place. Public activities should be encouraged and the municipal code should permit commercial activities such as dining, vending, and advertising when they do not interfere with safety and accessibility.

City of Bellingham | 4-5 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance

4.3.1 Sidewalks

Sidewalks are the most fundamental element of the walking network, as they provide an area for pedestrian travel that is separated from vehicle traffic. Sidewalks are typically constructed out of concrete and are separated from the roadway by a curb or gutter and sometimes a Zones in the Sidewalk Corridor landscaped planting strip area. Sidewalks are a common application in both urban and suburban environments. Attributes of well-designed sidewalks include the following: Accessibility: A network of sidewalks should be accessible to all users. Adequate width: Two people should be able to walk side by side and pass a third comfortably. Different Sidewalk Widths walking speeds should be possible. In areas of intense pedestrian use, sidewalks should accommodate the high volume of walkers. Safety: Design features of the sidewalk should allow pedestrians to have a sense of security and predictability. Sidewalk users should not feel they are at risk due to the presence of adjacent traffic. Continuity: Walking routes should be obvious and should not require pedestrians to travel out of their way Addressing Sidewalk Obstructions unnecessarily. Landscaping: Plantings and street trees should contribute to the overall psychological and visual comfort of sidewalk users, and should be designed in a manner that contributes to the safety of people. Drainage: Sidewalks should be well graded to minimize standing water. Social space: There should be places for standing, Pedestrian Amenities visiting, and sitting. The sidewalk area should be a place where adults and children can safely participate in public life. Quality of place: Sidewalks should contribute to the character of neighborhoods and business districts.

This Section Includes: Pedestrian Access in Construction Zones • Zones in the Sidewalk Corridor • Sidewalk Widths • Addressing Sidewalk Obstructions • Pedestrian Amenities • Pedestrian Access in Construction and Repair Zones

4-6 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedetrian Master Plan

Sidewalks

Zones in the Sidewalk Description Sidewalks are the most fundamental element of the Corridor walking network, as they provide an area for pedestrian travel separated from vehicle traffic. A variety of considerations are important in sidewalk design. Providing adequate and accessible facilities can lead to increased numbers of people walking, improved safety, and the creation of social space.

Property Line

Parking Lane/Enhancement Zone Furnishing Zone Pedestrian Through Zone Frontage Zone

The parking lane can act as a The furnishing zone The through zone is the The Frontage Zone flexible space to further buffer buffers pedestrians area intended for pedes- allows pedestrians the sidewalk from moving from the adjacent trian travel. This zone a comfortable traffic. Curb extensions, and roadway, and is also should be entirely free of “shy” distance

bike corrals may occupy this Zone Edge the area where ele- permanent and temporary from the building space where appropriate. ments such as street objects. The City’s Code fronts. It provides trees, signal poles, also refers to this area as opportunities for signs, and other the ‘movement zone.’ window shopping, In the edge zone there should street furniture are sign placement, Wide through zones are be a 6 inch wide curb. properly located. planters, or chairs. needed in downtown areas or where pedestrian Also referred to flows are high. as the ‘storefront activity zone’.

Discussion Sidewalks should be more than areas to travel; they should provide places for people to interact. There should be places for standing, visiting, and sitting. Sidewalks should contribute to the character of neighborhoods and business districts, strengthen their identity, and be an area where adults and children can safely participate in public life.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2002). Accessibility Guidelines for Sidewalks are typically constructed out of concrete and Buildings and Facilities. are separated from the roadway by a curb or gutter and United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- ity Guidelines (PROWAG). sometimes a landscaped boulevard. Colored, patterned, AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of or stamped concrete can add distinctive visual appeal. Pedestrian Facilities.

City of Bellingham | 4-7 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Sidewalks

Sidewalk Widths Description The width and design of sidewalks will vary depending on street context, functional classification, and pedestrian demand. Below are preferred widths of each sidewalk zone according to general street type. Standardizing sidewalk guidelines for different areas of the city, dependent on the above listed factors, ensures a minimum level of quality for all sidewalks.

Property Line

Parking Lane/ Furnishing Pedestrian Frontage Street Classification Enhancement Total Zone Through Zone Zone Zone

Local Streets Varies 2 - 5 feet 4 - 6 feet N/A 6.5 - 10 feet

Commercial Areas Varies 4 - 6 feet 6 - 12 feet 2.5 - 10 feet 11 - 28 feet

Arterials and Collectors Varies 2 - 6 feet 4 - 8 feet 2.5 - 5 feet 10 -19 feet

Six feet enables two pedestrians (including wheelchair users) to walk side by side, or to pass each other comfortably

Discussion It is important to provide adequate width along a sidewalk corridor. Two people should be able to walk side by side and pass a third comfortably. In areas of high demand sidewalks should contain adequate width to accommodate the high volumes and different walking speeds of pedestrians. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires a 4 foot clear width in the pedestrian zone plus 5 foot passing areas every 200 feet.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- Sidewalks are typically constructed out of concrete and ity Guidelines (PROWAG). are separated from the roadway by a curb or gutter and AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. sometimes a landscaped boulevard. Surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip resistant.

4-8 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Sidewalks

Sidewalk Obstructions and Description Obstructions to pedestrian travel in the sidewalk corridor Driveway Ramps typically include driveway ramps, curb ramps, sign posts, utility and signal poles, mailboxes, fire hydrants and street Guidance furniture. Reducing the number of access points reduces the need for special provisions. This strategy should be pursued first. Obstructions should be placed between the sidewalk and the roadway to create a buffer for increased pedestrian comfort.

Dipping the entire sidewalk at the Where constraints preclude When sidewalks abut hedges, driveway approaches keeps the a planter strip, wrapping the fences, or buildings, an additional cross-slope at a constant grade. (The sidewalk around the driveway two feet of lateral clearance should least preferred driveway option) provides adequate driveway ramp be added to provide appropriate space. shy distance.

Planter strips allow sidewalks to remain When sidewalks abut angled on-street parking, level, with the driveway grade change sidewalks should be widened 2-3 feet to occurring within the planter strip. accommodate overhanging vehicles.

Discussion Driveways are a common sidewalk obstruction, especially for wheelchair users. When constraints only allow curb-tight sidewalks, dipping the entire sidewalk at the driveway approaches keeps the cross-slope at a constant grade. However, this may be uncomfortable for pedestrians and could create drainage problems behind the sidewalk.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2002). Accessibility Guidelines for Surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip resistant. Buildings and Facilities. United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- ity Guidelines (PROWAG). AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities.

City of Bellingham | 4-9 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Pedestrian Amenities

Pedestrian Amenities Description A variety of streetscape elements can define the pedestrian realm, offer protection from moving vehicles, and enhance Street Trees the walking experience. Key features are presented below. In addition to their aesthetic and environmental value, street trees can slow traffic and improve safety for pedestrians. Trees add visual interest to streets and narrow the street’s visual corridor, which may cause drivers to slow down. It is important that trees do not block light or the vision triangle.

Street Furniture Providing benches at key rest areas and viewpoints encourages people of all ages to use the walkways by ensuring that they have a place to rest along the way. Benches should be 20” tall to accommodate elderly pedestrians comfortably. Benches can be simple (e.g., wood slats) or more ornate (e.g., stone, wrought iron, concrete). If alongside a parking zone, street furniture must be 3 feet from the curbface.

Green Features Green stormwater strategies may include bioretention swales, rain gardens, tree box filters, and pervious pave- ments (pervious concrete, asphalt, and pavers). Bioswales are natural landscape elements that manage water runoff from a paved surface. Plants in the swale trap pollutants and silt from entering a river system.

Lighting Pedestrian scale lighting improves visibility for both pedestrians and motorists - particularly at intersections. Pedestrian scale lighting can provide a vertical buffer between the sidewalk and the street, defining pedestrian areas. Pedestrian scale lighting should be used in areas of Furnishing high pedestrian activity. Zone

Discussion Additional pedestrian amenities such as banners, public art, special paving, along with historical elements and cultural references, promote a sense of place. Public activities should be encouraged and commercial activities (such as dining, vending and advertising) may be permitted when they do not interfere with safety and accessibility. Pedestrian amenities should be placed in the furnishing zone on a sidewalk corridor. See Zones in the Sidewalk Corridor for a discussion of the functional parts of a sidewalk. Signs, meters, and tree wells should go between parking spaces. Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- Establishing and caring for your young street trees is es- ity Guidelines (PROWAG). sential to their health. Green features may require routine maintenance, including sediment and trash removal, and clearing curb openings and overflow drains.

4-10 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Construction and Repair Zones

Pedestrian Access Through Construction Areas

Description Measures should be taken to provide for the continuity of a pedestrian’s trip through a construction closure. Only in rare cases should pedestrians be detoured to another street when travel lanes remain open.

Guidance • Pedestrians should be provided with a safe, accessible, convenient path that replicates, as nearly as practical, the most desirable characteristics of the existing sidewalks or footpaths. The alternate circulation path shall be parallel to the disrupted pedestrian access route, be located on the same side of the street, and accommodate the disabled. • The alternate route should have a width of 5 feet minimum, and an additional foot of width for each vertical element along the route. • In rare cases where access is not available on the same side of the street, the alternate pedestrian route may be located on the opposite side of the street as long as the distance of the disrupted pedestrian route does not exceed 300 feet. • Signage related to construction activities shall be placed in a location that does not obstruct the path of bicycles or pedestrians, including bicycle lanes, wide curb lanes, or sidewalks. • During long-term construction provide sheltered, covered walkways in commercial districts.

Discussion The removal of a pedestrian access route, curb ramp, or pedestrian street crossing, even for a short time, may severely limit or totally preclude pedestrians, especially those with a disability, from navigating in the public right-of-way. It might also preclude access to buildings, facilities, or sites on adjacent properties.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The alternate route should include sidewalks and AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of pedestrian access routes, curb ramps, pedestrian cross- Pedestrian Facilities. ings, lighting, and all other elements included in these standards.

City of Bellingham | 4-11 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance

4.3.2 Pedestrians at Inter- sections

Attributes of pedestrian-friendly intersection design include the following: Marked Crosswalks Clear Space: Corners should be clear of obstructions. They should also have enough room for curb ramps, for transit stops where appropriate, and for street conversa- tions where pedestrians might congregate. Visibility: It is critical that pedestrians on the corner have a good view of vehicle travel lanes and that motorists in the travel lanes can easily see waiting pedestrians. Legibility: Symbols, markings, and signs used at corners should clearly indicate what actions the pedestrian Raised Crosswalks should take. Accessibility: All corner features, such as curb ramps, landings, call buttons, signs, symbols, markings, and textures, should meet accessibility standards and follow universal design principles. Separation from Traffic: Corner design and construction should be effective in discouraging turning vehicles from driving over the pedestrian area. Crossing distances should be minimized. Median Refuge Islands Lighting: Adequate lighting is an important aspect of visibility, legibility, and accessibility. These attributes will vary with context but should be considered in all design processes. For example, suburban and rural intersections may have limited or no signing. However, legibility regarding appropriate pedestrian movements should still be taken into account during design. Curb Extensions See Crossing Beacons and Signals for a discussion of signalization in support of pedestrians.

This Section Includes: • Marked Crosswalks • Raised Crosswalks • Reducing Crossing Distance Advance Stop Bar • Median Refuge Islands • Minimizing Curb Radii • Curb Extensions • Minimizing Conflict with utomobilesA • Advance Stop Bars • Parking Control • ADA Compliant Curb Ramps ADA Compliant Curb Ramps

4-12 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Marked Crosswalks

Marked Crosswalks Description A marked crosswalk signals to motorists that they must Guidance stop for pedestrians and encourages pedestrians to cross At signalized intersections, all crosswalks should be at designated locations. Installing crosswalks alone will not marked. At unsignalized intersections, crosswalks may be necessarily make crossings safer especially on multi-lane marked under the following conditions: roadways. • At a complex intersection, to orient pedestrians in At mid-block locations, crosswalks can be marked where finding their way across. there is a demand for crossing and there are no nearby marked crosswalks. • At an offset intersection, to show pedestrians the shortest route across traffic with the least exposure to vehicular traffic and traffic conflicts. • At an intersection with visibility constraints, to position pedestrians where they can best be seen by oncoming traffic. Continental markings provide • At an intersection within a school zone on a walking additional visibility route.

The crosswalk should be located to align as closely as possible with the through pedestrian zone of the Parallel markings are the sidewalk corridor most basic crosswalk marking type

Discussion Continental crosswalk markings should be used at crossings with high pedestrian use or where vulnerable pedestrians are expected, including at school crossings, across arterial streets for pedestrian-only signals, at mid-block crosswalks, and at intersections where there is expected high pedestrian use and the crossing is not controlled by signals or stop signs. See Intersection Signalization for a discussion of enhancing pedestrian crossings. Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (3B.18) Because the effectiveness of marked crossings depends AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of entirely on their visibility, maintaining marked crossings Pedestrian Facilities. FHWA. (2005). Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at should be a high priority. Thermoplastic markings offer Uncontrolled Locations. increased durability than conventional paint. FHWA. (2010). Crosswalk Marking Field Visibility Study.

City of Bellingham | 4-13 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Marked Crosswalks

Raised Crosswalks Description A raised crosswalk or intersection can eliminate grade Guidance changes from the pedestrian path and give pedestrians • Use detectable warnings at the curb edges to alert greater prominence as they cross the street. Raised vision-impaired pedestrians that they are entering the crosswalks should be used only in very limited cases where roadway. a special emphasis on pedestrians is desired; review on a case-by-case basis. • Approaches to the raised crosswalk may be designed to be similar to speed humps. • Raised crosswalks can also be used as a traffic calming treatment.

A tactile warning device should be No grade change with used at the curb edge sidewalk level

Discussion Like speed humps, raised crosswalks have a traffic slowing effect which may be unsuitable on emergency response routes.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (3B.18) Because the effectiveness of marked crossings depends AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of entirely on their visibility, maintaining marked crossings Pedestrian Facilities. USDOJ. (2010). ADA Standards for Accessible Design. should be a high priority.

4-14 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Reducing Crossing Distance

Median Refuge Islands Description Median refuge islands are located at the mid-point of a Guidance marked crossing and help improve pedestrian safety by allowing pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at • Refuge islands can be applied on any roadway with a time. Refuge islands minimize pedestrian exposure by more than two lanes of traffic. shortening crossing distance and increasing the number of • Appropriate at signalized or unsignalized crosswalks available gaps for crossing. • The refuge island must be accessible, preferably with an at-grade passage through the island rather than ramps and landings. • The island should be at least 6 feet wide between travel lanes and at least 20’ long • The refuge area should be wide enough ( > 6 feet) to Cut through median islands are accommodate bikes with trailers and wheelchair users preferred over curb ramps to better • On streets with speeds higher than 25 mph there accommodate bicyclists. should also be double centerline markings, reflectors, and “KEEP RIGHT” signage.

W11-2, W16-7P

Discussion If a refuge island is landscaped, the landscaping should not compromise the visibility of pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk. Shrubs and ground plantings should be no higher than 1 ft 6 in. On multi-lane roadways, consider configuration with active warning beacons for improved yielding compliance.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Refuge islands may collect road debris and may require AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of somewhat frequent maintenance. Refuge islands should Pedestrian Facilities. NACTO. (2011). Urban Bikeway Design Guide. be visible to snow plow crews and should be kept free of snow berms that block access.

City of Bellingham | 4-15 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Reducing Crossing Distance

Minimizing Curb Radii Description The size of a curb’s radius can have a significant impact Guidance on pedestrian comfort and safety. A smaller curb radius provides more pedestrian space at the corner, allows The radius may be as small as 3 feet where there are no more flexibility in the placement of curb ramps, results in turning movements, or 5 feet where there are turning a shorter crossing distance, and requires vehicles to slow movements and there is adequate street width and a larger more on the intersection approach. During the design effective curb radius created by parking or bike lanes. phase, the chosen radius should be the smallest possible for the circumstances.

Curb Radius

Effective vehicle radius

Discussion Several factors govern the choice of curb radius in any given location. These include the desired pedestrian area of the corner, traffic turning movements, the turning radius of the design vehicle, the geometry of the intersection, the street classifications, and whether there is parking or a bike lane (or both) between the travel lane and the curb.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of A small curb radius is also beneficial for street sweeping Pedestrian Facilities. operations. AASHTO. (2004). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.

4-16 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Reducing Crossing Distance

Curb Extensions Description Curb extensions minimize pedestrian exposure during Guidance crossing by shortening crossing distance and give pedestrians a better chance to see and be seen before committing • In most cases, the curb extensions should be designed to crossing. They are appropriate for any crosswalk where it to transition between the extended curb and the run- is desirable to shorten the crossing distance and there is a ning curb in the shortest practicable distance giving parking lane adjacent to the curb. consideration to sight distance issues with parked cars. • For purposes of efficient street sweeping, the minimum radius for the reverse curves of the transition is 10 feet and the two radii should be balanced to be nearly equal • Curb extensions should terminate one foot short of the parking lane to maximize bicyclist safety. • The curb extensions length at non-signalized intersections should be based on roadway speed limit.

Crossing distance is shortened Curb extension length can be adjusted to accommodate bus stops or street furniture.

1‘ buffer from edge of parking lane

Discussion If there is no parking lane, adding curb extensions may be a problem for bicycle travel and truck or bus turning movements. If a refuge island is landscaped, the landscaping should not compromise the visibility of pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk. Shrubs and ground plantings should be no higher than 1 ft 6 in.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Planted curb extensions may be designed as a bioswale, Pedestrian Facilities. a vegetated system for stormwater management. AASHTO. (2004). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.

City of Bellingham | 4-17 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Minimizing Conflict with Automobiles

Advance Stop Bar

Description Advance stop bars increase pedestrian comfort and safety by stopping motor vehicles well in advance of marked crosswalks, allowing vehicle operators a better line of sight of pedestrians and giving inner lane motor vehicle traffic Permitting bicyclists to R1-5c time to stop for pedestrians. stop at the crosswalk rather than the advance stop bar. Guidance • On streets with at least two travel lanes in each direction. • Prior to a marked crosswalk • In one or both directions of motor vehicle travel • Recommended 30 feet in advance of the crosswalk Wide stop lines used for increased visibility • Should be accompanied by a “Stop Here for Pedestri- ans” sign

Discussion If a bicycle lane is present, mark the advance stop bar to permit bicyclists to stop at the crosswalk ahead of the stop bar.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining markings should be a high priority.

4-18 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Minimizing Conflict with Automobiles

Parking Control Description Parking control involves restricting or reducing on-street Guidance parking near intersections with high pedestrian activity. Locating parking away from the intersection improves Curb extensions, ‘No Parking’ signage, or curb paint can be motorist’s visibility on the approach to the intersection and used to keep the approach to intersections clear of parked crosswalk. Improved sight lines at intersections reduces vehicles. conflicts between motorists and pedestrians. At “T” and offset intersections, where the boundaries of the intersection may not be obvious, this prohibition should be made clear with signage. Parking shall not be allowed within any type of intersection adjacent to schools, school crosswalks, and parks. This includes “T” and offset intersections.

Curb paint may be used to keep intersection approaches clear

Curb extensions physically prevent parking at intersection approaches R7-200

Discussion In areas where there is high parking demand parking, compact vehicles may be allowed within “T” or offset intersections and on either side of the crosswalk. At these locations, signs will be placed to prohibit parking within the designated crosswalk areas, and additional enforcement should be provided, particularly when the treatment is new.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Signage and striping require routine maintenance. Pedestrian Facilities. AASHTO. (2004). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.

City of Bellingham | 4-19 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance ADA Compliant Curb Ramps

ADA Compliant Curb Ramps Description Curb ramps are the design elements that allow all users to make the transition from the street to the sidewalk. There are a number of factors to be considered in the design and Guidance placement of curb ramps at corners. Properly designed curb ramps ensure that the sidewalk is accessible from the • The landing at the top of a ramp shall be at least 4 feet roadway. A sidewalk without a curb ramp can be useless to long and at least the same width as the ramp itself. someone in a wheelchair, forcing them back to a driveway • The ramp shall slope no more than 1:50 (2.0%) in any and out into the street for access. direction. • If the ramp runs directly into a crosswalk, the landing at the bottom will be in the roadway. • If the ramp lands on a dropped landing within the sidewalk or corner area where someone in a wheelchair may have to change direction, the landing must be a minimum of 5 feet long and at least as wide as the ramp, although a width of 5 feet is preferred. Curb ramps shall be located so that they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking access aisles

Perpendicular Curb Ramp Parallel Curb Ramp Diagonal Curb Ramp

Crosswalk spacing not to scale. For illustration purposes only.

Discussion The edge of an ADA compliant curb ramp will be marked with a tactile warning device (also known as truncated domes) to alert people with visual impairments to changes in the pedestrian environment. Contrast between the raised tactile device and the surrounding infrastructure is important so that the change is readily evident. These devices are most effective when adjacent to smooth pavement so the difference is easily detected. The devices must provide color contrast so partially sighted people can see them.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2002). Accessibility Guidelines for It is critical that the interface between a curb ramp and Buildings and Facilities. the street be maintained adequately. Asphalt street sec- United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- ity Guidelines (PROWAG). tions can develop potholes in the at the foot of the ramp, USDOJ. (2010). ADA Standards for Accessible Design. which can catch the front wheels of a wheelchair.

4-20 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Crossing Beacons and Signals

Crossing beacons and signals facilitate crossings of roadways for pedestrians and bicyclists. Beacons make crossing intersections safer by clarifying when to enter Active Warning Beacons an intersection and by alerting motorists to the presence of pedestrians in the crosswalk. Flashing amber warning beacons can be utilized at unsignalized intersection crossings. Push buttons, signage, and pavement markings may be used to highlight these facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. Determining which type of signal or beacon to use for a particular intersection depends on a variety of factors. These include speed limits, Average Daily Traffic (ADT), Hybrid Beacon (HAWK) and the anticipated levels of pedestrian and bicycle crossing traffic. An intersection with crossing beacons may reduce stress and delays for a crossing users, and discourage illegal and unsafe crossing maneuvers.

This Section Includes: • Accommodating Pedestrians at Signalized Intersec- tions • Active Warning Beacons • Hybrid Beacon for Mid-Block Crossing

City of Bellingham | 4-21 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Signalization

Audible pedestrian traffic signals provide Accommodating crossing assistance to pedestrians with vision Pedestrians at Signalized impairment at signalized intersections Crossings

Description Pedestrian Signal Head Pedestrian signal indicators demonstrate to pedestrians when to cross at a signalized crosswalk. All traffic signals should be equipped with pedestrian signal indications except where pedestrian crossing is prohibited by signage. Countdown pedestrian signals are particularly valuable for pedestrians, as they indicate whether a pedestrian has time to cross the street before the signal phase ends. Count- down signals should be used at all signalized intersections. Signal Timing Providing adequate pedestrian crossing time is a critical element of the walking environment at signalized intersections. The MUTCD recommends traffic signal timing to assume a pedestrian walking speed of 4 feet per second, meaning that the length of a signal phase with parallel pedestrian movements should provide sufficient time for a pedestrian to safely cross the adjacent street. At crossings where children, older pedestrians or pedestrians with disabilities are expected, crossing speeds as low as 3 feet per second may be assumed. Special pedestrian phases can be used to provide greater visibility or more crossing time for pedestrians at certain intersections. Consider the use of a Leading In busy pedestrian areas such as downtown, the pedestrian Pedestrian Indication (LPI) to provide signal indication should be built into each signal phase, additional traffic protected crossing eliminating the requirement for a pedestrian to actuate the time to pedestrians signal by pushing a button.

Discussion When push buttons are used, they should be located so that someone in a wheelchair can reach the button from a level area of the sidewalk without deviating significantly from the natural line of travel into the crosswalk, and should be marked (for example, with arrows) so that it is clear which signal is affected. In areas with very heavy pedestrian traffic, consider an all-pedestrian signal phase to give pedestrians free passage in the intersection when all motor vehicle traffic movements are stopped. Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibil- Depending on power supply, maintenance can be ity Guidelines (PROWAG). minimal. If solar power is used, flashing beacons should AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. run for years without issue.

4-23| City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Signalization

Active Warning Beacons Description Active warning beacons are user actuated illuminated Guidance devices designed to increase motor vehicle yielding • Warning beacons shall not be used at crosswalks compliance at crossings of multi lane or high volume controlled by YIELD signs, STOP signs, or traffic signals. roadways. • Warning beacons shall initiate operation based on Types of active warning beacons include conventional pedestrian or bicyclist actuation and shall cease circular yellow flashing beacons, in-roadway warning lights, operation at a predetermined time after actuation or, or Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB). with passive detection, after the pedestrian or bicyclist clears the crosswalk.

Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) dramatically increase compliance over conventional Providing secondary installations of warning beacons. RRFBs on median islands improves driver yielding behavior.

W11-15, W16-7P

Discussion Rectangular rapid flash beacons have the most increased compliance of all the warning beacon enhancement options. A study of the effectiveness of going from a no-beacon arrangement to a two-beacon RRFB installation increased yielding from 18 percent to 81 percent. A four-beacon arrangement raised compliance to 88 percent. Additional studies over long term installations show little to no decrease in yielding behavior over time.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance NACTO. (2011). Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Depending on power supply, maintenance can be FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. minimal. If solar power is used, RRFBs should run for years FHWA. (2008). MUTCD - Interim Approval for Optional Use of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (IA-11) without issue.

City of Bellingham | 4-24 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Signalization

Hybrid Beacon for Mid- Description Block Crossing Hybrid beacons are used to improve non-motorized crossings of major streets. A hybrid beacon consists of a signal head with two red lenses over a single yellow lens Guidance on the major street, and a pedestrian signal head for the Hybrid beacons may be installed without meeting traffic crosswalk. signal control warrants if roadway speeds and volumes are excessive for comfortable pedestrian crossings. • If installed within a signal system, signal engineers Should be installed at least should evaluate the need for the hybrid signal to be 100 feet from side streets coordinated with other signals. or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD • Parking and other sight obstructions should be signs prohibited for at least 100 feet in advance of and at Hybrid Beacon least 20 feet beyond the marked crosswalk to provide adequate sight distance.

W11-15

Push button actuation

Discussion Hybrid beacon signals are normally activated by push buttons, but may also be triggered by infrared, microwave or video detectors. The maximum delay for activation of the signal should be two minutes, with minimum crossing times determined by the width of the street. Each crossing, regardless of traffic speed or volume, requires additional review by a registered engineer to identify sight lines, potential impacts on traffic progression, timing with adjacent signals, capacity, and safety. Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Hybrid beacons are subject to the same maintenance NACTO. (2011). Urban Bikeway Design Guide. needs and requirements as standard traffic signals. Signing and striping need to be maintained to help users understand any unfamiliar traffic control.

4-25 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

4.3.3 Shared-Use Paths

A shared-use path allows for off-street pedestrian travel and may be shared with bicyclists, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non-motorized users. These facilities are frequently found in parks, along rivers and beaches, and in greenbelts or utility corridors where General Design Practices there are few conflicts with motorized vehicles. Path facilities can also include amenities such as lighting, signage, and fencing (where appropriate). Key features of shared-use paths include the following: • Frequent access points from the local road network. • Directional signs to direct users to and from the path. Local Neighborhood Accessways • A limited number of at-grade crossings with streets or driveways. • Terminating the path where it is easily accessible to and from the street system. • Separate treads for pedestrians and bicyclists when heavy use is expected.

This Section Includes: • General Design Practices • Local Neighborhood Accessways

City of Bellingham | 4-26 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Shared Use Paths

Terminate the path where it is easily accessible General Design Practices to and from the street system, preferably at a controlled intersection or at the beginning of a Description dead-end street. Shared-use paths can provide a desirable facility, particularly for recreation, and for users of all skill levels preferring separation from traffic. Shared-use paths should generally provide directional travel opportunities not provided by sidewalks on existing roadways.

Guidance 8-12’ Width depending • 8 feet is the minimum allowed for a two-way shared on usage use path and is only recommended for low traffic situations. • 10 feet is recommended in most situations and will be adequate for moderate to heavy use. • 12 feet is recommended for heavy use situations with high concentrations of multiple users. A separate track (5 feet minimum) can be provided for bicycle use. Lateral Clearance • A 2-foot or greater shoulder should be provided on both sides of the path. An additional foot of lateral clearance (total of 3’feet) is required by the MUTCD for the installation of signage or other furnishings. Overhead Clearance • Clearance to overhead obstructions should be 8 feet minimum, with 10 feet recommended. Striping • When striping is required, use a 4 inch dashed yellow centerline stripe with 4 inch solid white edge lines. • Solid centerlines can be provided on tight or blind corners, and on the approaches to roadway crossings.

Discussion The AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities generally recommend against the development of shared use paths along roadways. Also known as “sidepaths”, these facilities create a situation where a portion of the bicycle traffic rides against the normal flow of motor vehicle traffic and can result in wrong-way riding when either entering or exiting the path. However, as an alternative to a typical sidewalk, sidepaths provide a desirable separated option for pedestrians.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO. (1999). Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. Asphalt is the most common surface for shared -use FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. paths. The use of concrete for paths has proven to be Flink, C. (1993). Greenways: A Guide To Planning Design And Development. more durable over the long term. Saw cut concrete joints rather than troweled improve the experience of path

4-27 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Shared Use Paths

Sidepaths Along Roadways

Description A sidepath provides a separated facility for pedestrians that does not require full curb and gutter. The facility should have a hard, level surface, placed between private property and the travel lanes. Sidepaths can be straight or can meander and can be constructed out of concrete, pervious concrete, asphalt, porous asphalt, or crushed stone. Where sidewalks traditionally require installation of a curb and gutter to manage stormwater runoff, trails or sidepaths may lend themselves to using other stormwater manage- Crossings should ment methods, such as low impact development. Using be stop or yield permeable paving and bioretention facilities, sidepaths can controlled be installed on residential streets. The AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities generally recommends against the development of shared-use paths directly adjacent to roadways.

W3-1 in advance Guidance of cross street • Sidepaths should be a minimum of 6 feet wide. stop sign • Bicycle lanes should be provided as an alternate (more transportation-oriented) facility whenever possible. • If a separate bicycle facility is not possible, 8 feet is the minimum allowed for a two-way sidepath and is only recommended for low traffic situations. • 10 feet is recommended in most situations and will be adequate for moderate to heavy use.

Discussion When used along roadways with heavier traffic volumes and speeds, the sidepath will be used by both bicyclists and pedestrians and should be designed to accommodate multiple users safely.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Asphalt is the most common surface for narrow side- Edition paths. The use of concrete for paths has proven to be Access Board, Accessible Rights of Way: A Design Guide, http://www. more durable over the long term. Saw cut concrete joints access-board.gov/prowac/ rather than troweled joints improve the experience of

City of Bellingham | 4-28 Chapter 4 | Design Guidance Shared Use Path

Local Neighborhood Description Accessways Neighborhood accessways provide residential areas with direct pedestrian access to commercial services, parks, trails, greenspaces, and other recreational areas. They most Guidance often serve as small trail connections to and from the larger • Neighborhood accessways should remain open to the trail network, typically having their own rights-of-way and public. easements. • Trail surfaces shall be at least 8 feet wide to accommo- Additionally, these smaller trails can be used to provide date emergency and maintenance vehicles, meet ADA bicycle and pedestrian connections between dead-end requirements and be considered suitable for multi-use. streets, cul-de-sacs, and access to nearby destinations not provided by the street network. • Trail widths should be designed to be less than 8 feet wide only when necessary to protect large mature native trees over 18 inches in caliper, wetlands or other ecologically sensitive areas.

From street or cul-de-sac

8’ wide concrete access 5’ minimum trail from street ADA access

Property Line

8’ wide concrete trail

Discussion Neighborhood accessways should be designed into new subdivisions at every opportunity and should be required by City and County subdivision regulations. For existing subdivisions, Neighborhood and homeowner association groups are encouraged to identify locations where such connects would be desirable.

Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance AASHTO. (1999). Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. The use of concrete for paths has proven to be more FHWA. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. durable over the long term than asphalt. FHWA. (2006). Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation. Lesson 19: Greenways and Shared Use Paths.

4-29 | City of Bellingham CHAPTER 5 Programs Recommendations

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

While improving infrastructure is critical, the importance of encouragement, education, enforcement, and evaluation programs should not be underestimated. These efforts can ensure that more local residents know about new and improved facilities, get the tools they need to integrate walking into their daily activities, and receive positive reinforcement for walking. In essence, the new and enhanced programs market the idea of walking to local residents and encourage a shift to walking as a transportation option. The following chapter presents recommendations for low-cost ways to increase walking in Bellingham. The City will look to access funding and build partnerships to implement programs in coordination with infrastructure improvements over time.

Purpose: Increase the number of children walking and bicycling to school, and improve safety for children who walk and bicycle. Audience: Parents, children, school neighbors, teachers, and school staff Potential Partners: Bellingham School District, City of Bellingham (Public Works, Police), Whatcom County Health Department, Whatcom Council of Governments, Bellingham Police Department, Bellingham Transportation Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Program Description: Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a national and international movement to help more children bicycle and walk to school and improve traffic safety for children who do walk and bicycle. Safe Routes to School can include a variety of multi-disciplinary programs aimed at promoting walking and bicycling to school and improving traffic safety around school areas through education, incentives, law enforcement, and engineering measures. SRTS programs typically involve partnerships among municipalities, school districts, community and parent volunteers, and law enforcement agencies. The primary goals of SRTS programs are to improve safety, health, and fitness habits for children while improving air quality and diminishing traffic congestion. Most SRTS programs focus on elementary and middle school travel. Numerous Bellingham agencies and organizations already acknowledge the importance of the Safe Routes to School initiative, including the City of Bellingham, the Bellingham School District, the Whatcom County Health Department, and the Whatcom Council of Governments. These partners have collaborated on specific grant-funded SRTS efforts at selected elementary schools, and are actively seeking to continue this collaboration. The specific SRTS recommendations, below, are intended to support these existing efforts and help to expand and institutionalize SRTS in Bellingham.

City departments should work together and with other partners to convene a Safe Routes to School Task Force. This task force would bring together parties with a shared interest in youth health and safety, neighborhood livability, increasing active transportation, and expanding Safe Routes to School throughout the Bellingham School District.

| 5-1 The primary function of the Task Force is to coordinate the activities of all partners, but other key duties include the following:  Coordinating on infrastructure projects that affect school travel  Developing a strategic plan for implementing the district-wide SRTS efforts  Securing and expanding long-term, stable funding for SRTS efforts in Bellingham  Developing an evaluation strategy and collecting data for evaluation  Overcoming barriers to implementing a crossing guard program by creating a pilot program and addressing policies  Creating and implementing school siting policies that support healthy and active transportation  Studying the potential to reduce bus service and repurpose its budget for SRTS efforts  Determining which policies and programs are needed to address equity

Numerous educational activities have already been implemented in selected Bellingham schools, including assemblies and in-classroom safety education. These education programs, and others as desired, should be continued and expanded to all schools in the Bellingham School District. WCOG is currently developing a four-week educational program about transportation for a YMCA camp, and this curriculum can be used for Safe Routes to School efforts as well. The goal of these programs is to provide children and parents with information about why and how to walk and bicycle to school.

Numerous encouragement activities have already been implemented in selected Bellingham schools, including Walking Wednesdays and Walk and Bike to School Day. These encouragement programs, and others as desired, should be continued and expanded to all schools in the Bellingham School District. The goal of these programs is to provide children and parents with compelling, fun reasons to walk and bicycle to school.

5-2 |

A Safe Routes to School coordinator is essential for consolidating, expanding, and continuing any Safe Routes to School program. While SRTS programs can generate outstanding volunteer support from parents, this support will be transitory, as their children will inevitably graduate to the next school. The SRTS Coordinator could be housed at the Bellingham School District and/or could be embedded at the City of Bellingham some of the time. In the long run, the ideal coordinator would be a full-time, permanent position, but to start having a part-time SRTS coordinator or one that is grant funded or a temporary position (e.g., an AmeriCorps member) could have tremendous value to help launch a SRTS program to a much higher level.

School Action Plans bring together community stakeholders to identify barriers to active transportation for each school and develop a written action plan for addressing those barriers. The flexibility of the School Travel Plan framework tested in a pilot project allows communities to customize their approach to fit local circumstances. Through a five-step process, each school, with assistance from the community stakeholders, writes a School Travel Plan that includes an action plan describing steps they plan to implement, such as the following:

 Engineering improvements at or near school sites (e.g., pedestrian crossings, repairs/upgrades to sidewalks, signage)

 Introduction of school infrastructure (e.g., bike shelters, bike racks, lockers)

 Education (e.g., traffic safety education, education about personal security)

 Community mobilization (e.g., walking school buses, walking buddies, ride sharing)

 Encouragement (e.g., celebrations of physical activity and environment)

 Event days, recognition and rewards for walking/biking

Schools create a School Travel Plan (STP) to show how they intend to make travel to and from their sites safer and more sustainable for pupils, parents, and teachers. The STP document itself should then link to the school’s development or improvement plan. It is an important tool in reducing the number of students who travel to school by car. STPs are created in consultation with the whole school community, and will be different from each other to reflect the local situation and current trends. In addition to safer travel, STPs are about improving health, broadening education, and providing equity.

One school could be selected as the pilot for a crossing guard program. The SRTS Task Force may work on policy changes that are needed before a pilot program can be deployed, and can secure funding for a pilot as needed. In addition, the Task Force should determine what the goals of the program are and how the program will be evaluated.

| 5-3

Suggested Safe Route to School Maps show stop signs, signals, crosswalks, sidewalks, paths/trails, overcrossings, and crossing guard locations around a school. These can be used by families to identify the best routes for walking or biking to school. Safe Route to School Maps should be distributed at the beginning of the school year and at any other appropriate times such as during special events. Maps should also be made available on an ongoing basis, either online or in paper form from the school office. Maps should be updated annually, if needed, to account for changes to the walking and bicycling routes due to construction, new facilities or treatments, or other changes.

Purpose: Encourage walking by providing route and facility information and highlighting walking destinations. Audience: Bellingham residents Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works), Whatcom County Health Department, Whatcom Council of Governments, Neighborhood Associations Program Description: One of the most effective ways of encouraging people to walk is through the use of maps and guides to show where you can walk, and to guide people to enjoyable routes and destinations for walking. Bellingham’s strong neighborhood ethic lends itself naturally to neighborhood walking maps, which have the added advantage of being an appropriate scale for a complete walking map. Neighborhood walking maps could be developed for each neighborhood, or be combined if appropriate, and actively distributed to residents. As funding is available the maps should be updated on a regular basis as new facilities are implemented.

Purpose: Improve safe behavior on the part of all road users, particularly to mitigate dangers to pedestrians. Audience: All road users Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works, Police), Bellingham School District, Western Washington University, Whatcom Transportation Authority, NWRC Senior Information and Assistance, Whatcom County Health Department, Whatcom Council of Governments, Whatcom County Traffic Safety Task Force A high-profile marketing campaign that promotes safe behaviors of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists is an important part of creating awareness of walking and improving safety for all road users. A well-produced safety campaign will be memorable and effective and encourage all road users to obey traffic laws and share the road safely. Most importantly, the campaign should emphasize responsibility and respect between road users. Key messages to emphasize include the following:  Every corner is a crosswalk.  Yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, even on multi-lane streets.

5-4 |  Speeding kills; modulate your speed to protect pedestrians.  Red light running is extremely dangerous and leads to serious and fatal crashes.

A traffic safety campaign in Bellingham should combine compelling graphics and messages with an easy-to- use website focused at motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists. The safety and awareness messages can be displayed near high-traffic corridors (e.g., on billboards), printed in local publications, and broadcast as radio and/or television ads. The program could be created from scratch, or it could be licensed from another community.

Purpose: Provide opportunities for residents and visitors to experience Bellingham on foot. Audience: General public and visitors Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works), Downtown Bellingham Partnership, Bellingham Whatcom County Tourism Board, Bellingham/Whatcom Chamber of Commerce Project Description: The City could work with partners to create one or more guided tour routes based on themes such as a historic tour and/or a public art tour. The three historic tours created by the Downtown Bellingham Partnership are a good starting place. Live tours could be hosted by knowledgeable tour guides (annually or more frequently as demand permits) and should be publicized widely. The tour routes could be preserved in a brochure and/or a self-guided (e.g., iPod-based) tour as well so that people can participate even if they are unable to attend the guided tour. In addition, regular fun walking events can be hosted by various partners featuring community highlights such as the Downtown Art Walk, the Farmer’s Market, and local cafes and coffee shops.

| 5-5

Purpose: Encourage walking, biking, and physical activity by providing a car-free street event. Audience: General public, generally within a particular community but can be promoted citywide Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works, Police, Planning & Community Development, Parks and Recreation), Downtown Bellingham Partnership, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Whatcom County YMCA, Bellingham Whatcom County Tourism Board, PeaceHealth, active living retailers (e.g., running, walking, recreational equipment), Bellingham Farmer’s Market, Whatcom Community Foundation, Whatcom County Health Department, Council of Governments Program Description: Open Streets programs have many names: Ciclovias, Open Streets, Sunday Parkways, Summer Streets, Sunday Streets, etc. Ciclovias, which originated in Bogotá, Colombia (hence the Spanish name), are periodic street closures (often on Sundays) that create a temporary park that is open to the public for walking, bicycling, dancing, hula hooping, roller skating, etc. They have been very successful internationally and are rapidly becoming popular in the United States. They promote health by creating a safe and attractive space for physical activity and social interaction, and are cost-effective compared to the cost of building new parks for the same purpose. These events can be weekly or one-time events, and are generally very popular and well-attended. A new collaborative online initiative called the Open Streets Project has launched to share information and experiences; this will undoubtedly be of service for Bellingham in launching an open streets event: http://openstreetsproject.org/

5-6 | Open streets event organizers should consider lessons learned and best practices from other communities. Some recommendations include the following:  Make sure that there are programmed, family-friendly activities along the route such as concerts, dance and exercise classes, and food vendors; an “open street” alone is not sufficient to draw participants (and especially not on a repeat basis).  These events lend themselves to innovative partnerships and public/private funding. Health care providers whose missions include facilitating physical activity are often major sponsors. Businesses may also support the event if it brings customers to their location.  The cost of organizing the event can be mitigated through volunteer participation, as this type of event lends itself to enthusiastic volunteer support. However, this will require a high level and quality of volunteer recruitment and management to be sustainable in the long run.  Police costs to manage the road closure will be one of the largest costs. Work with the police to develop a long-term traffic closure management strategy that uses police resources where needed but also allows well-trained volunteers to participate in managing road closures.  Informing residents along the route about what it means for them is essential. They should be informed numerous times (3 to 6 times is not too much), including a reminder the day before the event. Expectations about vehicle access to and from residences should be managed clearly.  Consider linking parks, schools, and other public assets. If possible, organize a route that introduces residents to good walking and bicycling routes that they can use at other times as well.  The greatest value to the community comes when an open streets event happens on a regular basis (e.g., monthly during pleasant weather months). For this to be successful, different routes and/or different activities should be considered.

Purpose: Educate and train planners and engineers on pedestrian facilities and policy issues. Audience: Professionals in planning, engineering, landscape architecture, etc. Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works, Planning & Community Development), Whatcom Council of Governments, Western Washington University Program Description: Professional development courses provide training to transportation professionals who may not have received extensive experience or training in pedestrian facilities. This can be a successful way to institutionalize knowledge of pedestrian facility design at an institution and create an agency culture that values walking. Potential topics include the following:  Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan  Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Standards - NACTO, MUTCD, AASHTO  ADA Compliance for Transportation Facilities - PROWAG, ADA Transition Plans, and liability issues, etc.

| 5-7  Complete Intersections – including operations, lighting, planning, accessibility, etc.  Complete Streets – implementing the policy  Trail Design Standards  Pedestrian Facilities – planning, design, and implementation  Pedestrian and Bicycle Integration with Transit  Working with Law Enforcement on Traffic Safety Campaigns

Sample program: Institute for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation: http://www.ibpi.usp.pdx.edu/

Purpose: Encourage walking, biking, and transit trips through outreach to community residents Audience: Whatcom County residents Potential Partners: City of Bellingham Public Works, Whatcom Council of Governments, Whatcom Transportation Authority, Whatcom County Program Description: The Whatcom Council of Governments runs a number of programs that promote walking, bicycling, and transit, and also provides resources and staff partnership to support similar community efforts. The City of Bellingham should continue to partner with WCOG on promotional efforts such as Whatcom SmartTrips, Safe Routes to School programs, and individualized marketing strategies.

Purpose: Raise awareness of speeding and reduce speeding Audience: Motorists Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works, Police), Bellingham School District Program Description: Speed radar trailers can be used to enforce speed limit violations in known speeding problem areas. In areas with speeding problems, police set up an unmanned trailer that displays the speed of approaching motorists along with a speed limit sign. The Bellingham Police Department currently has a speed radar trailer but it would need repair before it could be deployed. Speed radar trailers can be used as both an educational and enforcement tool. By itself an unmanned trailer effectively educates motorists about their current speed compared to the speed limit. As an alternative enforcement measure, the police department may choose to station an officer near the trailer to issue citations to motorists exceeding the speed limit. Because they can be easily moved, radar trailers are often deployed on streets where local residents have complained about speeding problems. If frequently left in the same location without officer presence, motorists may learn that speeding in that location will not result in a citation and the strategy can lose its benefits. For that reason, radar trailers should be moved frequently.

5-8 |

Purpose: Increase driver awareness of and yielding to pedestrian right-of-way in crosswalks; increase pedestrian safety at crosswalks. Audience: Motorists Potential Partners: City of Bellingham (Public Works, Police), Bellingham Transportation Commission, Northwest Washington’s Area Agency on Aging Program Description: Crosswalk enforcement actions (sometimes known as “pedestrian stings”) raise public awareness about the legal obligation of motorists to stop for pedestrians at crosswalks. While crosswalk enforcement actions do result in tickets being distributed, the greater impact comes through media publicity of the event to reinforce the importance of obeying pedestrian crossing laws. Most crosswalk enforcement sites are selected because they have been identified as locations where pedestrians have trouble crossing and/or where a large volume of pedestrians (especially vulnerable pedestrians such as children and seniors) is expected. High-crash locations may also be candidates for enforcement actions. Downtown is a logical first priority for pedestrian crossing enforcement actions. If locations near schools are selected, the best timing for an enforcement action is the back-to-school window just after school has begun for the year. Locations should be selected by the Bellingham Police Department in consultation with City engineers and planners. If any complaints from the public have been received about problem crossing locations, they should be considered during the selection process. School officials will also have valuable input about school crossing locations that would benefit from targeted enforcement. Once locations have been determined, the Police Department prepares by marking the safe stopping distance with cones. Then plainclothes police officers or trained volunteer decoys attempt to cross at corners and marked mid-block crossings just before a vehicle passes the cone. (Decoys may also be notable community members (such as the mayor) to increase media interest in the event.) If motorists fail to yield to the pedestrian in a crosswalk, a second police officer issues a warning or a ticket at the officer’s discretion. It is recommended that the enforcement action be recorded on video to support issued violations should a motorist challenge the ticket. The Whatcom Council of Governments has a chicken costume, and the City of Bellingham has a bee costume, either of which could be used to create a “hook” to attract greater media attention and public notice. The costume could be used by the decoy. In addition, the chicken or bee character could be used to educate the public about crosswalk laws and encourage people to pay attention to crosswalks (e.g., by offering a prize to people who spot the chicken/bee).

| 5-9

Purpose: Establish and promote the City’s commitment to a walkable Bellingham. Audience: All residents and visitors Potential Partners: City of Bellingham, Western Washington University, Bellingham Transportation Commission, Bellingham/Whatcom Chamber of Commerce Program Description: Walk Friendly Communities (WFC) is a national recognition program developed to encourage towns and cities across the U.S. to establish or recommit to a high priority for supporting safer walking environments. The WFC program recognizes communities that have shown a commitment to improving walkability and pedestrian safety, mobility, access, and comfort through comprehensive programs, plans and policies. Communities can apply to the program to receive recognition in the form of a Bronze, Silver, Gold, or Platinum designation. There is no cost to apply for a WFC designation, though it is estimated to take approximately 20–60 hours of time to complete an application. Further information is available at http://www.walkfriendly.org. Questions about the program can be directed to [email protected]. The WFC program is maintained by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center’s Pedestrian and Bicycling Information Center, with support from a number of national partners.

5-10 | CHAPTER 6 IMplementation

City of Bellingham BELLINGHAM PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN WASHINGTON

As described in Chapters 3, 4, and 5, Bellingham’s recommended pedestrian system consists of a comprehensive network of sidewalks, improved crossings, shared-use paths, and various design and programmatic measures. This chapter presents high-priority projects for early implementation and planning- level cost opinions for the proposed sidewalk improvements. Grant funding sources are identified on federal, state, and local levels. An implementation strategy follows, presenting a targeted approach for how Bellingham can implement projects and programs. Finally, this chapter closes with a discussion of performance measures to track the success of the Plan over time.

This Plan identifies a pedestrian network that is fully connected and ambitious in scope and scale. The full completion of the network is a long term goal for the City. The Plan recommends a comprehensive set of pedestrian improvement projects that, once constructed, will help people to walk more often throughout the city and in their neighborhood. The order in which projects in this Plan are constructed will depend on many factors, including budget and grant availability, community support, and City policies.

While each and every project is important to the completion of the network, it is necessary to set out priorities for implementation. In order to determine which network links, intersections, and accessways can be built in the 20-year plan timeframe, the project team applied a set of criteria that were developed by the Steering Committee to represent the goals of the Plan. The project scores generated through this evaluation should not be viewed as absolute priorities to be completed sequentially, but rather a measure of which projects within the network best meet the goals of the plan. The criteria are intended to provide an ongoing tool for City staff to help determine relative priorities for individual projects. The criteria are summarized in Table 6-1 on the following page.

| 6-1 Chapter 6 I Implementation

Table 6-1: Priority Project Evaluation Criteria

Criterion Related Value Description

Score each project based on collision history. Projects Safety (Crash Safety receive a higher score if they improve a location that has Reduction} had a high number of collisions.

Score each project based on the posted motor vehicle Posted Speed Safety operating speed.

Arterial roadways are grouped into categories based on the estimated daily motor vehicle traffic. Agency staff Traffic Volume Safety provided categorical definitions based on existing traffic counts at selected locations.

Projects are scored based on their ability to serve lower Economic Equity Equity income residents as determined by housing type and whether owner or renter occupied.

Safe Routes to Connectivity/ Score projects based on their ability to serve students School Health walking to a school.

Score each project based on its proximity to commercial Pedestrian Access areas, parks, schools and civic areas. Projects receive a Connectivity/ to Community higher score if they are located closer to community Sustainability Destinations destinations with potential to draw high volumes of pedestrians.

Connectivity/ Transit Score each project based on its proximity to WTA transit Multi-Modal Connectivity service. Transportation

Crossing Safety/ Score each project based on whether it improves an (Intersection Only) Connectivity arterial or local roadway crossing.

Neighborhood Project identified as part of a neighborhood plan, Urban Community Plan Village Plan, or other public planning process.

6-2 | City of Bellingham

All potential projects on the Primary Pedestrian Network were evaluated with the plan criteria. The projects that received the highest total scores were prioritized into Tier 1 and Tier 2. Resulting total scores for each project are included in Appendix C - Pedestrian Master Plan Project List. The first Tier projects are those that the City will strive to complete within the first 10 years. A summary of the priority projects is provided in Table 6-2 below. Figures 6-1 through 6-4 illustrate the locations of Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects. All projects are further defined in the full project tables included in Appendix C.

The City should revisit the project list annually to develop a draft list of potential near-term projects after assessing staff resources and available/upcoming funding sources. This list should be refined with input from the Transportation Commission (TC); it is recommended that the TC focus one meeting each year on addressing implementation priorities. It is expected that that there will be sidewalk segment and intersection improvement projects from the long-term projects list that are built sooner than expected. There are many factors that can and should affect project implementation, including the following:  Any changes to existing grant programs, or creation of new grant or funding programs, that affect the type or number of large-budget projects that can be implemented  Any changes in City policy that could affect how local or state funds can be spent  Changes to zoning and land use that will affect where and how development occurs in Bellingham (such as through Comprehensive Plan update)  City capital roadway projects that include pedestrian improvements  The pace of development, which will affect which projects are implemented through developer requirements  Changes to City staff capacity to manage pedestrian projects  Community input (e.g., through the Transportation Commission or neighborhood groups)  Directives (policy or otherwise) from elected officials and other governing bodies  Interest from partners (such as Whatcom County and Washington Department of Transportation) in implementing projects that are partially within their jurisdiction

It should be noted again that the Primary Pedestrian Network was not defined outside of the city limits. As the Urban Growth Areas are developed and incorporated into the city, the Primary Pedestrian Network, associated sidewalk infill, and intersection projects should be identified and incorporated into the network.

| 6-3 Chapter 6 I Implementation

1-·-··---..r------: :_, ! ~---1:. Cityof i i • • ~ - ~ Bellingham - j'i • i .. .. "-.._,,,, "~ WASHINGTON i 4,.0~RD L._l , ... o~ . .. Figure 6-1: Priority , ~" I -·--· ~r·- -·--··1 Projects 1 . r·--··-··-· ...._I _____ J: z~ ii, ~ E KELLOGG RD ~ ! w,ri:µoGG Rb - '- w i z ~-· -..L.:J.-.---'-_,. - -re-" J :-i ,_J I t :i: L ___, ... EBA ERVIEW RD / J/) - :0 I ( I ::E DIVISION ST L._..,.. . .J ...C( ! L..----··1 • L.·--·-··1 .,.oRTHs11 0 l '" 11 0 "'jl

~ If.. ___...... - ,.,c ,...... J ~ I -j B II ngh m i; Bay Key: Project Priority ,...... s ··-··-··--· 1-··- 'Ti er 1 Crossi ng l • Improvement 'Ti er 2 Crossing • Improvement 'Ti er 1 Infill or Widening ~ 'Ti er 2 Infill or Widening Primary Trail

Ill Secondary Trail ~ ,- ~ .... Trails Recommended in 2008 Parks, Trails, & "'"'--..r .i Open Space Plan Wlll

City Limits

Urban Growth Area

0 1,300 2,600 3,900 5,200 AA fttt NORTH

6-4 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

'·-··-··-··- --J··-··--··-··--:I City of I ' :...... , i Bellingh~m , ~ I i ~ TREMONT AVE ... i Figure 6-2: Priority ~) i ~ ~o..- , L-··~ Projects - North v r<,O~ ! ~o~ i ' ~ / ~ L.·-· ··- · · - ··-· - -· ~-- -· - · ·i I i .(-- ' - ;t;. _ \ .. - I . L.._ .. ~--_r-·-t··-··-··-··1 ', ! i .--·· ,.J WBAK~EWRD E BAK!~llIEW RD L._ .. _ / / ( 0 ...... " a: ...Ill z ( Ill t; c( BE~FAIRPK w Cl :E w i c( z ...... ,__.__.__ ~ L.. ::c

Ill... Illw :E ...c( - ·~

Tier 1 Crossing • Improvement Tier 2 Crossing KENTUO • Improvement '""'-' Tier 1 Infill or Widening HIOI ST ~ Tier 2 Infill or Widening Primary Trail Secondary Trail Trails Recommended in 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Plan B llmgham Schools Bay Parks

City Limits

Urban Growth Area

Auth or. kimvoros 890 1,780 2,670 3,560 Date: July 2012 AA Name: PriorityProjects feel NORTH

City of Bellingham | 6-5 Chapter 6 I Implementation

' i ' ·" i r ·- ··-··- ··-··-··1 ' , i i i 1_ _ __ _ .. ~- ·· - j f \ i i Figure 6-3: Priority :-··l Projects - Central r·.. j L-··--.· I / / ··"·\.. ..- ...., _. . I : ;1 ( ( r - - · ·-' l!I j I l ( z "'z L_ __ __,. 1.,1:_.,Q,.Eoo !!.!>) ~

111 jjj TEXASST. Iii c ~ 0 ~ <>~ KENTUCKY ST z ~l IOWA ST IJ OHIO ST

- lier 1 Crossi ng • Improvement lier 2 Crossing • Improvement ~ lier 1 Infill or Widening "'"'"'-' lier 2 Infill or Widening ,.. Prima ry Trail

sJJl ,u,.fl Bl.~ 1-··-··-··- ··-··- ··-··-: Secondary Trail r··-·· IBYRON AVE .... Trails Recommended in r-··-··...: 2008 Parks, Trails, & v i Open Space Plan

i ' \ l Schools ! Parks { ! •. r-1 City Li mits UGLAS A r,r' 0 i ...z i Urban Growth Area M Author: kimvoros i 890 1.780 2,670 3,560 I Date: July 2012 i AA NORTH ~Name :1 Prrior~tyEroject s f- i

6-6 | City of Bellingham Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

City of \ :t ~~ Bellingh~m "'0 Q~~1-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--1 - r:.u ::i Figure 6-4: Priority ~ ~ Projects - South ~ ALAB MAS ~ ~T I

Bellmgham Bay

I \ I '

); ,u~r··-··, ---- · · -· · - · · r--·--·.J

i \ i \ ! i Key: Project Priority

lier 1 Crossing • Improvement lier 2 Crossing • Improvement lier 1 Infill or Widening lier 2 Infill or Wid ening Primary Trail ~ Secondary Trail , ...... Tra ils Recommended in 2008 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Plan Schools '• Parks

City Limits

Urban Growth Area

Author: kimvoros 890 1,780 2,670 3,560 Date: July 2012 E3 ~ NORTH - Name: Priori tyProjects

City of Bellingham | 6-7

Once projects were ranked for relative priority, the project team assessed likely funding scenarios for project completion. Through an analysis of past grant success and a projection of likely Transportation Benefit District funding, the project team determined potential dedicated funding available for pedestrian projects in the first five years of plan implementation. The City of Bellingham estimates that sales tax revenue generated through the Transportation Benefit District (TBD) may provide about $1.4 million annually for non-motorized capital improvements. Public Works estimates that pedestrian infrastructure costs will exceed bicycle infrastructure costs due to different implementation and construction realities between the two types of facilities, described below. Therefore, in order to gauge available revenue and the degree of project implementation on an annual basis, an assumption has been made that 75% of the TBD revenue allocated for non-motorized improvements could be used for sidewalk infill/widening and intersection improvement projects listed in the Pedestrian Master Plan. The actual percentage of TBD non-motorized funding allocated to pedestrian improvements will need to be decided each year by the City Council serving in their capacity as the TBD Board of Directors and can be changed year to year. While sidewalks are always constructed as part of large new or reconstructed street improvement projects (James Street, Illinois Street) and minor gaps can be filled to fulfill ADA requirements of arterial resurfacing projects (Forest Street), the list of over 300 sidewalk infill/widening locations identified in the Pedestrian Master Plan will primarily be constructed as independent projects. These independent sidewalk projects will not realize the same construction efficiencies as sidewalks included in larger street projects and will often require additional elements, such as curb and gutter and either integration into an existing adequate storm water drainage system or construction of new storm water drainage for the new impervious sidewalk surface, which must meet current storm water treatment requirements. Any new sidewalks constructed with pervious concrete will require the new construction of adequate drainage underneath the sidewalk or the amendment of soils if infiltration is possible. Pervious concrete is a more expensive construction material, and unfortunately soils in many locations are not adequate for infiltration. Any new sidewalk constructed along the edge of a street that impacts a wetland or a stream will be required to provide adequate off-site mitigation, usually at significant cost. Urban sidewalk construction materials include steel and concrete, both of which are expensive and if excavation is required to cut into hillsides or fill in topographic depressions, both of which can also require the construction of retaining walls and/or metal safety railings, then there will be significant added cost. In some cases, the addition or widening of a sidewalk may require purchase of private property to create additional right-of-way before construction can occur. Marked bicycle lanes are also always constructed as part of large new or reconstructed street improvement projects (James Street), but bike lanes are also included, where possible, with annual arterial resurfacing projects (Lakeway Drive), or where City Council has approved the removal of on-street parking (Northwest, Cornwall, Indian) to accommodate a bike lane. The physical and impervious surface for the bike lane is either accounted for in the storm water mitigation for the overall project or the bike lane is using existing impervious surface between curbs more efficiently and not triggering new storm water requirements. The addition of a bike lane to the edge of a new street does have significant cost due to the need for a wider road bed, but also takes advantage of cost efficiencies when the asphalt is installed for the entire street as well. Where bike lanes are added through street retrofits, such as arterial resurfacing or removal of on-street parking, the construction costs are much lower. When a bicycle master plan is completed for Bellingham it may include projects such as "bicycle boulevards" or some other type of bicycle facility, which may have

6-8 | different construction costs than traditional marked bike lanes on arterials, but at the present time, bicycle facilities cost far less to construct than pedestrian facilities.

This section summarizes planning level cost estimates associated with the recommended sidewalk improvement projects. Cost estimates were provided by City of Bellingham staff. While these estimates provide a general understanding of resource needs, they are intended to provide City of Bellingham staff with an “order of magnitude” estimate for the project cost so that projects can be prioritized on an ongoing basis and to provide information for next steps (including soliciting funding, preliminary and final design, etc.). A planning-level range of potential costs is appropriate given the level of uncertainty in the design at this point in the process. Many factors can affect final construction costs, including the following:  Revisions to the facility design as required by local, state, and federal agencies, and/or in response to public input

 More detailed understanding of physical constraints such as drainage, utilities, right-of-way encroachments, storm water treatment requirements, environmental mitigation requirements, etc.

 Fluctuations in commodity and labor prices during the design and permitting processes

 Selected construction materials The costs per segment can be used to understand the relative investment needed per segment. Detailed estimates should be completed during engineering and design work for each individual segment. The ranges shown on the following page reflect the significant level of variation expected in actual implementation of projects. Cost estimates for intersections, studies, and programs are not defined. However cost assumptions for primary intersection treatments are listed in Table 6-3 on the following page. Total costs for Tier 1 and Tier 2 priority projects are shown in Table 6-4.

| 6-9

Table 6-3: Baseline Cost Assumptions for Sidewalk Construction and Shared-Use Path/Neighborhood Connectors

All costs include engineering, contingency, and design allowances.

Table 6-4: Priority Projects – 20-Year Plan Cost Estimates for Sidewalk Infill and Sidewalk Widening

The City is required to submit a "fiscally constrained" 20-year project list to the Regional Transportation Planning Organization/Metropolitan Planning Organization for the federally-required regional plan. The Plan identifies a robust and comprehensive pedestrian network. Development of the complete network is the long term goal for the City. However, even with dedicated funding sources, it is not possible to complete all of the projects identified through this planning process in the 20-year timeframe of the Plan.

The pedestrian plan priority project list should be viewed within this context. The priority projects provide the basis for building the network over the next 20 years. Estimates of annual TBD and grant revenue for pedestrian projects are $1,579,000 per year, which over a 20-year timeframe totals $31,580,000. This amount

6-10 | assumes the TBD is extended by voters in 2020. It is also expected that street frontage improvement requirements for new private development will support some pedestrian projects. In addition, some projects listed for the 20-year timeframe will be constructed as part of larger regional arterial improvement projects that are funded by other local and grant funds. The inclusion of these projects on the Pedestrian Master Plan list will lend additional support to grant funding applications. The following tables, 6-5 and 6-6, provide information on additional funding needed to complete the priority projects. Note again that these funding scenarios do not include intersections, studies, or programs, which could require significant additional funds. The 20-year projected revenue available from current funding sources is expected to allow for the implementation of Tier I. Additional funding sources will be needed to complete the Tier II priority sidewalk infill projects and any additional projects.

The quality and condition of the sidewalks, shared-use paths, and crossings in the pedestrian network are essential to the long term success of the system. System maintenance refers to the care, upkeep, and smooth functioning of the network of sidewalks, crossings, and shared-use paths. If the network is well maintained and cared for, it will assure both the safety and enjoyment of the residents and visitors who use it. A proper maintenance program will reduce long-term costs by extending the life of the facilities. This section provides a summary of routine maintenance activities and risk management tasks for the pedestrian network in Bellingham. Routine maintenance refers to the day-to-day regimen of litter pick-up, trash and debris removal, weed and dust control, sign replacement, tree and shrub trimming, and other regularly scheduled activities. Routine maintenance also includes minor repairs and replacements such as fixing cracks and tree heaves or repairing a broken section of fence. Major maintenance includes regularly scheduled improvements and upgrades to infrastructure such as retrofitting of signals for pedestrian heads. Vegetation encroachment into pedestrian areas is a common maintenance issue. In general, in Bellingham it is the property owner’s responsibility to keep sidewalks clear of vegetation, debris snow or other obstructions. City ordinances state that the abutting property owner is responsible for maintaining all vegetation up to the improved right-of-way, i.e. street. City staff has observed that many citizens do not maintain this vegetation until they receive abatement letters from the city. As the vegetation encroaches onto streets, sidewalks or

| 6-11

traffic signing, citizens call in with complaints. A Customer Service Report is generated and a person inspects the area of the complaint. This inspection usually generates an abatement letter to the adjacent property owner requesting that the offending vegetation be either removed or trimmed. Enforcement of existing ordinances is an ongoing maintenance responsibility for the City. Table 6-7 presents key maintenance needs for primary pedestrian facilities.

The City should establish a maintenance schedule for pedestrian infrastructure based on best practices and should expect to set aside funds for annual maintenance of the pedestrian network and code enforcement.

Acquiring non-local funding for projects and programs is considerably more likely if local funds can be leveraged toward a variety of state, federal, and public and private sources. This section describes various sources of funding available to plan and construct pedestrian facilities, or to provide awareness, encouragement, or education programs. Pedestrian projects and programs are funded through multiple sources, and not all sources apply to all projects. Many non-local grant funding sources require a local funding match, and most are competitive based on project merit, adherence to grant criteria, and state or federal facility standards and procedures. Bellingham transportation planners have been very successful in leveraging local funding to secure state and federal grants for multi-modal transportation improvements. This section covers federal, state, regional, and local sources of pedestrian funding, as well as some non-traditional funding sources that have been used by local agencies to fund pedestrian infrastructure and programs. Tables 6-8 and 6-9 provide additional information regarding the summarized grant sources at the end of this section.

On June 29, 2012 a new transportation bill (MAP-21) was passed that has many changes to the funding of pedestrian elements. SAFETEA-LU, the previous legislation contained dedicated programs including - Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School, and Recreational Trails - which were all commonly

6-12 | tapped sources of funding to make non-motorized improvements nationwide. MAP-21 combines these programs into a single source called ‘Transportation Alternatives.’ Overall levels of funding for these programs were reduced from $1.2 billion annually to approximately $800 million – a reduction of one third. Additionally, states may ‘opt-out’ of up to 50 percent of the funding and use it for other projects. If Washington decides to opt-out, this will result in a reduction in funding for pedestrian related improvements by up to two-thirds when compared to 2011 levels. At the time of publication of this plan, these funding mechanisms are completely new, and it will take some time to fully understand all of the implications of MAP-21 and to get this new program up and running. Federal funding is administered through the state (Washington State Department of Transportation) and regional planning agencies. Most, but not all, of these funding programs are oriented toward transportation versus recreation, with an emphasis on reducing auto trips and providing inter-modal connections. Federal funding is intended for capital improvements, and safety and education programs and projects must relate to the surface transportation system. Given the limited understanding of the full implications of the new legislation, a discussion of the programs identified within SAFETEA-LU that provide for the funding of pedestrian projects is included in the plan. The specific types of eligible projects and required funding match by the local jurisdiction are discussed further below.

The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides states with flexible “regional” and “enhancement” funds which may be used for a wide variety of projects on any Federal-aid Highway including the National Highway System, bridges on any public road, and transit facilities. In the Whatcom region, STP-Regional (R) and STP- Enhancement (E) funding is allocated to jurisdictions through the Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG), acting in its role as both the state-appointed Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) and the federal Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). STP-R and STP-E funding is awarded to projects through a competitive application process according to scoring criteria established by the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) and approved by the RTPO Policy Board, made up of elected officials throughout the Whatcom region. Eligible STP-R project funding is used for multi-modal transportation corridors that provide region-wide benefit and the inclusion of sidewalk or other appropriate pedestrian accommodation is a project requirement for a funding award. STP-E funds are more typically used for stand-alone pedestrian improvements, such as the addition of on-street facilities, off-road shared-use paths, sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, parking, and other ancillary facilities. SAFETEA-LU funding specifically requires modification of sidewalks to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). STP-E funds may be used for pedestrian-related, non-construction projects, such as maps, coordinator positions, and encouragement programs, but are subject to the same competitive application process as all construction projects. In 2010, Bellingham received $400,000 in STP-E funds for the addition of sidewalks on the Roeder Avenue Bridge over Squalicum Creek.

| 6-13

This program funds projects designed to achieve significant reductions in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, bikeways, and walkways. This program includes the Railway-Highway Crossings Program and the High Risk Rural Roads Program. This program replaces the Hazard Elimination Program from TEA- 21.

Administered by the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT), this program is funded by a set- aside of STP funds and is designated for improvements to highway-rail grade crossings to eliminate safety hazards. Eligible projects include installation of new crossing protection devices, passive crossing protection devices, upgrades of existing signal devices, railroad crossing closures, and pedestrian crossing improvements. Funding for this program comes out of Highway Safety Improvement Program funds.

The purpose of the Safe Routes to Schools program is to provide children a safe, healthy alternative to riding the bus or being driven to school. The SRTS Grants were established to address pedestrian and bicycle mobility and safety near schools. The Washington State Department of Transportation’s Federal Highways and Local Programs Division is responsible for administration of SRTS funding. Application for these funds is open to any public agency. Agencies providing a funding match will be given preference. The Federal Safe Routes to School Program was extended through December 31, 2011, and may be included in the future federal transportation bill. Cities, counties, school districts, non-profits, and tribal organizations are eligible for the 100 percent reimbursable funds that target children in grades K-8. Applicants may use funds for construction or for education, encouragement, enforcement, and evaluation activities. Construction must be within two miles of a grade school or middle school. Cycle 1 provided $42 million for FY 10/11 and 11/12 which may be adjusted pending a new federal transportation bill. Eligible projects may include three elements: 1. Engineering Improvements. These physical improvements are designed to reduce potential bicycle and pedestrian conflicts with motor vehicles. Physical improvements may also reduce motor vehicle traffic volumes around schools, establish safer and more accessible crossings, or provide walkways, trails, or bikeways. Eligible improvements include sidewalk improvements, traffic calming/speed reduction, pedestrian and bicycle crossing improvements, on-street bicycle facilities, off-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and secure bicycle parking facilities. 2. Education and Encouragement Efforts. These programs are designed to teach children safe bicycling and walking skills while educating them about the health benefits and environmental impacts. Projects and programs may include creation, distribution, and implementation of educational materials; safety based field trips; interactive bicycle/pedestrian safety video games; and promotional events and activities (e.g., assemblies, bicycle rodeos, walking school buses). 3. Enforcement Efforts. These programs aim to ensure that traffic laws near schools are obeyed. Law enforcement activities apply to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists alike. Projects may include the

6-14 | development of a crossing guard program, enforcement equipment, photo enforcement, and pedestrian sting operations.

The Community Development Block Grants program provides money for streetscape revitalization, which may be largely comprised of pedestrian improvements. Federal Community Development Block Grant grantees may use funds for the following activities: acquiring real property; reconstructing or rehabilitating housing and other property; building public facilities and improvements, such as streets, sidewalks, community and senior citizen centers, and recreational facilities; paying for planning and administrative expenses, such as costs related to developing a consolidated plan and managing Community Development Block Grants funds; providing public services for youth, seniors, or the disabled; and initiatives such as neighborhood watch programs. The funding is limited to improvements made in designated low-income neighborhoods.

The Transportation, Community and System Preservation Program provides federal funding for transit oriented development, traffic calming, and other projects that improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce the impact on the environment, and provide efficient access to jobs, services, and trade centers. The program is intended to provide communities with the resources to explore the integration of their transportation system with community preservation and environmental activities. The Transportation, Community and System Preservation Program funds require a 20-percent match, and due to federal grant administration procedures, typically require a total project cost in excess of $300,000.

In 2005, the Washington State Legislature began offering grants to support pedestrian and bicycle safety projects such as shared-use paths, sidewalks, safe routes to school, and transit. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grants were established to address the nearly 400 statewide fatal and injury collisions involving pedestrians and bicycles each year. The Indian Street and North Samish Way Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Projects in Bellingham were awarded funding for the installation of curb extensions, curb ramps, improved lighting, crosswalks, and other enhancements.

The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) was created by the Washington State Legislature to encourage state investment in high quality local transportation projects. The board distributes grant funding generated by statewide gas tax. To date, more than 320 cities and counties throughout the state have been recipients of TIB funding. Eligible grant recipients are cities and counties. Typically, applications are accepted in the summer of each year, with submission closing in late August. The Sidewalk Program is intended to provide safe sidewalks for transportation on federally classified routes (principal, minor, or collector). Projects should aim to improve safety, access, connectivity, and continuity

| 6-15

while conforming to standards created by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A minimum 20-percent match is required on all urban Sidewalk Program projects, and the maximum project request is usually $175,000. Bellingham received TIB sidewalk funds for the Northshore Drive and Meador-Kansas-Ellis projects. The TIB also administers the Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and the Urban Corridor Program (UCP). These funds are available to cities with a population of 5,000 or greater. To be eligible, projects must be consistent with state, regional, and local transportation plans. Funding requires sidewalks on both sides of the roadway unless a deviation is approved. Bellingham has been successful in funding roadway projects that include pedestrian improvements through both of these funding programs.

The Washington Traffic Safety Commission provides state funding for programs, projects, services, and strategies to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries that result from traffic crashes. Funds may be used for pedestrian and bicycle improvements. The funding cycle begins April each year.

WSDOT provides federal funding to safety improvement projects that eliminate or reduce fatal or injury accidents by identifying and correcting hazardous locations, sections, and/or elements. The goal of the Corridor Safety Program is to “reduce fatal and disabling collisions on roadways using low-cost, near-term solutions through partnerships with community groups, business, engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency service organizations.” These include activities for resolving safety problems at hazardous locations, and roadway elements that constitute a danger to motorists, pedestrians, and/or bicyclists. Corridors are selected for designation based on statistical evidence of a significant crash problem in one or more locations. The problems identified must have the potential low-cost, near-term solutions. Selected projects must have significant local level support to undertake a corridor project. In 2011, Bellingham applied for $1.5 million in Corridor Safety funds for Alabama and $350,000 for pedestrian signal conversion.

Enacted in 1997 with the goal of improving rural economies, the EDI Program authorizes counties to retain a portion of collected taxes to finance public facilities. The EDI Program provides financing to public agencies or local governments through very low interest loans, grants, or a combination of both. Relevant eligible public facilities include roads, bridges, storm sewer facilities, and transportation infrastructure. The minimum project size that EDI will fund is $25,000. Bellingham has received EDI funds for the Depot Market Square (Farmer’s Market) and the West Bakerview Overpass, which adds a new 6-foot sidewalk on the north side of the West Bakerview bridge over I-5 where there are currently no sidewalks.

All cities and counties may levy a quarter percent tax (described as "the first quarter percent of the real estate excise tax" or "REET 1"). Cities and counties that are planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA)

6-16 | have the authority to levy a second quarter percent tax (REET 2). The City of Bellingham receives revenues from Whatcom County’s Real Estate Excise Tax under both REET 1 and 2. Jurisdictions must spend the first and second quarter percent of their real estate excise tax receipts solely on capital projects that are listed in the capital facilities plan element of their comprehensive plan. RCW 82.46.010(6) defines "capital projects" as those public works projects of a local government for planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks, recreational facilities, law enforcement facilities, fire protection facilities, trails, libraries, and administrative and judicial facilities. Between 2000 and 2008, Bellingham used REET funds to help construct pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, including filling many gaps in the sidewalk network in the downtown and “Arts District.” Since 2009, however, REET funds have been eliminated from the annual six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a funding source due to the collapse of home sales and because of commitments made of REET funds for the Bellingham Waterfront district redevelopment.

The Public Works Street Fund is comprised of motor vehicle gas tax and 42.5% of the total sales tax collected by the City of Bellingham and is often used to pay for maintenance expenses and limited capital improvement projects. Projects identified for reconstruction or repaving as part of the Capital Improvements list should also implement recommendations for pedestrian improvements in order to reduce additional costs.

Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) are a legal mechanism (RCW 35.43) sometimes used by cities or private property owners to fund and construct localized projects such as streets and sidewalks. Through the LID process, the costs of local improvements are generally spread out among a group of property owners within a specified area. In Bellingham, LIDs have been used to fund both major street and sewer improvement projects (West Bakerview Road) and new sidewalks on local residential streets (East Victor Street).

An LID for a sidewalk improvement can be established by either the City Council or a group of property owners. In either circumstance, a "benefit area" must be established and a majority of the Council or property owners in the LID boundary area must agree to have each individual property assessed for the sidewalk improvement. If the LID is approved, then all property owners who directly abut and benefit from the new sidewalk are required to pay a proportional share of the overall improvement costs through a special LID assessment on their property taxes each year until the improvements are paid for in full. The LID is attached to the property, must be disclosed in the event of a sale, and typically has a 15- to 25-year lifespan.

| 6-17

The Bellingham Transportation Benefit District (TBD) is comprised of 2/10 of 1% of the total annual sales tax receipts collected within city limits to fund the following specific transportation needs: arterial resurfacing, WTA bus service, and non-motorized transportation infrastructure. The Bellingham TBD was approved by voters, is governed by the TBD Board of Directors, and is effective from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2020.

Pedestrian improvements can often be included as part of larger efforts aimed at business improvement and retail district beautification. Business Improvement Areas collect levies on businesses in order to fund area- wide improvements that benefit businesses and improve access for customers. These districts may include provisions for pedestrian improvements, such as wider sidewalks, landscaping, and ADA compliance. Downtown Bellingham is pursuing a Parking and Business Improvement Area to help raise funds for maintenance and decoration of downtown public areas.

A challenge grant program with local businesses may be a good source of local funding, where corporations ‘adopt’ a sidewalk and help maintain the facility. Foundation grants, volunteer work, and donations of in-kind services, equipment, labor, or materials are other sources of support that can play a supporting role in gathering resources to design and build new pedestrian facilities. Residents and other community members are excellent resources for garnering support and enthusiasm for a pedestrian facility, and the City should work with volunteers to substantially reduce implementation and maintenance costs. Local schools, community groups, or a group of dedicated neighbors may use the project as a goal for the year, possibly working with a local designer or engineer. Work parties can be formed to help clear the right-of-way for a new path or maintain existing facilities where needed. A local construction company could donate or discount services. Other opportunities for implementation will appear over time, such as grants and private funds. The City should look to its residents for additional funding ideas to expedite completion of the pedestrian system.

There is increasing corporate and business involvement in trail and conservation projects that benefit walking. Employers recognize that creating places to walk is one way to build community and attract a quality work force. Outdoor recreation businesses often support local projects and programs.

Community fundraising and creative partnerships are plentiful. A common approach is to find creative ways to break a large project into small pieces that can be "purchased" by the public. One example is selling bricks for local sidewalk projects, especially those in historic areas or on downtown Main Streets. Donor names are engraved in each brick, and a tremendous amount of publicity and community support is purchased along with basic construction materials. Portland, Oregon's downtown Pioneer Square is a good example of such a

6-18 | project. Both the Fairhaven Village Green and the Depot Market Square were the beneficiaries of significant and successful community fundraising efforts.

A wide range of foundations have provided funding for pedestrian-focused projects. A few national and large regional foundations have supported the national organizations involved in pedestrian and policy advocacy. However, it is usually regional and local foundations that get involved in funding particular bicycle, pedestrian, or trail projects.

The Whatcom Community Foundation is a public charitable organization created to enrich the quality of life for all residents of Whatcom County, Washington by providing funds to nonprofit organizations. Some of these funds are restricted by their donors to use for specific purposes or agencies, while others are unrestricted. The amount of funding available in each field of interest varies depending on incoming donations and income available from designated funds. Past grantees include the Bellingham Railway Museum to provide signs and guidance along Bellingham railroad routes and Futurewise Whatcom to continue Urban Livability advocacy to promote more compact, livable, and vital urban areas that are accessible by bike, foot, and transit.

| 6-19

This page intentionally left blank Chapter 6 I Implementation

Table 6-8: Federal and State Funding Sources

UJ >- Vl z UJ u u I- ELIGIBLE PROJECTS I- c:: z z 0 Vi :::> UJ UJ ;:: a:i 0 \.? 2 0.. UJ Vl <( UJ 5: c:: c 01 c c c u s: I- ~ Vl z 5 c 01 0 UJ 0 <( .g ·v; .g c c:: a «: •t 0 I- UJ :~ c 0 i3 "'c u \.? c:: ::i "' ::i J!l <( \.? O' a:"' ~ "O c I- v c UJ ·;;; z z <( 0 0 J: u 2 u u !;( 2 F. EDERA L! F.UNDING Surface Whatcom 20% Flexible funding that may be used by http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ localpro Tran sportation Council of States and localities for projects to grams/ProgramMgmt/ STP.htm Program (STP) Governments ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; preserve and improve the transportation system consistent with regional priorities.

Federal Highway WSDOT-City 10% The goal of the program is to reduce Traffic Services Branch Manager, Safety Safety Program ..; ..; ..; ..; fatal and serious injury collisions. Susan Bowe, PE, 360-705-7380, Improvement [email protected] .gov Program (HSIP) Railway-Highway WSDOT - City 10% These funds are designated for Traffic Services Branch Manager, Crossing Safety Program depending improvements to highway-rail grade Susan Bowe, PE, 360-705-7380, Program (RHC) on project ..; ..; ..; crossings to eliminate safety hazards. [email protected]

Safe Routes to WSDOT 0% Enable and encourage children to walk http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPr School required, and bicycle to school. Funding from ograms/ SafeRoutes/funding.htm match ..; ..; ..; ..; this program is for projects within two preferred miles of primary and middle schools.

Community HUD N/ A Primarily for community revitalization, http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/c Development ..; ..; ..; may be used to fund streetscape ommunitydevelopment/ programs Block Grants improvements. / index.dm Transportation, FHWA 20% Provides federal funding for transit - http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tcsp/ Community, and oriented development, traffic calming http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretio System and other projects that improve the nary/tcsp2012info.htm Preservation ..; ..; efficiency of the transportation Program (TCSP) system, reduce the impact on the environment, and provide efficient access to jobs, services, and t rade centers. Federal Lands Federal 11 % Eligible projects must appear in State Contact Washington Division, Highway Funds Highway ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; Transportation Improvement Federal Highway Administration Administration Program. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/wad iv/

Pedestrian and WSDOT 0% Grants to support pedestrian and Kathleen Davis, H&LP Director, Bicycle Safety required, bicycle safety projects such as shared- (360) 705-7871 . Program match ..; ..; ..; ..; use paths, sidewalks, safe routes to http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ bike/ Fu preferred school and transit. Invited agencies nding.htm only. Transportation TIB 20% Grant funding generated by statewide http://www.tib.wa.gov/ grants/ urb Improvement gas ta x. State grant funding for an/ SP.cfm Board (TIB) arterials, sidewalks, and safety Sidewalk, Urban ..; ..; measures. Arterials and Urban Corridors Programs

6-20 | City of Bellingham

| 6-21

The Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan provides the long-term vision for the development of a community- wide pedestrian network usable by all residents for recreation and transportation. Implementation of the Plan will take place over many years. The following strategies and action items are provided to guide Bellingham toward the vision, goals, and policies identified in the Plan.

City of Bellingham staff should strategically pursue infrastructure projects. Ideally, staff should pursue capital improvement funding and grant funding, as well as incorporating projects into upcoming public works projects for short-term pedestrian and trail improvements first. However, if promising grant programs are identified or construction of another roadway project makes construction of a lower priority project possible, then the community should pursue that project regardless of priority.

 Pursue capital improvements funding or grant funding for higher-priority pedestrian projects and programs first  Complete an ADA transition plan to coordinate high-priority projects on the pedestrian network with needed transition projects.  Where grant requirements or construction in conjunction with another roadway project make construction of a lower priority project possible or required by law, pursue funding sources for that project regardless of priority.  Publish a public report documenting the status and on-going actions for pedestrian projects at the end of each fiscal year.  Update the Pedestrian Master Plan project list every five years to identify new facility improvements and programmatic opportunities as the pedestrian network develops, assess their feasibility, gauge public support, identify funding sources, and develop implementation strategies.

The City should augment the expanded pedestrian network with education, encouragement, and enforcement activities to encourage more walking among Bellingham residents. These supporting programs are critical to the success of the Plan and increased use of the pedestrian network.

 Pursue grant funding for higher-priority programs and partnerships for early establishment.  Work with schools, youth groups, and other parties to provide education and encouragement programs to Bellingham residents.  Develop strategic partnerships with community agencies and businesses to promote programs that build support for walking and provide economic development potential.  Develop and distribute easily accessible information about the pedestrian network in Bellingham.  Provide incentives for existing businesses and other entities to add and improve pedestrian amenities.

6-22 |

The pedestrian network will work best when designed for full connectivity and ease of use with all transportation modes. In some cases, such as transit, this means ensuring that access by foot is seamless and safe. In other circumstances, such as most motor vehicle traffic, this means designing the street corridor in a manner that provides appropriate separation for pedestrians.

 Establish a formal Complete Streets Policy and best practices by consolidating and building upon existing relevant policies in the Bellingham Comprehensive Plan.  Improve crossings and the pedestrian environment on WTA GO Routes.  Provide separation for pedestrians from motorized traffic whenever possible through the use of buffers and amenities.  Coordinate the City’s future bicycle master planning efforts and WTA planning with the primary pedestrian network defined in the Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan.  Review current posted speeds on major streets. Identify opportunities for posted speed reductions and traffic calming, especially on roadways where pedestrians cross frequently such as higher density residential districts, commercial streets, and in the vicinity of schools.

This Plan presents a vision for the future of walking in Bellingham. To ensure that that vision is implemented, the Plan must become a living document that is incorporated into the day-to-day activities of planning, design, funding, construction, and maintenance.

 Review existing city standards and develop a consistent and comprehensive set of design guidelines and development standards to support pedestrians.  Incorporate a pedestrian facilities checklist into the plan review process.  Implement existing Comprehensive Plan policy to ensure that pedestrian and path facilities are included in all major construction and reconstruction projects.  Require sufficient right-of-way to be set aside for sidewalk and path facilities as redevelopment projects occur.  Ensure that appropriate pedestrian facilities are built in new developments in accordance with this Plan and other relevant plans.  Develop requirements and incentives for private property owners to incorporate pedestrian features into new projects.  Review the transportation and health impacts of school siting policies.  Revise zoning and development codes to foster reduced automobile reliance in new developments.  Design pedestrian crossing enhancements with integrated stormwater features.

| 6-23

 Provide opportunities for community members to provide input on major pedestrian projects.  Review income and ethnicity data in decision-making for capital improvements.  Complete key sidewalk connections to transit.  Identify low-income and transit-dependent communities that require pedestrian access to, from, and within their neighborhood.

Performance measures are a means of gauging both progress on implementation of the Plan and the effectiveness of the facilities and programs on behavior change and mode shift. The performance measures are based on the following principles:  The measure is policy-driven and can be supported by data.  Data can be collected with available resources.  Data are consistently available over time.  Data allow year to year comparisons.  The results are understandable to the general public.

With careful planning, the performance measures can serve as a core tool for system management in the long term, both to track performance and to ensure that resources are available and well managed. Tables 6-10 and 6-11 provide a summary of recommended performance measures.

6-24 | Bellingham Pedestrian Master Plan

Table 6-10: Pedestrian Master Plan Performance Measures - Goals 1-3

G Performance Baseline Performance Data Collection Data Collection 1 oa Measure Measurement Target Frequency Responsibility

Safety: Improve pedestrian safety through wel I-designed facilities along and across roadways, and by promoting safe driving, walking, and bicycling behaviors. Reduce the number and Frequency of #of pedestrian-involved Decreasing number Annually Bellingham Police severity of collisions collisions involving traffic collisions per 1000 over time Department pedestrians population

Promote safe walking Availability of #of students that have Increasing number Annually SRTS Program and behaviors pedestrian safety received pedestrian safety over time Bellingham School education at education District elementary schools Improve the walking Sidewalk quality Percent of sidewalks 5% needing Annually (4 year COB Public Works environment through needing replacement replacement per year collection enhanced traffic operations horizon) and maintenance Equity: Provide accessible pedestrian facilities for all through equity in public engagement, service delivery and capital i nve stm e nt. Ensure that the transportation Overall accessibility On "go routes", Increasing Annually COB Public Works system is accessible to people compliance on percentage of percentage of with disabilities select routes intersections that are ADA compliance over compliant time

Identify obstacles to access, Completion of ADA #of completed plans from Increasing Annually COB Public Works develop a work plan to Transition Plan ADA Transition Plan percentage of remove those obstacles, and projects projects complete identify responsible parties overtime

Public and Environmental Health: Develop a pedestrian network that promotes active, healthy lifestyles and sustains a healthy environment. Increase the availability and Increase number of Number of children Increasing number of Survey annually SRTS Program, use of pedestrian children walking or walking to school as trips Bellingham School infrastructure. biking to or from measured in school travel District school surveys completed by schools participating in the Fede rat Safe Routes to School program (before and after surveys)

Promote active, healthy Pedestrian mode 2010 5-year ACS: Increasing pedestrian Annually US Census Bureau lifestyles (also tracking multi- share Percentage of commute mode share over (5 year ACS) modal goal) trips made on foot (means time of transportation to work)

Develop a pedestrian network Number of street Existing number of trees Increasing number of Annually COB Parks and that sustains a healthy trees on arterials on arterials trees on arterials over Recreation environment. time.

City of Bellingham | 6-25

The performance measures can be used to assess progress on project development and overall goals for the Plan. The City should establish a mechanism for reporting that summarizes the performance measures in a consistent, user-friendly format. This could be a separate report or part of the Transportation Report on Annual Concurrency. The reporting should be updated annually and posted to the City’s website. While some of the data sources are not reported in current-year formats (traffic safety, for example, is often delayed for several years before reporting becomes available), initiating the benchmarking process is an integral part of the program management process.

6-26 |